The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1907-02-05

land most OF them had opinions on the
case when examined-and he knew that
they had intellectual power enough to do
il. On this subject he quoted these lines
from the work of John Hay:
why should you worry in thinking
whom you should marry?
Choose whom you will. you will find
you have married some other feiloyy."
"That. gentlemen" Mr. Gleason con-
/ tinued, lis the case here. Your previous
opinions have been formed with reference
to different state of facts, with refer
/ ence to the idea of emotional in
sanity upon a single act or with refer
ence 90 things Of that kind, all OF which
defenses viii be rejected by this defend
ant as he stands here before you.
Defense Is "NOt GuiIty.v
what, then. IS the defense that will be
introduced in this case? The defense will
rely upon all defenses which we may be
able 10 prove, under the plea of not
guilty; upon all circumstances tending
/ TO show that the defendant acted without
malice and without premeditation. and in
/ the belief Of self-defense. induced by the
threats of White 20 kill the defendant
You will consider the evidence which will
I be presented IN that regard.
But the greater part Of the evidence
will be to prove 10 you that the defend
ant killed Stanford White under the de-
/ fusion that it was an act Of Providence.
4 that he was the agent Of Providence TO
/ Kill Stanford White. This defendant for
I three years had been suffering from n
/ disease Of the brain which eliminated I'm
+ the killing Of Stanford White. and which
/ left its effect clearly observable after the
/ homicide. When examined after the
/ homicide he was not aware Of his men
/ tai condition and insisted that he was
/ sane, and that the act was an act OF
/ Providence
/ Now, gentlemen, we have here the
/ principal defense which we THl present
| to You. The defendant killed Stanford
/ White because he did not know that the
act was wrong. Why did he not know
/ the act was wrong2 Because. gentlemen.
/ he was suffering from disease of the
/ brain which produced that condition OF
mind. under the explosive operations OF
(which be believed he had a right 10 Kill
Stanford White. acting under the infiu-
/ ence Of this insanity
Insanity Il Hereditary.
What was the cause OF this mental
condition Of the brain? Hereditary in
sanity In the family; the story IF his life
and the acts of Stanford White. and the
conclusions they produced on the mind Of
the man. under which it finally gave
way"
/ Mr.. Gleason said that the jurors were
competent judges Of insanity. even more
competent than some II the alienists OF
/ trained lawyers. lie went into a descrip-
| ton of the brain. and pictured the inn
pulses under which men act His talk
was very involved. and one Of the jurors
yawned Thaw seemed 90 De very de
7 pressed. Most of the time he held his
/ face in his hands. lie E0t cold. appdr-
entity. for he got Up and drew his coat
over his shoulders. Then he let his head
( fail into his hands again. His face lost
the look Of eaEcrness which IL has shown
during most Of the trial. aud altogether
liz appeared that something had happened
TO make ThaW very detected. Mr. Glea-
son got % this point.
Gentlemen. when you have gone into
the jury box, apply the test To the acts
OF this defendant as testified 60 hy the
witnesses. and 7 know YOU viii say. gen
ylcmeu. that that act may have been an
act Of insanity. but could not have been
an act OF crime
His Test OF Sorrow Also.
Il have another tess, the test Of sorrow.
For we will prove 20 YOU the grief and
sorrow Of the defendant. which acted
upon hls mind before IL gave way and Gull
minated IN this fatal act. There is the
verse Of thar great German poet:
"}yb5 meier bis bread iu sorrow ate.
Wlcne or Tu THE midnight hours,
Hard u.cn hIs he'd 1f SIM
IT, knows not -1U, Sc heavenly powers
Gentlemen. ] have eaten my bread in
sorrow: I have sat through the nights,
weeping. and I know. and sou know. that
from experiences like these insanity may
come, but never crime"
Il did not mean. Mr. Gleason said. that
because r. man WAS insane De was insane
0u All things. He told of a woman he
/ knew who killed her three children. and
when she was found. every recollection
Of the scene had been removed. Every
body said she was insane because Of the
extraordinary uatu-e Of her act but. bee
added, in an act in a high degree ir-
rational. the suggestion of insanity was
bound 10 intrude itself.
I'VE Will introduce 10 YOU said Mr.
Gleason, in detail. the evidence Of these
facts that there was hereditary insanity in
this mans family. 81 that if ne were
subjected TO prolonged stress. the by
pothesis Of insanity would become "a rea-
sonable one. in fact the only one you
could take
Insanity Knows No Wrong.
AN insane man may know, in the alb
stract. what IS right and what is wrong"
Mr.. Gleason said. and he might have an
adherence Of murder. yet the insane i'm
pulse Of the mind would separate the
right and the conscience Of the general
wrong. In addition the freedom of the
viii is destroyed by insanity. because the
conscience is faisifed by decisions and
halluclnations.
"A man acting under the influence Of
a delusiOn that it was an act Of Provi-
dencc 10 kin Stanford White is a man
you can readily see was not a sane
man. or to be held responsible for his
acts. So the law regulates al prosecu-
tons and requires the people to prove
that the act Yves the act of a sane man
beyond q reasonable doubt For. IL not.
the act was not the act Of his free will.
and he is no more responsible for il
than If I. by superior force, should take
the arm of one of YOU jurors and place
in your hand a knife and punch it 10
the heart of q fellOw-iuror. II the man
by reason of his insanity was compelled
to do this act, the law says he is not re-
sponsible for it
Quotes Law on Insanity.
Mr.. Gleason then quoted the law on in
sanity and gave the definitions of muir
der by eminent judges and legal authori-
ties. There was difference, he said. be-
tween what is called legal insanity and
medical insanity. He added: 1.-THE physi-
clans have an idea that a man is some