The Birmingham age-herald., 1906-11-20

mental infirmity as to prevent his ra- tionally aiding in his defense. should not be put to trial, is, the language of the old books "because he is disabled by the act of God" from making a Just de- fense if he has one. and because there may be circumstances lying in his private knowledge which would prove him inno- cent or his legal Responsibility, of which he can have no advantage because they are not known to persons who undertake his defense. Nevertheless. a person though not entirely sane. may be put upon trial in a criminal case If he rightly comprehends his own condition with ref erence to the proceedings. and has such possession and control of his mental powers, including the faculty of memory. as will enable him to intelligently give his counsel all the material facts bearing upon the criminal act charged against him and material to repel the accusing evidence. and has such boise of his facul- ties as will enable him to rationally and properly exercise all the rights which the law gives him in contestlng q con- vction.
 It is proper that I should say to you that the defense of insanity, or mental inability to properly conduct a defense when arragned Is frequently resorted to without any just basis. and. that in pass ! ing upon such questions, you may give | | opinion 1t may be entitled to in eonnec- tion with all the facts of the particular case. It would be reproach to justice l If guilty man escaped the penalty for crime upon feigned mental rrespon- siblity. or postponed his trial on a feigned condition of mind. as to his inability to aid in his defense. On the other hand, It Is i also my duty to caution you, with earn estness, it would he likewise a reproach n p1 in sri tfIf biI m being made in Gods own image" while suffering as the old books put 1t "under i visitation of God" were compelled to go to trial at a time when he Is not sufficiently in possession of his mental | faculties to enable him to make a rational and proper defense. The latter would be i more grievious error than the former; 1; | since in the one case an individual would I go unwhlpped of justice. while in the other the great safeguards which the law l adopts in the punishment of crime and 1 the upholding of justice. would be rudeiy i invaded by the tribunals whose sacred 1 duty 1t is to uphold the law in all it's integrity. As said by the supreme court of the United States. with reference to | feigned defenses of mental weaknesses. ! and the consequences which may result
 to society, it seems to us that undue stress is laid in some of the cases upon
 
 such results must always attend any
 system devised to ascertain and punish , crime. and ought not to induce the court | to depart from principles fundamental , In the criminal law, and the recognition
 and enforcement of which arc demanded
 by every consideration of humanity an,
 justice"
 Case Excites Interest
 You are human beings and cannot alto
 gether shut your eyes to the things vol
 see around you. This case naturally am
 rightly has excited great interest Tn
 crime charged involves a very seriou
 offcnse about matter which greatly con
 cerns the public welfare. The law yer,
 properly throws all the safeguards |
 can around the honest keeping of th' | accumulations of the well-to-do and th,
 savings of the poor when placed in the
 national banks of the country. The pre- vention of offenses like that here charged i is of grave concern to the public. Yet,
 on the other hahd. as l earnestly eau
 tion you. it is equally, if not of greater [ public concern, that the disposition of | such an issue as that now presented to
 you should not turn upon any supposed
 public exigeney by way of example, to 1 prevent the repetition of such offenses. 1 by compelling the trial of n human being l on such q charge if he be in fact. in such mental condition that he cannot
 fairly and ratlonally make his defense. Our duty and province are to hold the | scales of justice even. in view of all l these considerations In order that justice,
 and nothing but justice. as defined by the | law of the land may be done in this par ticular case, as to placing this defendant
 on trial at this time. No feeling of sym
 pathy or regard for individuals should move your judgment a hairs breadth. I Neither, on the other hand, ought you to | allow your conclusions to be influenced,
 in the remotest degree. by any thought 1 as to what the public may say or think 1 of the effect or justice of the conclusion at which you arrive. You twelve men
 out of all the millions of American free men, who administer their justice, are, f in the last analysis. the only authorita- tive advisers of the court on this issue.
 In the discharge of that duty the re-
 sponsbility and sacredness of which. know you appreciate, you are answerable
 only to your Creator and your eonsciences
 What are the facts which must gov ern your decision? Having no personal
 knowledge you must ascertain the iact;
 largely from the mouths of witnesses
 There are many rules for determining thc
 amount of credence which the jury should
 give witness. The most important oi
 them are. that you may look at the re-
 lationship of the witness by blood or fam
 i1y ties. or of business, or friendship or
 enmity$ his bias or motive, if any to mis-
 state the facts of transaction, or to
 color them You may look also to his CONTINUED ON PAGE 10.)