Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Duke University Libraries
https://archive.org/details/officialreportofOOhyde
OFFICIAL REPORT
OF THE
TRIAL
OF ' A \T X Y HYDE,
FOE THE MURDER OF GEO. W. WATSON,
ICLUDING THE TESTIMONY, THE ARGUMENTS OF COUNSEL, AND THE CHARGE OF THE COURT, REPORTED VERBATIM.
With Portraits of the Defendant and the Deceased.
FROM THE SHORT-HAND NOTES OF
WILLIAM HEMSTREET,
OFFICIAL REPORTER OF THE COURT.
NEW YORK : J R. McDIVITT, LAW BOOKSELLER, PUBLISHER AND IMPORTER,
81 NTassaxx street, 1872. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year eighteen hundred and seventy-two, I
J. R. McDIVITT,
in the office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.
Deller & Walrath Printing Co., Publishers & Law Booksellers, 122 Liberty Street. i l! '
I N 13 K X.
-»-(♦»-<-
hranneling Jury. .10
Oaring of tlie District Attorney.. .13
Anission of the act, &c.17
E|n Curley.17
Recalled.61, 87
My Ann Kelley.19
Asr Pixley.19
Recalled.22
Mgaret Manie.20
NconJ. Stowell .20
Cn;. C. Woglom.21
Recalled.85
SECOND DAY.
Dr Joseph Creamer. .21
PROSECUTION RESTS.
•'Icon to instruct the jury to find for defendant.24
Ar meat upon ...24
Moon denied, and rulings.25
OPENING FOR THE DEFENSE
Hoird Daisley.38
Jan Thatcher.43
Ed' n Holloway.43
JolMarr.; .43
" Recalled..59
M il un Newton.44
Ale ndre Amos..47 8 INDEX,
THIRD DAY. Sarah Masr. Edward Weaving. Isaac P. Maples. Kate Lown. Sarah Webb. Mary Milford. Eliza Jackson. Arthur Thomas. Thomas Whitaker.. Henry Potts. . . Mary Gleason.. Mary Dexter. Recalled. Kate Hanskaw. John Dexter. Margaret Hyde. Sarah Windley. John Windley. Fanny Hyde, Defendant. ...
FOURTH DAY.
Statement of District Attorney as to a juror.
Joseph H. Barclay .
Dr. John Byme.•*
Recalled . •']
Dr. Charles Correy. ■ * Recalled.
Sergeant Geo. W. Bunce. ...!.. .
Thomas Langan..1
Eliza W. Watson.Ji
FIFTH DAY.
Lorenzo D. Tice... ••• • •
Dr. Thomas Holmes. .
A. P. Bachman. -ii
Summing up for the Defense.
Summing up by District Attorney. ..
Charge of the Court . APRIL 15, 1872. ft.. A. B. TAPPEN, J. C. Presiding, and Associates, Justices of the Peace VOORHEES and JOHNSON.
rhe People of the State of New York against Fanny Hyde.
WINCHESTER BRITTON, District Attorney. PEEL D. MORRIS, PATRICK READY, I. B. CATLIN and THOMAS E. PEARS ALL, for the Defence.
h BRITTON.—If the Court please, I move scruples against finding a verdict of guilty c;e of the People against Fanny Hyde, where the punishment by law would be death ? h des seem to be ready. A. No, sir. '•lice TAPPEN.—Are you ready ? Q. Suppose the party be a woman, would IrMORRIS.—Yes, sir; we are ready, that make any difference with your answer ? A h 30URT.—The Clerk will call a jury, No, sir. h ollowing were accepted in the manner as ea:; The Juror was accepted as satis factorii, and duly sworn. J PANELLING THE JURY. TAPSC0TT ““ f' ROUSS called and prelimina- nt administered. ABf4^“Hs4LArwl” 'lo ^!r. MORRIS.—Where do you live? A. a. Street. MetlS“ “ y“r 7 A- ShiPPif! hat is your business? A. Dry goods j e you married ? A. No. StoetYN“w&°f " A' 86 S'”lUl M you know Geo. W. Watson, the de- d A. No, sir. ma1ri^dre ^ a ““ °f family? A- Am not 1 ve you heard anything about the case fy Hyde, charged with killing George A Qi y0U read any acc011nt of this case ? fnon, on the 26th of January last? A. I Q. From what you have heard or read have I ve you read anything about it ? A. I cusedA^ °-Pmi0n °r imPression against the ac-
I ve you heard anything of the case ? A. Mr. BRITTON.—That is hardly a proper question on challenge for principal cause P Hi anybody expressed any opinion about A AjirT 7tU f0rmed 0r exPressed any opinion ? A. JNot that I am awmre of. 1 S'n your hearing? A. Not to my knowl- Q. From what you read'did you form or ex¬ 0v king have you been in business in press an opinion ? A. No, I have not formed iiVaSu01“C time a«° siuce I read A- Two years- it. I have forgotten the circumstances. I have -1 iJ-iUJN.—Have you any conscientious no present opinion. e 10
Q. Have you heard the case talked of? A. disqualification or difficulty. We want jui Yes. whose minds are free; who don’t go into Q. At the time that you read about the case jury box with an impression formed as to did you lomi any opinion or impression ? veryr subject we are to try. Mr. BRITTON.—I object to'that question on Mr. BRITTON.—The subject to try is win challenge for principal cause. er this defendant is guilty, as charged in the The COURT.—All that may go to your sub¬ dictment. of the crime of murder. This ji sequent challenge to the favor. Your present says he has formed no impression as to the g question is confined to challenge for principal or innocence of this party charged. That is cause. point we are here to try; no other point is bel Mr. MORRIS.—At the time you read of this this court but that, and that he distinctly sti transaction did it make any impression on your he has not formed any impression about mind -with reference to the case one way or the says what no man could help saying who kn< other—not what that impression was, but did that somebody has been guilty of violence. *' it make any impression ? A. Yes. assumption of any intelligent man would Q. Has anything occurred since that event to that somebody was to blame; that is a gen change that impression ? A. I formed no opin¬ impression, growing out of the fact that tl ion ; but I had an impression it was a very sad has been a death by violence. Any rule affair. In fact I have almost forgotten. eluding on that ground, if adopted, woulc Q. Has anything occurred to change the im¬ elude any juror of any intelligence who pression you formed at that tune? A. None heard this man was killed. whatever. Mr. MORRIS.