Year: 1873

JUDGE HENRY W. TAYLORS REMEDIES FOR OBJECTS


IN THE LAw-JUDdE DAVIS on TRAINS CASE.
To ne EditOr Of The Tribune.


SIR: More than 20 years ago, while occupy
ing a seat the bench OF the Supreme Court was 80
ANNOYED by the vagueness and mpeTfectiOn Of the law
of insanity in the trial OF criminal that drafted
bill with the intention Of presenting it to the Legi'la-
ture with the hope, least OF relieving the judges from
the difficulties attending such trials.


This bill was never presented in consequence or the
expiration OF my term OF office. II contained substan-
italy the following provisions, as applicable now as
hen Whenever should be the intention or counsel TO


erpose the defense OF insanity he should be required
to enter the same upon the ndicmOnt and thereupon
it should be tho duty OF the Judge jury to be
drawn for tho trial of that only that trial the


Jury should decide whether the defendant was Insane az
the time u the commission OF the alleged crime, or at
the time Of the trial at either or both periods
that If by the verdict he should be declared insane az
the Of tho alleged crime, he should be sent under
the order Of the judge to the State Asylum there to be
detained and treated until the medical authorities Of the
institution should certify to his perfect restoration, and
should then be set at liberty Ii the jury should decide
that ne was at tho time OF the alleged commission
OF crime but insane at the time OF the trial inquest


then should be committed TO the asylum until the
medical authorities aforesaid should certify to his re5to
ration after which he should be brought before the
court and tried as if intervening proceedings had
been had And in the jury Of inquestshould lind
the defendant to be sane them IN the last case, he
should DO tried upon the issues Of the indictments aud
on the trial OF such iNsues in either Of the two last cases
t should made tho duty OF the judge to prevent tho
introduction OF any testimony touching the defense OF
insanity; and this last point should be enforced with
the utmost strngeucy to punish its introduction
as a penal Offense.


I know OF nothing that could bring our system OF
jurisprudence into utter contempt than the late
case of Train First the question OF his insanity Is
tried and decided by jury Of inquest that he is
sane He is then brought - trial on the indictment and
on this trial the counsel who had proved his sanity
before now assert his insanity and prove him insane
by the testimony of two witnesses He now declared
insane, aud disposed OF accordingly; but the same
counsel to ovade the legal consequences Of their own
defense, apply for writ dc tunahco, buresque on
Justice who decide that he is sane Whatever else may
be said of this proceeding there are some old foges
who believe that the counsel In thus blowing hot and
blowing cold so solemn ose, ignored their pIOfcs
sonal honor, II not their professional oath.


But all has fallen upon the Judge; for what
The prosecutor had proved his crime, else the plea Of
insanity would have been out OF place. To eude con-
yicon tho counsel for Train asserted his insanity, and
proved 1t by credible Witnesses the public prose
cutoP admitted il. Under these circumstances the
Judge took the from the jury and directed them to
bring verdict precisely according to law, for there
WAS no fact for them TO pass upona verdict Of not
guilty on account Of insanity. What else could he do
Why he refused TO allow the jury to be poed-poed
for what The verdict on the indictment was for the
defendant the only person to demand polling, II any
body was the public prosecutor. But he was content
What then On the question OF insanity Il had been
proved by his own counsel and admitted by the sci
on both sides Should jury be allowed TO be poued by


party who had obtained by the verdict precisely what
he asked fora But the Judge hasy aud too prompt
II ere there may be Just cause for complaint.


In a city where chicanery IN eyadng Justice on tho
part Of lawyers dlatorness Of public prosecutors, aud
remssness Of courts TO punish crime have become
chronic as TO constitute them law and to bring
law itself into contempt-the prompt and fearless exc
cnn Of his duty By judge may be regarded as just
- o.. ,~orObatOn Henry W. TAYLOR.


Canandaigua, - =. Jdiy !, ,3I5.