Daily press. [volume] (Newport News, Va.) 1896-current, 1908-02-01
THAW JURY FAILED 70
AGREE LAST NIGHT
Continued from Page onc)

ton aud generalization the jury
might take into account the acts of
the defendant Immediately proceeding
the. shooting. his acts upon tho roof
garden aud the incidents attending tho
shooting itself. "A san man. a vol
untary agent acting upon motives,
must he presumed to contemplate and
intend the necessary. natural and
prohailo consequences of his own
acts" he contended. IF. therefore,
ono voluntarily or wilfuly docs an
net which has tendency to destroy
nnother's life. You are not to be
prejudiced by any testimony which
reflects upon the character of the de-
cedent.
I'm the eye of the law, numbering tho
vilcst and most abjcct of the human
race. Is rs great crime as to muir
der its greatest benefactor There is
no testimony To controvert the proof
that Stanford White came TO his deurn
ms tho result of pistol shot wounds
inflicted by the defendant. The de-
PENDANT. under plea CT not guilty
Inns entered specification that at the
time Of tho Jfacurance in qestion HI
was insane and that therefore under
the law he Is me-. responsible for his
acts at The time In question. Where
the defense Is insanity and evidence
Is given tending to establish that de-
tense the general question IS present
ed whether the crime was committed
By Il person responsible for his acts.
and the burden of establishing sanity
Is upon the prosecutions: and II upon
The whole calse any reasonable doubt
remains in your mind as to the de-
PENDANTS insanity, he Is entitled to
the benefits of that doubt and to be
acquitted upon that ground.
THE only question for you to de-
eide is whether the defendant was or
was not insane on the evening of
June 20, 1906. when the shooting oc-
Cured But the testimony Of family
history OF prior life illness and con-
ditions and of subsequent mental and
physical state Is received TO cast light
upon the question cf defendants men
tai condition at the time In question.
The proof of antecedeut acts is like
to proof of hereditary taints offered
for the purpose of casting further
light upon his then condition. the
point at Issue, by proving his earlier
and recurrent or continuous mental
state. You will weigh the testimony
Of the experts rs you do the other
testimony Of the case. You are not
bound ty IT unless you deem it wor-
thy OF your credence. To conclude.
II yen are satisfied beyond a reason
able doubt upon the proof that at the
time Of the commission of tho act
charged in the indictment the defend
ant knew the nature and quality OF the
acts lie was doing and that the act
was wrong. You will find him guilty
of such degree OF crime MS under the
law as heretofore laid down the evil
dence has satisfied You OF his guilt
beyond n reasonable doubt II on the
, contrary you are satisfied upon the
proof that at the time of the com
mission OF the act charged in the in
dictment the defendant was laborlng
under such defect Of reason as
| quality of the act ne was doing or not
10 know the act was wrong, or if you
entertain IA reasonable doubt us to
| whether tho defendant was lahoring
under such Il defect of reason as not
TO ltipow tho nature and quality OF the
net he was doing, or net 10 know the
act was wrong YOU viii acruit the de-
PENDANT upon the ground OF insanity.
The following verdicts are possible
in the case: Murder in the first de-
gree: penalty. death Murder in tho
gocon degree penalty, life imprisoU-
mcnt Mnrslaughter in the first de-
] gree; penalty. not 10 exceed twenty
| years imprisonment Not guilty oil
the ground OF insanity at the uIne the
crime was committed; probably con-
/ itmcnt to Mattewan asylum
---~s- -