—But there is no other pe Q. You have a present impression with refer¬ charged with this than the prisoner no\n ence to the case ? A. None on the merits of the trial. When he says he has an impression s. case. I have an impression what it was. I have one.was to blame, he has reference to the ‘ not followed the ease through the papers. I oner on trial. merely read an account of it on one occasion. Mr. BRITTON.—It maybe the accused, i Q. Do you distinguish between an impression very nature of the defense is that the elect» and an opinion? A. As to which party was at was to blame. He only got an impression o fault, I have formed no opinion with regard to it was a sad affair; that somebody was to bl« that. Mr. i OR R IS. —If either one, it would eq 1; Q. Have you formed any impression on that disqualify him. subject at all as to whether there was any fault The COURT.—The Court comes to the n in any one ? A. I do not know that I have. elusion that the juror has not disqualified Ji Q. Can you say whether you have or not— self in either of his answers. Your dial gi have you formed any impression with reference to the favor is not sustained. to the question as to whether or not any one was Mr. BRITTON.—Have you any conscier >u to blame ? A. I imagine I have. scruples against finding a verdict of } ltj Q. You have that impression still ? A. I have where the punishment for the offense won h an impression that some one was to blame. death? A. I have no conscientious sciJ* Q. And it would require some evidence to re¬ against finding a verdict, having been swe ai move that impression ? A. Certainly it would. a juror. Mr. BRITTON.—Have you formed any im¬ Q, Do you mean to say that your mind in pression whatever as to the guilt or innocence such a condition that you would find a v lid of the prisoner ? A. None whatever. if the testimony led to that conclusion ii c® Q. All the impression you formed was that mind, under the rules of law? A. I iniglp™ some one must have been to blame; as to who a verdict of guilty; that’s what I mean tgjH that person is you have not formed any impres¬ Q. Suppose the penalty of the law oi om sion ? A. I have not. verdict would be death ; the question is w tlw Q. That impression is a mere general impres¬ you have any scruples such as would pent sion? A. It is a general impression; when we your giving a verdict of guilty on the testify? read anything of the kind— A. I have conscientious scruples. Q. Of an occurrence of that kind, that some¬ The COURT.—Against rendering a did body is wrong ? A. Exactly. of guilty in a capital case, where the tesuoaj; Q‘. But as to who it was you have no impres¬ warrants it ? A. Yes, sir. sion? A. None whatever. Mr. MORRIS.-Your opinion is inor"m The COURT.—Are you laboring under any reference to the policy of the law than ftiMJ bias or prejudice for or against the prisoner? else. Now, if you were sworn as a juroi WJf A. None whatever. not you render a verdict according to t’H Q. Could you enter into the jury box and deuce in the case? A. I should feel boidfl there try the case and render a verdict according do that. to the evidence as though you never had heard Q. You would want clear evidence bef* ra of it ? A. Yes, sir-. dering a verdict ? A. Yes. Mr. MORRIS.—All men who have prejudice Q. If you were sworn as a juror do- J® or bias imagine they have none; and the strong¬ think you could render a verdict aecorfcWj er the prejudice the more unprejudiced they the evidence, uninfluenced by any opinh yj( think they are. He says he has an impression, might have with reference to the policy! 1 and that impression relates to the precise ques¬ law ? A. I have never served on a jury1 tion at issue. A gentleman saying he has no life, and know nothing about it, but I Pj prejudice on the subject does not remove the could render a verdict of guilty if I wt sm 11 ed in my mind it'was correct—that the party in such a condition on that subject that you ■as guilty. I do not know that I would have would hesitate to find a verdict of guilty? A. ay scruples. No, sir ; I don’t think I would. The COURT.—The Court say he qualifies Q. Suppose the prisoner to be a woman ? A. imself as a juror. I don’t think the prisoner being a woman would Mr. BRITTON.—Suppose the party on trial make any difference. i be affected by your verdict was a woman, Q. Well, you think if you were sworn as a ould that make any difference as to your scru¬ juror to try this ease that your mind on capital bs ? Could you still render such a verdict as punishment is so unbiased that you can try the Ascribed. A. I think so. case on the evidence and render a verdict ac¬ The juror was accepted and sworn. cordingly ? Mr. MORRIS.- I submit the juror has fully answered. MARTIN J. COOLEY called and sworn The COURT. — The question is ruled in. :r challenge. For principal cause : Q. It you were to be sworn as a juror on this Q. Where do you live? A. 515 Henry street. case, is your mind so free on the subject of con¬ Q. What is your business ? A. Merchant. scientious scruples as to render a verdict in a Q. Are you a man of family ? A. Yes. capital case according to the testimony in the Challenge for principal cause withdrawn, and case ? A. I think I could. allenqe to the far or : The juror was accepted and duly sworn. 3- Have you any feeling of prejudice or im- ipsions against the accused that would inter- CHARLES R. BLOOMER called and sworn iewith your rendering an impartial verdict ? to challenge. t No, sir ; I don’t think I have. Q. Where do you live? A. 61 Devoe street, 'challenge withdrawn. Eastern District. dr. BRITTON.