Year: 1865




pistol at him, inficting wound Of which he died. and
then cooking the pistol fired at him second tme they
should ind her guilty as indicted unless they are sa.
ned ny the said evidence beyond reasonable doups ths
at the time said homicide was committed, as aforesaid,
the accused had not sufficient reason 70 Know
homicide, and sufficient capacity TO distinguish
right from wrong In regard TO that particular aci.
second II the jury lind from the whole evioehcc sna.
the deceased came 10 his death at the time and place ana
In the manner set forth in the foregoing prayer tney
must ind the accused guilty indicted unless hey are
satisfied by said evidence beyond reasonable uoups
tnat at the time the said homicide was committed as
Aforesaid the accused had not sufficient capacity 70
distneuish right from wrong IN regsra s;s, .hs hs
homicide, from disease incapable 70 resist ne
commission Of the act Third II the jury hnd from the
whole evidence that the deceased came TO bis death M
the time and place and in the manner set iortn IA .he
foregoing prayer II the jury further find that the
accused entertained feelings Of hatred towards the
deceased and was conscious that she was ~ S na
periods subject TO paroxysmal insanity, ana that
the presence of the deceased was an excit,
ing cause Of paro!ysm: of insanity and
lily sought the deceased in the manner set forh I'D the
first prayer the accused is emitted acqual on the
caused by paroxysmal insanity; but the jury should nnd
tho accused guilty Of murder or or 9, Srom man, she
whole evidence that the deceased came his death
at the time and place and in the manner set iorth
in the foregoing prayer in order TO entitle the ac.
cused 10 an acqutal the ground Of insanity, 1t
is sufficient for the accused 10 show state OF
mind susceptible TO disease nor is IL sufficient ina
the proof merely shows that il was possible, or
probable, that at the time Of the commission
of the homicide the accused OF unsound or diseased
mind and subject to tits Of insane fury, and was subject
whole evidence that the deceased came TO his death at
the time and place and in the set forth In the
@ or s os o sn& the
law as stated by the Court they should
render their verdict IN the following form, TO
wit-"Not guilty, by reason Of insanity, or words to
that effect tAct Feb II statute, 10Th section, 5h,
1851 Sixth II the jury find from the whole evidence





time and place and in the manner set forth
in the first prayer in order to ene the accused TO an
acquitta the ground Of insanity il is not sufcient
for the accused to show state OF mind susceptible to
disease, nor is IL sufficient that the PROOF merely
Sabe, that at the time '' Of the commission
OF the homicide the accused was of unsound
or diseased mind and subject to paroxysma insanity;
but il be shown To the satisfaction OF the jury and
beyond reasonable doubt that the act of homicide pro
ceeded from a paroxyism OF insanity occasioned by
disease and not from criminal intent


MI. Bradley proceeded to argue upon the prayers
offered saying that he would not cite authority but
would heap them that the Court might Gull thererom
those thought proper The first paragraph was
sustained by all respectable courts He quoted Metcalf
500 and sad in order 10 constitute crime the person
charged must be possessed Of power Of reason sufficient
TO know right from wrong and understands the relation
he or she bears to Others and rice uerso TO DC rcspOn
sibe for bis acts He must have reason enough to un
dersand that he will be liable to punishment for the act
The defendant II at the time Of the commission OF the
act was under the control OF disease OF the
mind, was entitled 70 an acquitta In 1852
in the Of John Day, the Judge tCrawford
entered largely into the two principles he presented and
came to the same conclusions he MR. B. contended
should prevail in this The OF the two Devens
decided by Judge Crawford In 1858, was also referred
TO- In some 1t was held that the burden Of proof
fell on the defence but in this II devolved ON the
government to prove that the prisoner was sane At
the time OF the commission Of the act and this should
prove every material fact beyond doubt II the defence
proves diseased and disordercd mind the burden OF
proof s thrown the prosecution II there is reason
able doubt Of the sanity Of the mind OF the prisoner u
the time Of the commission OF the act, or that
it was committed with malice aforethon8ht, the
prisoner was entitled TO her freedom. Mr.. Bradley
quoted from various authorities in support Of his argl.
ment referring 10 the testimony or DIR Nichols IN COM
plimentary terms The questions were, was the crime
committed with malice aforothought and was she capa
blo olcontrong her actsY And II at the time the act
committed the party was incapable Of having malice
af0reth0ught, eho cannot DO held guilty.


This argument occupied about an hour and . hAh and
was listened TO with breathless attention.


At this point the Court took recess.


proceeded to reply to Mr.. Bradley, and TO argue
the prayers offered the part Of the prosecution
MI Wilson argued at length on the questions
contending that the prosecution had followed the
established rulings Of Law and the rulings In cases some
late as 1s4s Mr. Wilson contended that the dccnce
should furnish satisfactory evidence OF insanity as hey
would have to in any other He read from whar
toms American Criminal Law to show that one V
from Sn''' parksr's Reports ,voi i 5, p so0, which
states insanity is to be anrmativsy proved,
soS ns %s esnce Sm up hs
but they have not proved it, and yet they pray nstruc
tons to the jury TO acquit them He referred TO the
case OF Foley in the Circuit Court.


Mr. Wilson having referred to the decisions OF the old
Criminal Court Judge wyc stated that he held that the
Criminal Court still in existence and he was on the
bench Successor Of the late Judge Crawford.


Mr. Wilson contended II she knew before she went
into OF the deceased what the consequence
would be- armed herself and then and there went into
his presence she should be found guilty. and he quoted
Wharton and Stilys Medical Jurisprudence, page lH


Judge Hughes proceeded 70 notice some Of the cita
tions made by Mr. Wilson, for the purpose Of showing
his (Mr WsOn's) manner OF dealing with authorities
Mr. Hughes commenced by reading from Beck's Medical
Jurisprudence the report OF the Huntington case.


Mr. Wilson stated that he had only referred 10 the
work but had read the case named in another work.


Mr.. Hughes continued and read from the same works
In support OF the prayers offered by the defence


1t IL expected that the argument TO the jury will be
commenced TO- morrow by Mr.. Wilson. judge Hughes
and Mr. Voorhees, will follow for the Defence and Gene
raj Darlington will close the argument