Evening star., 1932-01-03

1NdGlOlld1 dGIClIllOIl was GCl1UCIch uEOkl
the trial Of Guiteau so years ago and
the extrsor-
Judge Cox's Conduct dfnary con-
Of Guiteaus Trial. duct of the
prisoner T.
the court room gave rise to unjust
criticism of the presiding judge for
permitting his outbursts and harangues
and interruptions, which in fact he was
powerless to prevent. The Star of De-
cember 27, 1881, thus comments upon
the matter
Much of the abuse heaped upon
Judge Cox by home and foreign news
papers is unjust, as all appreciate in
Washington who know him. His up
right character and fine legal abilities
and judicial mind caused his selection
for the position on the District bench
to- be universally regarded by our COM
munity as most worthy one. His
course upon the bench up to the pres
ent trial has tended to confirm this be-
lief in his fitness for the place. In
dealing with Guiteau he has had task
of exceptional difficulty, and it is not
easy to see exactly how he could have
managed to keep the colossal egotism
of the detested criminal in entire
check. 1t is conceded now that how
ever great the provocation to abate the
nuisance by gagging him or removing
him from the court room, such pro-
cedure would probably have vitiated
the trial and given Guiteau a chance
to escape the gallows. Judge Cox has
doubtless acted upon his best juds-
ment, fortified perhaps by the advice
IA
conducting the trial that there shall be
no opening of this sort for upsettlng
its results. While his general policy
on this line Is probably sound, there Is
fear expressed, and amongst those
who have high regard for his char
acter and attainments, that the extent
to which he carries his tolerance OF the
prisoners offensive conduct in the
court room may tend to impress the
jury with the idea that the judge be-
lieyes him to be irresponsibly and ire
preSsibly insane, and therefore beyond
the control of the court. Many of
Guiteaus interpretations and Interrupt
tions are made with such lightning-llke
sWiftness that the court could hardly
intercept them before they are de-
considerable length to villify the wit
nesses and counsel for the Govern
ment. This Is gross contempt OF court,
as well as an outrageous violation of
the rights of counsel and witnesses,
and can only be tolerated upon the
assumption that the prisoner is insane
and therefore beyond the ordinary rules
OF the court room. The Judge should,
therefore. interpose q prompt ana per-
emptory command of halt to the prls-
oner when he indulges in these often
sive trades, both for the protection of
the court and for the benefit OF the
jury. Even If he should fail to effec-
tually silence the prisoner the decided
effort in that direction would have a
wholesome effect in the way pointed
out"
The day following this publication
Guiteau's conduct became SO violent
r,.. in the course of the
uulteau Put proceedings t h t
In the Dock, Judge Coz. Cox ordered pr red
dock. The Stars report of December
%, 1881, says:
Judge Cox said that it was hardly
necessary to say that the conduct OF
the prisoner had been one OF resist
ance and defiance. The only meas
ures that could have been adopted at
the outset were such as would infringe
his constitutional right. Until Satur-
day no other measure had been sug-
gested. Then the question was sug-
gested In the form of motion that the
prisoner be removed to the dock. 1t
had been the opinion of both the court
and the counsel that the prisoner
should be allowed some liberty as his
own actions in court would be crl-
terion of his mental condition. 1t was
through the expressed desire of the dis
trict attorney that he was allowed such
latitude In order to furnish opror-
tunities for observation to expert VIII
nesses who wished to diagnose the case
At this stage of the trial, the object
having been accomplished, the aspect
Of affairs was changed.
lit does seem to me that 1t is in
cumbent on me now continued
Judge Cox, to grant the application to
forcs such restraint upon the prisoner |
as Is necessary TO preserve order. Upon