—For principal cause : Q. What is your business? A. Sash and 1- Did you read an account of this killing at blind factory. tl time it occurred? A. I did read an account Q. Are you a married man. A. Yes. o it, but it passed out of my mind. I- The facts having passed out of your mind, Challenge to the favor. at/ou say, did you then form an opinion or Q. Have you any feeling or prejudice that h iression as to the guilt or innocence of the would prevent you from rendering a fail- verdict ac'rsed? A. I presume I did form an opinion in this case according to the evidence, and an aljhat time. impartial verdict so far as the accused is con¬ Do you know whether you did or not. A. cerned ? I ) not now. Mr. BRITTON.—I object to the latter clause . Have you any opinion now as to the guilt of the question. I don’t think it competent for oiunocence of’ the prisoner, charged with this the counsel on the other side to ask questions offise ? A. No. which the answer to calls for the nature of the . Have you any conscientious scruples bias. This question calls for the bias so far as agnst rendering a verdict of guilty where the the prisoner is concerned. tei mony warrants it, although the punishment The COURT.—Whether he can render a is eath? A. I never served as a juror in such fair verdict ? Limit the question to that. a fie. Mr. MORRIS. —I suppose we can go farther restion repeated by the Court. A. I cannot than that in challenge to the favor. The ques¬ sa;[ have. tion, as far as we are concerned, is whether the j Is your mind entirely free and unbiased juror has a bias against the prisoner. on lat point ? A. As I feel now I sliouldjdis- Mr. BRITTON.—The rale of both principal llli to. ■“ cause and favor is as to whether the juror is ie COURT.—On the question of conscien- biased. I don’t understand in either case the uo, scruples the statute exempts you if you party may ask a question which calls for the ex¬ 1. H is addressed to your conscience. The pression of the nature of the bias, if it exists, HU', ion is whether, when the evidence war- but only to ascertain if there is a bias. First, 1 an the verdict, have you conscientious scruples whether there is a legal bias, and, second, where "gUst performing that duty. A. As I feel now the bias lies. In challenging for principal cause 1 h e some ieeling in that direction. I do not nobody ever thought of allowing a question of , f I have any conscientious scruples, that nature. nit have always had the feeling that such a The COURT.—This is a challenge to the ‘ er ct would be distasteful to me. favor ? ^ Do you mean to say you would be Mr. BRITTON.—Yes. Thej way I under¬ "vei to rendering such a verdict if the evi- stand it is; there is no difference between aen warranted? A. No, sir; I do not mean principal cause and favor, except in one case ; to s| that emphatically. the law says the juror is disqualified ; in the Q How far do you mean to say it ? A. I other case it is a question of fact whether there mea to say I prefer not being a juror. is any such bias ; but because it is for the favor V Suppose the . evidence was such that the question is not whether it is favorable to or ft™ satisfied in your own mind, under against the accused, whether to or against the the lies of law the prisoner was guilty of people. the ense charged, would your mind then be Mr. MORRIS.—Suppose the juror expresses 12
an opinion against the party, would not we be to interfere writh your rendering a verdict on tl at liberty7 to prove that as challenge to the evidence? A. No, sir. favor ? I have a right to ask him anything that Mr. BRITTON.—Have you any feeling c goes to that question. prejudice in favor of the accused to prevei Mr. BRITTON.— Counsel has a right to ask your rendering a verdict according to the test him whether he has an opinion ; and if he says mony? A. No. he has not, it follows then that is the end of it; Q.' No bias in your mind one way nor tl if he says he has, it matters not in whose favor. other? A. No, sir. The COURT.—Let the question be an¬ Q No conscientious scruples against rendei ing a verdict of guilty where the punishment i swered. Mr. MORRIS.—Have you any bias or impres¬ death ? A. I have not. sion, so far as the accused is concerned, that Challenge withdrawn. would prevent you from rendering an impartial Mr. MORRIS.—Are you acquainted wit verdict? A. No, sir. either of the parties? A. Not at all. Challenge withdrawn. Juror accepted and sworn. Mr. BRITTON.—Did you read an account of HENRY HEWITT called and sworn to cha this about that period ? A. I cannot tell. lenge. Q. You don’t remember V A. No, sir. Q. Where do you live? A. 295 Eighteen- Q. Have you ever heard anybody talk about Street. this case? A. I have. Q What is your business ? A. Q. How often have you had conversation or Q. Are you a married man ? A. Yes. heard anybody talk about it? A. Never but Q. Did you read any account of this transf once, and" that between myself and wife. tion? A. Yes. Q. Did you ever express an opinion as to the Q. Have you read anything since ? A ho. guilt or innocence of the prisoner ? A. I do Q. (To the favor)—Have you any opimc not know that I have. impression or feeling so far as the accused Q. Did you have any opinion? A. I don’t concerned that would interfere with or previ your rendering an impartial verdict according think I did. Q. Have you any7 now ? A. No, sir. the evidence? A. No, sir. Q. Have you any bias or prejudice in favor Challenge withdraxcn. of the prisoner, which would prevent your ren¬ By Mr. BRITTON.