Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-12-03

been rushing toward her and the cir
cumstances of their relations. and the
way he approached her. and the provoca
ton may have been such as to shake any
ordinary judgment, and she fired, even
intending to take his life. That would be
manslaughter. But il the evidence should
satisfy the jury that she did fire inten-
tional.y into Browns body she would be
guilty Of murder, at least In the second
degree: II Intentionally and deliberately,
and with premed.tated malice, then, muir
der in the first degree
Judge Stafford pointed out that all the
matters essential to the commission of
the crime would have to be proved be-
doubt meant beyond moral certainty: it
meant feeling sure that you are max
fh e' la N: the court continued requires
a man to master his passions and pun
ishes him II he does not. The emotional
insanity theory Is entirely rejected in this
District. If there Is a reasonable doubt
of the defendants mental responsibility
the defendant should be acquitted.
As to Mental Responsibility.
The question of mental responsibility
was the most important to Mrs. Bradley.
and on this point Justice Stafford said:
when is a person mentally responsible
in the eyes Of the law? The answer is
threefold: u He must be capable OF I'M
Outstanding the physical nature Of his
act; for example, in the present case, the
defendant, to be responsible. must have
been capable of understanding that she
was shooting Arthur Brown. ~ He must
be capable Of understanding the mora
character Of his act-that Is, whether 1t is
right or wrong. In this case. for exam
pie. it Is necessary that the defendant
should have been capable Of understand
ing that it was wrong. or unlawful. for
her to shoot Arthur Brown. 90 He must
be capable of controlling his action, capa-
BILE of choosing the right and refraining
from the wrong. II he IL mentally in
capable in any OF these three respects he
Is not responsible. But there Is an i'm
portant qualification to this statement.
1t Is necessary that this mental incapacity
should be the result of disease-mental
disease.
"The law distinguishes sharply between
disease and mere passion. II one Is blind
I'd by rage, jealousy, revenge or any
other passion. so that for the time being
he cannot understand what he Is doing
or cannot understand that 1t is wrong. or
cannot resist his impulse to crafty his
passion-that does not relieve him from
responsibility. In some circumstances it
may reduce the grade OF his offense, as
I shall point out to you; but 1t does not
constitute insanity as the law uses that
recognize that men may be swept away
by their emotions or their passions. The
law Is not so absolute in goodness as to
forget what human frailty is 1t shows
mercy to al such when 1t can be done
without violence to reason ard justice.
Degrees Of Homicide.
when one is engaged in combat
and kills his adversary in the heat of
blood. even though he intends to kill him,
1t is manslaughter and not murder. But,
aside from a few exceptions Of this ex-
treme character, the law says that II
mans mind is not overcome by mental
disease he can and he must know what
he is doing and do what the law COM
his emotion or his passion got the
better Of him. The very fact that the
law requires him to master his passion.
and Furnishes him when he does not, helps
him to control himself.
himse'f as readily II he knew that the law
would accept the excuse that he could
not resist his impulse? When a witness
testified, in an English court. that, in his
opinion. the defendant could not have re-
sisted his impulse to commit the crime.
the Judge turned and asked him II he
thought the defendant could have resisted
the impulse If there had been a police
man standing by. That question reminds
fact that men are held accountable for
their actions is a potent factor in ena-
bling them to govern those actions. The
theory of emotional insanity. or irresist-
ible impulse. Is utterly rejected by the law
of this jurisdiction. and when the defense
Of insanity is interposed the question is
merely whether the defendants act was
the product of mental disease. Such de-
Tense when well founded is as valid and
meritorious as any other. When evidence
Is introduced tending to support it. 1t be-
comes necessary for the government 70
satisfy the Jury that there Is no reasona-
BILE doubt Of the sanity of the accused.
If there Is reason able doubt about the de-
PENDANTS responsibility. there Is reasona-
Bile doubt about her guilt. and the law de-
clares that she shall be acquitted.
Should Be Uninfiuenced.
"To arrive at true conclusion 70.
speeding any question OF fact It is of the
utmost importance that We should be uns
Influenced by any wish to arrive at one
conclusion or the other. In the present
case 1t may prove especially difficult for
you to remain uninfuenced by your wishes
and your sympathies. The case may be a
test, and possibly the severest test that
you have ever been subjected to- of your
ability to try and decide a question of
fact unswayed by your inclinations and
your feelings. Before you were accepted
as triers of this case you declared, each
Of you. that you believed yourselves
equal to that test. None but yourselves
to it or not. But If you are unequal to
it then there has been ns real trial. In
that event there has been only an appeal
to sentiment and feeling, and the case