New-York tribune., 1901-03-01
DAVIS ACQUITTED.
Continued from frat n.

'"hunned from first mage
witnesses. He said his dearest via,
tablish the principle that insane psrxor.
'estlfy in their own behalf when tbAv a. 81
treated II had never been passed uno, H.. 49,
court of Appeals Of the State, he said A.. VI
Should like to see it established ~
DOES NOT THINK MUCH OF Exprr
IN the closing part of his address Mr. p,...-
experts: oy
Medlcal experts? Why. an expert has hss, :,
fined as laundering big liar Soooa -, .en a de-
experts have done more to ds-radit tbs u - tneee
profession than anything else Won can ,,sia suical
was almost inclined fer a while not ~ Ion
any Oh ~ mere Tor us. IL too often becor,s. sas
a steeplechase between story teIlers Ns.uiE uhE
Is so destructive TO the law. nothing has hs sa,ls
so much d1srespect for the courts 7 can aaseu ssN
thousa,,ds t,'S s & oee VII not pay out tens o.
TINS office cannot convict upon the farf, = :,
won't convict at ALL es'
In his charge to the jury Judge Cowinr cat,
that If there was reasonable doubt az "a ~.
guilt OF Davis on the evidence prssenr.a ,r.
defendant must have the benefit Of surh . 49,.
Good character must be taken into con.,7.r.
tion. because person of good character i. ~.
sumed not to depart from that trait Th.r \.
continued:
The testimony of the insane witnesse. 4, .,r,
petent and is before YOU But it's credibii-y ,s,
with you. The same is true of expert tAetir,..,-
You have seen here how doctors disagree ars
you are the Judges of their credibiIity I. "a a.
mitted that Hilliard died almost Immediately ar
ter this defendant and his associates used forrs
on him. There seems to be two princpaI facts
in doubt. What was the cause Of deathp y,
the defendant caused it. was he jUstified9 Ev.rv
human being, be he sane insane, il erF-s;as
to every minute of his life If it is snort snea
by hve minutes. the one who Gauss IL IL re-
sponsible.
EXPLAINS THE INDICTMEy
person guilty Of unkind treatmen, Of the
insane il guilty of a misdemeanor and when
death is caused by misdemeanor it is man
Slaughter This indictment does not charge n
so many words that Hilliard vas stranglAc Let
us see what is exCusable hOn,icide. II Is whAr.
one kills another by Lawful aot lawful means
with ordinary caution and without unlawt,l
intent. As counsel for defence has sad Il IA
true that the code also provides for the use ~
lawful force to restrain him from injury TO him
self or others. but IL must be simply necassary
force.
Now the important question here Is: VINO
provoked the force? There are bounds 10 f-s
use. Was the fact that Hilliard wculdn'. ear
sufficient reason? Was there any other? II Is
conceded that this was 3. mutual combat Who
brought it on?
1t is an important case It is important IA
the people and TO the State how these institu-
tions are conducted. II is important for the de-
fen6ant. It has been said that argument Is III.
opposite or reasoning I hope you VIII reason
together and not argue
After the Jury had retired. counsel for the
prosecution and defence talked in a friendly
way with one another in the corridor Of the
Criminal Courts Building. They seemed to agree
I'm the opinion that the charge Of Judge Covinr
had been against the defendant. II was said
that the judges statement that the fury mus.
consider to who started the combat between
Hiliard and the nurses and that his intination
that proof Of strangulation was not necessary
for a conviction, were strongly against tha
prisoner
The jury retired about 4:30 o'clock. and when
an hour had elapsed without any sign Of an
agreement the lawyers said they would not De
surprised IL the jury disagreed.
At o'clock the jury had come TO no agree
ment. and went TO the AstOr House for dinner
with the judges permission The members Of
the jury were Edmund De Braekseer, foreman;
Caspar ". Dean. William II. Claary. Charles
WhedOn. Charles y Edwards. Emil Kohler
William Wilson. Roland Holt, AIpad S. Gross.
mann Rudolph c, Stole. Patrick Cashin and
George NJ. Shut.