—Did you form an op dering a verdict against her, if the evidence ion when you read the account? A. All I warranted it ? A. I have not. opinion I formed or expressed I could not m ■ Q. Have you any conscientious scruples which up my mind whether she was guilty or innoci would prevent your rendering a verdict ot guilty Q 'Have you any conscientious scrap if the evidence warranted it, where the punish¬ against finding a verdict of guilty in a cap ment following the judgment would be death ? case where the evidence warrants it? A ij A. I don’t understand that question. sir. Q. Have you any conscientious scruples Juror accepted and sworn. which would prevent your rendering a verdict of guilty in this case, this defendant being a CARREN C. CURTIS called and sworn r female, if the evidence warranted it, the penalty challenge. ___ _ being death? A. No, sir. Q. Where do you live ? A. 2<0 Henry stit, Q. Have you any conscientious scruples on business is plumbing. the subject of capital punishment? A. No, sir. Q. Are you a man of family ? A. I am. Juror accepted and sworn. Q. Have you any feeling or impression, &■» as the accused is concerned, that would rw fere with your rendering a verdict accordn » JOHN B. CREGIR called and sworn for the evidence? A. I have not. challenge. Challenge withdrawn. Q. Where do you reside? A. 244 Rutger Mr. BRITTON.—Did I understand y< street. Q. Are you a married man ? A. Yes. say you did read an account ? A. I rq •, Q Have you read any account of this case? general account, but not in detail. A. I read an account at the time of the occur¬ Q. Did you ever form any opinion subject of the guilt or innocence? A ho. rence. Q. Have you read nothing since? A. Noth¬ Q. Is your mind unbiased? A. 1 thin* * Q. Not prejudiced for nor against? A. b| ing of any consequence. Q. Have you any conscientious sci» Challenge lo the favor. against rendering a verdict of guilty if uiffi Q. Have you any bias, prejudice or impres¬ deuce warrants it ? A. I have nob sions against the accused that would interfere Juror accepted and sworn. with or prevent your rendering a verdict accord¬ ing to the evidence ? HUGH ALLEN called and sworn foil Mr. BRITTON. - Does the ruling of the Court in the other case go so far as this ? Q. Where do you live? A. 89 Harris" The COURT —Put your question in the form Q. What is your business? A. rau of the other question and it will be ruled in. lerchant. „ A. I have an opinion. Q. You are a man of family? A. leb. Q. You have no such opinion or prejudice as 13
Q. Have you any opinion or impression Mr. BRITTON. — Have you any conscien¬ gainst the accused that would prevent you tious scruples against rendering a verdict of om rendering an impartial verdict according guilty where the offence is punishable with ) the evidence ? A. I have none. death ? A. While the law remains the same, I have none. Challenge withdrawn. Mr. BRITTON.—Have you any opinion or Juror accepted and sworn. ias in favor of the accused which would pre- ait you rendering an impartial verdict, accord- ALFRED ARMSTRONG- called and sworn ig to the evidence ? A. I have not. for challenge. Q. Have you any conscientious scruples Q. Where do you live ? A. 247 South North ;ainst rendering a verdict of guilty where the Street, Williamsburgh. inishment is death ? A. No, sir. Q. Were you acquainted with either of the Q. Were you acquainted with either of these parties? A. No, sir. ixties? A. No, sir. Q. Your business ? A. Mason. Q. Have you a family? A. No, sir. Juror accepted and sworn. Q. Did you read an account of this transac¬ JAMES M. ROWAN called and sworn for tion ? A. No, sir, not a word. allenge : Q. Have you talked with any person on the Q. Where do you live ? A. 555 Pacific street. subject? A. No, sir. Q. Your business ? A. Nothing at present. Mr. BRITTON.—Have you any conscientious Q. Have you any impression or prejudice, so scruples as to rendering a verdict of guilty • as the prisoner is concerned, that would in- where the offence is punishable with death ? A. Here with your rendering a verdict according Not that I know of. I the evidence? A. I have no prejudice Q. Have you any feeling or prejudice in favor ;ainst the prisoner. of the prisoner in this case? A. No, sir. Challenge withdrawn. Juror accepted and sworn. Mr. BRITTON.—Have you any conscientious [The foregoing relates to the examination of tuples against rendering a verdict of guilty the jurors accepted. During the empanelling f ere the penalty is death ? A. I have not. of the Jury, the People challenged peremptorily Juror accepted and sworn. four jurors, and the prisoner nine.] The panel being full, the Court instructed rACOB H. BROWN called and sworn to them that on their separating during the trial j.llenge : they should hold no converse in the case, and % Where do you live ? A. 212 Wilson street, then ordered a recess. j. What is your business ? A. Stationer, SY. |. Man of family ? A. Yes. (. Have you any prejudice or impression so -- ?£ as the defendant is concerned, that would ivent you rendering a verdict on the evi- i| ce ? A. I have not. OPENING ON THE PART OF I Did you read an account of this transac- 1 ? A. Some slight ; not much. THE PROSECUTION. ,. Did you hear it talked about? A. Not ih. Mr. BRITTON.