The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-02-02

NOR WIS the NOlnlClut sStbehbiO Va
justifiable either at common law or
under the New York statute. for. to be
cxcusable. II must have been com
mItted by accident in doing iawfui
act. and to be justifiable, 1t must nave
been in the lawful defense or ina" or
his wife, when there was reasonable
ground to apprehend design on the
part OF the person slain 10 comm,
!, felony. or to do some great personal
injury, etc. and when there was Inn
,ninent danger of such. design being &C
compl,shed.' ~ Y Pen. Code. 2O3, 10
See II eye, 79i, si2, s2o.
Question of Insanity.
with respect to the defense SEQ, OF ne hs
sanity, e Thaw was insane nriy cannot Mnet be
punished but he was guilty OF no
crime: and this is true. althpusn o NE
may have been sane before ne G com,
i ~ cVe ' is5: Il eye. ss3. whether or
not he was insane is. of course,
ton OF fact, which must be deter NJ
bfy the Jury from the evidence: oa.
there are certain tests established ps
law in this State. as elsewhere, iSa !,
termination OF the question whet nie =,
he was to some extent insane. ms m
sanity was sufficient to exempt MIN
from responsibility.
I'm the first place. 1t Is everywhere
the settled lawn New YORK o. eS-
press pre- statutory provision--that If Thaw
at the time he Killed White was so in
sane that de did not know the hata a,S
and quality OF his act, or that ne ola
not know the act was wrong. he Is nSt
Responsible and must be acquitted \.
Y. Pen. Code, 20, 21: u eye. 1856;
well settled that mere moral or emo
tionaI insanity, or frenzy produced % by
ange5 ' sndb insa ar S'n as viii exempt
| from responsibility, where the nerson
knew the nature and quality OF ms
act. and that 1T was wrong; and this
is true, it has been held. although, he
may be unable to control his passion,
and even though some mental defect
makes him more iiabae 10 ylen 80 SOMA
liz Cyc ITO; 81 Cyc. 666.
| Proof of such condition. however,
By excluding, the elements OF 7, me me ds-
dence shows that 1t did so. put not
| otherwise, Will reduce the homicide to
murder In the SECOND deg 3 e;vo People 1sg
/ Perhaps there may be such thing
as genuine insanity produced by an
| ger, jealousy or revenge. and II there
determined from the evidence, then 1t
| is defense TO the same extent as
insanity produced by any other cause;
but 1t must be genuine, insanity as dis
tinguished from turbulence Of passion
| produced by desire for revenge (peo-
pie VS., Foy. 1873 N. Y. $3.50, ss75, and it
ton ton ii i of the Penal Code. have been
such as to render the accused incap-
able of knowing the nature and quality
of his act or of knowing that It was
! wrong. The heat of passion and feel
ing produced by motives of anger. hn-
tired or revenge Is not insanity, and
responsibility. People VS. Foy, 1873 N.
| Y. G66. 667.
| Other States.
ON some States a phasa of insanity
known as insane Irresistible impulse
resulting from mental defect or disease
is recognized lu as ErounG of exemp,
committed under It's influence; it be-
ing held in these States that. If an
insane imnulse SO overmasters the viii
of person as to irresistibly impel him
to the commission of homicide. he
Is not responsible, although he may
know the nature and quality Of his
act, and may know that it Is wrong
~ Cyc. 1859; 81 Cyc.. Sos.
Tn other States. however. this doc
trine Is not recognized. end 1t has nc
State it is expressly provided by statute
i that a person is not excused from Grim
inal liability as an insane person 'ex-
Committing the alleged criminal act. ht
reason as either "a not to know the
doings or aq s25 not e know es that the ae'
was wrong and. further, that a NOR.
4 bid propensity to commit prohibited
acts, existing in the mind Of q person
capable of knowing the wrongfulnes!
of such acts forms. no defense to {
prosecution therefor. N. y. Pena
| Code, pages 21, 23, and see IL Cyc. 1863
,, In the Carpentry Up, case {lo s y; Y
4 his wife by repeatedly stabbing hel
with a knife, in the presence Of :
!. number of people. in the open street
and in broad DAYLIGHT. the Court o
4 not err in, refusing the defendants re
i quest to charge the jury that, II SOM
! controlling disease was In truth tn
which he could not resist, or If h,
had not sufficient use of his reason t
control, the passion which promnte,
opinion Of the court, said that t tn
principle of this request is not onl,
! and 20 Of the Penal Code. but has bee,
held to be untenable by the express de
esion Of this S9urt tH!tting the Flan
a ae ihss anguag &c. Judge aotn
: drews therein-namely; Tnduigence i i
i evil passions weakens the RESTRAINING
t power of the will and conscience, an
! for the commission of crime and it
. justitlcation, The doctrine that a Grim
inal act may be. excused upon the no
. liOll o. All Impulse W com
: nit 1t, when the offender has the au,l
1 ity to discover his legal and moral dut
t IN respect to 1T. has no place in tn
If He Realized the Crime.
.S"This view has bee4 adhered to /
Q the later cases, as In People VS.. Fer
: raro, 161 NJ Y. ass, 377, and People v.
!. Silverman, 1871 N. Y. 235. In the latte
!, case conviction of murder In the frs
!. degree was sustained, although TIL
i aviHanCn ShOWa6 that tho 6sfen1an
3 had been eccentric, morose, and of ba
: | temper, and had been treated IN o san