Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1908-01-25

ers, l see but little difference between
his talk now and at other times. While
he spoke earnestly, and was some
as at other times.
Mr.. Meckcr: You may state that
when you examined Dr. Getz as to his
mental condition, whether you deemed
it necessary at the present time to re-
strain him by placing him in contine-
ment in an insane hospital
objected to unless based on the as
sumption that defendant is insane.
ca Il do not think so, but will
qualify my statement in this way:
| While l believe DR.. Getz is suffering
from a condition that is existing, |
| am not prepared to say that he is suf-
fering from insanity, and under those
grounds l think it unwise and unjust
to place him in an asylum for the in
sane"
(Q). Then, as I understand you
from your examination of DR.. Getz,
on January 20. and at the present
date, as a physician you do not think
DR.. Getz mentally unsound or that he
should be restrained in any institu-
tion?"
Objected to for calling for a determ-
ination of fact beyond the jurisdiction
of the board. which is limited to con-
finement of persons to an insane asy-
lum.
Mr.. Meeker. You may state whether
or not he should be confined in any
insane hospital Of the state of Iowa"
AZ Il don't think that he should"
Dr.. LierIe for Defense.
DR.. +. p. Lierle was the only expert
witness for the defense. He was
asked:
From your knowledge and exper-
fence, aided by observations. would you
consider DIR. Getz sane or insane?"
(A.) Sane"
On cross examination DR.. Lierle was
asked as to the time he had examined
DR.. GetZ. and was asked to make
statement as physician as to whether
or not he considered the defendant
today sane or insane. His answer was
that he believed he was sane.
90 IN your opinion should he be
restrained in any way, or have free
and absolute liberty in this commun-
ity?"
Objected to on commissions limita-
tons and jurisdiction and not proper
cross examination, in asking the wit
ness to determine ultimate facts not
within the jurisdiction Of this court
hut that which another court might
determine.
(A.) "rhe proposition is just this:
In his present condition ne needs no
if under the influence OF
a narcotic his mental condition might
be wrong. under those conditions the
proper thing would be restraint Now,
don't think DR.. Getz needs restraint
at ALL"
co. "Tf Or. Getz is under the infu-
ence Of drugs should he be sent to the
insane hospital?"
(A) mo, not to an insane hospital, /
but to an inebriate hospital"
Question by Devine: rs there sucn
a thing as drug and alcoholic insani-
ties?"
Objection.
e(A.) yes"
Earl Stoddart. Of the Stoddart ho-
tel, where DR. Getz has been guest,
was examined as to the doctors ac-
tons during recent days. The wit
ness testified that he showed no indi-
cations of being Irrational irrespons-
BILE, or, showing want of memory or
/, lack of understanding of the usual
wants of life. The witness also testi-
led that he had seen no indication of
he defendant attempting to do any
Violence to any person. In answer to
| question Of whether the witness
hought defendant sane or insane, he
'eplied. Sane"
The defense waived further testi-
nony, altho it had subpoenaed in addi-
iolr Charles T. LaPlant.