—If the Court please, . You did not form any opinion with ref¬ and gentlemen of the jury :— ugee to the guilt or innocence of the accused ? My duty in this case is a simple one, and INo. . Have you any impression on that sub- it will be, as it should be in my judgment, ei? A. No, sir. confined to a mere statement of facts ^ No impression in favor of the prisoner? which the people expect to prove in this Nor against? A. No. case, stating the offense and its nature, Have you any conscientious scruples which it is claimed has been committed. ©' ist rendering a verdict of guilty where the >e: lty is death ? A. No, sir. At the corner of First and South Eleventh streets, in this city, in the East¬ < ror accepted and sworn. ern District, is a manufactory. That pHN R. DAYTON called and sworn for hijenge. building is occupied by various persons. * Where do you live? A. 356 Schermer- It is a place where motive or manufactur¬ loi Street. ing power is rented on the several floors. At t Business? A. Cotton. ( Family? A. Yes. the time of this occurrence, the door which ( Have you any impression or prejudice, so led to the factory was on South Eleventh ar : the accused is concerned, that would in- er>e with your rendering an impartial verdict street. On the third floor of the build¬ >n e evidence ? A. I have not. ing, which was divided into several rooms, (illenge withdrawn. was a room occupied by Mr. Watson, the 14 deceased, for the purpose of manufacturing not able now to state. It was a few mi hair nets. In his employment was a fore¬ utes at best. As he started to go dot woman of the establishment—who is*the those stairs, so far as we are able to jud person on trial here—and four otherpersons from the circumstances of the case, he w were likewise employed there at that time. shot. There is a hole through the windo This was the third story, as I have stated Whether this was caused by this prison to you. The second floor was also used at the time, the trial may develop. At ai for various manufacturing establishments rate Mr. Watson was shot by a ball whi —one, two, or three, as the case may be— passed through his coat collar, struck 1 occupied for manufacturing purposes by neck below the ear, and penetrated t other persons. The stairs, wh ch were the head and brain so far as almost to rea mode of exit from this building to South the skull at the upper portion. Of cou Eleventh street, were narrow and steep— this caused his death. The circumstam there were two flights—one leading to the seem to show that he was shot when he i second, the other to the third story. The pretty well up stairs, and steep as ti stairs down from the third story led to a were, and lined with iron as they were, little passage or floor; you walk around rolled down these stairs, and when fj this and reach the head of the other flight discovered by another than the person v • —the one flight being directly over the committed the deed, he lay at the foot i other. During the course of the trial a the stairs with his feet on the steps i( diagram will be exhibited to you which head and shoulders on the floor. A yot; will give you a clearer idea than I can of girl who was tlmn working at the facte, the premises, so far as the stairs are con¬ and was accustomed to go out to gt a cerned. lunch at about this time, and bring it i) On the 26th day of January last, a little the premises to eat, left a few minutes v before twelve o’clock of that day, there fore Watson left. She went about a b k was working in that room the defendant— and a half, bought the material for 4 who is a married woman, the deceased, lunch, immediately returned, occupyii » who was the proprietor of the premises— time not to exceed five minutes. On a a married man,—and three other females return she first discovered Mr. Wa a and one man, if I remember aright. At lying in the condition I have descri tb about ten minutes before twelve,—some¬ At that time this defendant was there, time between ten minutes and three min¬ her attention being called to this by a r- utes before twelve,—Mr. Watson, the de¬ cumstance connected with the condui (I ceased, as was his custom, put on his over¬ the defendant, she immediately raw coat and started to go to lunch or dinner. into the room below and gave the ala. It was the custom at that establishment, as Afterwards she rushed up stairs consi at many others, to blow the whistle or bly excited. Others came out of the:* ring the bell at twelve o’clock, and it was beloA, who will be examined here, tfl Mr. Watson’s custom to leave the premises found Mr. Watson in the conditic is at a few minutes before twelve for tbe pur¬ which I have described, the head 'm pose of going to his dinner. On that day, down and the face up. The first suii# in accordance with such usual custom, he was that he had fallen down stairs, bi <4 put on a light overcoat—light in texture, examination it was discovered that tbdk not color—and started out of that room to bullet had sped its way to his death, go down stairs. Just before he left, which was on the floor and steps, and altiJg was three or four minutes before twelve, as he was then breathing, he soon died. near as I can ascertain, the defendant left Now, gentlemen, about ten days tit this room and went out of that door. weeks—I do not know the precise Where she was in the intermediate time the testimony will show—before thjj perhaps the testimony will develop. I am currence, this defendant, with a yol 15 ther, went to a gunsmith’s in this city in enormity than murder. There is like¬ i purchased a pistol. On examining it, wise known to the law, justifiable homicide h a view to purchasing it, the question and excusable homicide, wherein the cir¬ { asked this defendant, by her brother, cumstances of the killing are of such a jsther that would suit her. She assented, nature