Los Angeles herald., 1907-02-06


time after the provocation was given
for the passion of reasonable man to
cool whether Il does In fact cool or not,
since the safety of the community re-
uuires that persons shall reasonably
control their passions And, although
there has been some tendency to leave
the question In such cases to the jury,
the law has long been settled that mere
suspicion, or even actual knowledge,
on the part of husband of past or
even continued Illicit relations BIT
tween his wife and another man Is not
such provocation as will reduce his
killing Of the man from murder to man
slaughter 21 Cyc., 75t-753. A fortiori,
suspicion, or even knowledge, on the
part of man that his wife Is being
pursued or annoyed by another would
not be such provocation as to reduce n
homicide to manslaughter Further
more under the present statute In New
York a homicide cannot be classed as
manslaughter, except when there was
no design to effect death; when that
purpose is present the crime is murder
I'm one of its degrees, unless 1t is eX-
cusable or iustifable. N. Y, Penal
Code sections 1888, 1S9. 1873; People VS..
Beckwith, 103 N. Y, $50.
Nor was the homicide excusable or
justihable either at common law or
excusable, 1t must have been commit
ted by accident in doing lawful act,
and to be justihable It must have been
in the lawful defense of Thaw or his
wife, when there was reasonable
ground to apprehend a design on the
part of the person slain to commit
felony, or to do some great personal
injury etc, and when there was i'm
minent danger of such design being ac-
Tt. AIA
203. 205. See 21 Cyc., T94, Sl2. S26
"with respect to the defense Of in
sanity, If Thaw was insane when he
killed White, he not only cannot be
punished. but he was guilty of no
crime. and this is true although he may
have been sane before he committed
the act and may be sane now IL Cyc.,
1856; 81 eye. 663 Whether or not he
was insane is of course question of
fact which must be determined by the
jury from the evidence; but there are
certain tests established by law in this
state, as elsewhere, for determination
of the question whether, If he was to
some extent insane. his insanity was
sufficient to exempt him from response
bility.
"In the first place, it is everywhere
the settled law, in New York by eX-
press statutory provision, that If
Thaw, at the time he killed White. was
ture and quality of his act or did not
know the act was wrong, he Is not re-
sponsible. and must be acquitted. N.
Y. Pen. Code, sections 20, 21; IL Cyc.,
1876; 21 Cyc., 663.
"In the second place, it Is equally
we'll settled that more moral or emo
tional insanity, or frenzy produced by
L, fTNYN
is not sue. insanity as will exempt
from responsibility where the person
knew the nature and quality of his act.
and that it was wrong; and this is
true, 1t has been held, although he may
be unable to control his passion. and
even though some mental defect makes
him more liable to yield to passion than
if he were mentally sound.-12 Cyc.
10; 81 Cyc. 666. Proof of such a con-
dition, however, by excluding the ele-
ments of the deliberation and premedi-
tation, if the evidence shows that it
did so, but not otherwise, will reduce
the homicide to murder in the second
degree.-People VS.. Barberi, 149 N. Y.
256; 81 Cyc. 1872.
"Perhaps there may be such a thing
as genuine insanity produced by anger,
jealousy or revenge, and If there is,
termined from the evidence, then 1t
Is a defense to the same extent as
insanity produced by any other cause;
but it must be genuine insanity as dis
tinguished from turbulence of passion
produced by a desire for revenge CPeo-
pile VS.. Foy, 1873 N. Y. 666, 667), and 1t
must as is expressly required by sec
ton q of the Penal Code, have been
such as to render the accused incap-
able of knowing the nature and quail
ity OF his act or of knowing that it
was wrong. The heat Of passion and
feeling produced by motives of anger,
hatred or revenge Is not insanity and
affords no ground of exemption from
responsibility.-Peo VS.. Foy, 1873 n,
Y. 666, 667.
I'm some states a phase of insanity
known as insane irresistible impulse,
resulting from mental defect or dis
ease, is recognized as a ground of ex
emption from responsibility for a crime
committed under it's influence; it be-
ing held in these states that if an in
sane impulse so oVermasters the will
of person as to irresstibly impel him