that the party who commits it is j pistol was purchased and they went not held to be guilty of any offence. We ,y with it. Afterwards, and before this have a statute on the subject of murder, =th, the brother again called at this and in order to have a fair understanding he and desired to exchange, complain- of that statute, it is proposed to look and i or stating he did not know how to use see what murder is at common law ; and I ,and on its being explained by the propose to comment on this because you Li ufacturer in what manner it could be are unbiased and unprejudiced men, be¬ 3 L, he went away satisfied. That was tween the people and the defendants, and v or three days before this unfortunate desire to know the principles upon which slirrence. That pistol had on it a mark, you are to try the case. Murder at com¬ o'of the manufacturer, but a peculiarity mon law is defined thus : l is make which enabled the manufactu- “ Murder.—Where a person of sound memory ajjo identify it at the coroner’s inquest. and discretion unlawfully kills any responsible creature in the commonwealth, with malice : ort time after the killing, two or three prepense — (aforethought) — either express or u s afterwards, this defendant, with her implied. ” Uiiand and brother, went to the Fifth There are some words used in that defini¬ rtinct police station, and brought with tion which have acquired, from long expe¬ ifi this pistol which I have described to rience and numerous decisions, a definite, ai and surrendered it, and on a state- technical meaning, by which juries, courts ici of the occurrences, this defendant and counsel are bound. For instance, mndered herself into custody. Now “Sound memory and discretion.” Of o these facts arise this trial. course you understand by that that the Iwould seem that the facts, as I have person must be a responsible being, and ad them to you, would constitute a that he must not be laboring under such a la: case. Well, add to what I have disease as to impair his moral or mental rtdy stated, that the brother came out faculties. If one is an irresponsible being, oa the room below at the time of this or under some hallucination, or under aw. being given by this young girl, step- some disease which renders him irrespon¬ d,cross the dead body of this man, the sible for his acts, of course it would be ifi dant being still there, and, showing palpable injustice to punish him. “ With it emotion, said to her, “ Fanny, I told malice prepense.” The common sig¬ >u|ot to do this,” to which she made no nificance of malice is some ill-will against pi. Now, gentlemen, in stating these the person. In common parlance, if you -'tin a simple way, I have given all speak of a person having malice prepense, eiis to this transaction, so far as the it would be conveyed to your mind that loJedge of the prosecution goes. It be- there had been some special ill-will against im us then, if these facts should be that person. But malice in law is not la isbed, as we are not all supposed to be necessarily that. Malice in law is defined peenced in the criminal law, to see to be a wrongful act, done intentionally, ia find of an offence this is. without just cause or excuse. If a person its not all killing that is murder, as should gr into a crowd and shoot into it, u 1 readily understand. In this State and kill any person there, you coirld not mure two degrees of murder—first and say in common parlance that the person -o: L There are, likewise, resulting from had malice against the person who was In, certain degrees of manslaughter, hit; but it is malice in law, because it acis an offence, as you all know, less shows such a disposition of depravity as 16 the law would imply there was malice, clear that that blow produced death whether there was especial personal malice happening to strike in some partic or not. spot, and it was free from any inten Now the statute defines murder in the kill, that would not be murder; it w< first degree to be the killing of a human be manslaughter. In a case where being from premeditated design to effect persons get into a quarrel and one gre the death of the person killed, or of any provokes the other, strikes him blows human being. That premeditated design arouses his passions, so that iD the hei: might be a design formed on the instant passion, impulsively, without any pren : of killing, or auticipated for a longer pe¬ tated design, without even thinking ' j riod, but if intended before or at the time would be the result, and, goaded od b; i to produce death, then it is premeditated acts of the person abusing him, he sfc s in the eye of the law. It don’t require a blow with a knife or something that c any long-conceived purpose. Whether duces death, the law in its benignity y any such question will arise in this case I that a man may be so treated and pr< a am not able to say. There are other defini¬ that he should not be held as guilty of j tions, but it is not probable they will arise der, although he produced death w in this case. I do not deem it proper to murderous weapon, if done under a confuse your minds by farther definitions. circumstances. I do not propose t gi I do not read the definition of murder in into any more definite or close defin oi the second degree because, from my view with regard to manslaughter, becanl of the case, the question will not arise. If confess that, in no phase of the case il it should, the law will be given to you by that question be likely to arise, but i the Court or by counsel, as the circum¬ should you will then be instructed as 1 i stances of the case demand. law. Now, gentlemen, the next point with Standing here as a public officer, 1 re reference to the matter is, what consti¬ senting the people only, I come simj t tutes excusable or justifiable homicide, perform a duty. I come here asycdo because, as I have stated to you, there and will present this case to you as .el are instances where a person is not crim¬ as I am able, without prejudice, wi on inal—legally, nor in sound common sense, passion, without professional pride, itk for acts of homicide he commits. Ex¬ out any thing improperly influenci) m cusable homicide is where a man doing in anything I may do. I trust yoiwil a lawful act, without any intent, by acci¬ not consider it, if in the excitemd o dent kills another, as where a man is hunt¬ words and the conflict of counsel, I s »ul< ing in a park and accidentally kills a per¬ seem to show any zeal, and will att >nti son. Another phase of that kind of homi¬ it only to the excitement of the mo fa: cide is where it is done in self-defence. I have no feeling in this matter <3epl That don’t require any definition for you to that justice should be done to the jopb understand. Justifiable homicide is where and the prisoner. there is killing by unavoidable neces¬ It is not for me to say what the def seii sity without any will, intention, desire in this case. I do not know what it: aaa or neglect; likewise for the advance¬ if I did it would not be proper for n ben ment of public justice, as where an to state it. If it is a legal defense, id i officer performs an execution or something it be proven, I can only say I tru yoa of that kind. The distinction between will render a verdict acquitting the ]iso»- murder and manslaughter is that murder er. If, on the other hand, it is not legll requires an intent to kill, and manslaugh¬ defense, and if it is not proven, cifl ter is where there is killing without other words, you are satisfied after: hfl intent. For instance: If one person strikes been interposed, that the peopl
Q. Who were in the premises where you were Q. Where? A. At the foot of the se working that clay, say between 11 and 12 o'clock? flight of stairs. A. Mr. Dexter and his wife, Mr. Watson, Mrs. Q. How was he lying ? A. Lying right a Hyde and me. the foot of the stairs. Q. Five in all? A. Yes; and a young girl Q. Then where did you go? A. I we: named Mary Kelley. the flush room on the second floor. fi_ Q. At what time, if at all, did you leave these Q. Before you went into that flush roon ke emises before noon ? A. Ten minutes to anyone come out? No, sir; not as I seen. .velve. Q. Was any person there other than tb t Q. How do you know it was ten minutes to ceased lying on the floor and you and defen twelve ? A. I was in the room down stairs and A. No, sir. saw what time it was by the clock. Q. Before you went into that room ? A Q. What kind of an establishment was this sir. ' where you worked ? A. Hair net manufactory. Q. How long did you remain on that s Q. At what hour did the bell ring in that fac¬ floor room? A. Until after the whistle b tory for closing work in the forenoon ? A. Q. And then where did you go? j| Twelve o’clock. stairs. Q. At the time you went out of those premi¬ Q. Did you hear the whistle blow ? A.: ses, as you say, ten minutes to twelve, had that Q. When you went up stairs was del bell rung? A. No, sir. still in that place ? A. Yes. Q. What other signal was there which was Q. Did you see anybody else there thei given for closing in the forenoon, beside the Yes; I saw Mrs. Hyde’s lather. bell ? A. There is no bell; it is a whistle. Q. Anybody else? A. Air. Cox and JI ’ Q. You went out at ten minutes before twelve ? ley. I A. Yes. Q. Then you went up into the third 4 Q. Where did you go ? A. To Division Ave¬ A. Yes. nue. Q. Did you that forenoon before yoi A Q. About how far is that? A. Two blocks. out see deceased and Mrs. Hyde ? A. Yi 1 Q. How long did you remain—did you go Q. Where were they ? A. In the sami(| directly to that place ? A. Yes; after I went out with me. of the shop down stairs. Q. What doing? A. Working. Q. How long did you remain there ? A. I Q. Near each other ? A. Yes. was back before the whistle blew. Q. How near ? A. At one table. Q. What did you do when you was there? Q. Working together ? A. Yes. A. I went to the store and back again. Q. Did you see them conversing toge 3 Q. What did you do to the store ? A. I went all? A. Yes. to get the things for my dinner. Q. How did they appear towards each Q. You did not stay there and eat your din¬ was there anything unusual in their appe me ner? A. No, sir. Objected to. Q. You took that back to the factory ? A. The COURT. — Describe anything y< » Yes. Did you see anything different from w : y Q. You returned to the factory? A. Yes. usually saw ? Q. About how long do you think you was Objected to. gone ? A. From seven to eight minutes. The COURT.—She can state what Q. Why do you think that? A. Because it there. was ten minutes to twelve when I left and I was Q. What did you see there ? A. I die back about three minutes before the whistle anything at all ; all I could see was, I s ill blew. working together all the morning. Q. When you came back what first attracted Q. Did you see them talking together « your attention on the floor of the stairway—who A. Yes. did you see there? A. The only one I saw when Q. Down to what time did you s; ti« I first went in was Mrs. Hyde standing at the there ? A. Down to ten minutes to tvW head of the stairs. Q. The time you went out ? A. Yes, , Q. What stairs ? A. The first flight, Q. Was the machinery running till Q. What was she doing ? A. She was knock¬ Yes. ing at the door. Q. How long had you been workiii tw Q. Anything else ? A. No, sir. A. I went there shortly after New Q. What next attracted your attention ? A. work for Air. Dexter. That was all. Q. During that tune was Air. AVatsotlfl Q. Did you see the deceased ? A. No, sir, not or most of the time ? A. Some of the roe at that time. Q. Was there any time in which Aid'* Q. How soon after did you see the deceased ? was accustomed to leave the premises T®5 A. Two minutes after. whistle blow ? Q. What did you do between the time you Objected to. . came into the premises and the time you saw the Offer by the prosecution to show tit deceased ? A. I knocked at the door. the custom of the deceased to leave tlu;*r Q. What else? A. That was all. at about the time he left on this day. Q. Did anyone come out? A. Yes, but I The COURT.—Admitted so could not recollect who it was. within the knowledge of this witness I Q. Then after that you saw the deceased? A. Exception by the defense. Yes. A. He generally went at five minu i 19
SVliat time did lie generally come back, Q. Do you know whether he took one with fore half-past twelve. him ? A. No, sir ; I did not see him. Do you know of your own knowledge Q. Who left first ? A. Mrs. Hyde. he was accustomed to go. A. No, sir. Q. How long had Mrs. Hyde 'left the room Do you know whether the defendant was bet ore Mr. Watson left. A. About three min, imed to leave the premises or not at any utes. |lar time before the whistle blew? A. No, Q. Did she put on any outside apparel before she went out. A. No, sir. Cross-examination. Q. Do you know whether Mr. Watson had his hat on ? A. Yes, sir ; he had. >!r. MORKIS.—I call your attention to Q. Do you know whether she had a hat on ? [ rt of your examination before the Coro- A. No, sir ; she had a shawl on around her ou was examined before the Coroner? shoulders. Q. Had she been wearing her shawl during will read this for the purpose of refresh¬ the forenoon ? A. Yes. er memory—When you say you saw her Q. Where did you next see these parties or Jrou returned to the stairs—“she was any of them ? A. At twelve o’clock, when I fig her hands she said to me, “ Go in- was going to my dinner. ip tell the men to come out, that Mr. Q. Did you leave the room before the whistle \ was lying in the hall ’’—that’s correct, blew ? A. No, sir ; just as the whistle blew, I went out. j'tion to any declarations of the defendant Q. Where did you see Mr. Watson ? A. He ti alleged killing. was lying across the foot of the stairs. • IORRIS.—But they have proved what Q. Who did you see there when you came i —a part of it. Witness said that Mrs. out? A. Mr. Pixley, Mr. Petty, Mr. Windley Id her to go inside. —Panny’s father. . RITTON.—Not a word ; I did not ask Q. Do you know her brother ? A. Yes. j)rd on that subject. Q. Did you see him there ? A. No, sir. . [ORRIS.—Then what she said on that Q. What were they doing, any of them ? A. cjis stricken out ? Just standing there ; Mr. Pixley was holding e OURT.—I understand nothing of that Mr. Watson’s head. i; n. Q. Was Mrs. Hyde there then ? A. No, sir ; • IORRIS.—Then, if that is stricken out, she was up stairs. e o more questions to ask her. No cross-examination.
Ayer Pixley—Sworn. Iary Ann Kelley—Sworn. Q. Where do you live ? A. 45 Hudson avenue. Mere do you live ? A. 34 First street. Q. Where were you engaged on the 26th of Y.ere did you work on the 26th of Janu- January? A. In the Merrill building, corner t .e time of this occurrence ? A. South of South Eleventh and First streets: the factory. ii and First streets. Q. You were in some manner related to the 0 which floor of the building ? A. The deceased? A. Yes ; I am his father-in-law. fl r. Q. On which floor were you working on the V else worked there on that occasion ? day of this occurrence ? A. I was on the second r. Dexter and wife, Miss Curley, Mrs. floor. Watson and myself. Q. What first attracted your attention to it ? B you see Mr. Watson and Mrs. Hyde A. A knocking or kicking at the door. tk forenoon? A. Yes. Q. Did you see who did it ? A. I opened the Mat time ? They were there all the door and Ellen Curley came in. A up to ten minutes to twelve. Q. Then what did you do ? A. I went direct¬ Wit doing? A. Working at the same ly out in the hall and saw Mr. Watson there ; went through the passage-way around to the D you see anything occurring between foot of the stairs and saw Mr. Watson. hector word? No, sir. Q. Which stairs? A. The stairs leading Di you see whether or not they conversed from the second floor to the third floor. ici A. Yes, they conversed together. Q. State whether or not that was the position Di you know when the last witness went of the deceased on that diagram ? A. (.Witness t room ? A. She went out about ten pointing out.) That is the lower floor and that es i twelve. the second floor. He was across the foot of the ihleft you there? A. Yes. stairs—these upper stairs. He1 long after that was it that Mr. Wat- Q. What was the attitude ? A. He was lying jhj3 *?°m '■ A. He went right after her. on his back, his feet by the partition ; his head 'V t did he do preparatory to going out, extended out beyond the stairs, his body against aHjig on clothing ? A. Nothing at aR. the riser of the first stairs. His body probably Jo ou know whether he put on an over- extended from about the elbow beyond the *■ Not inside. stairs. 20
Q. Who else was there ? A. At the time Mr. BRITTON.—Does the Court in when I got there, there was no one but Fanny adjourn? The PRESIDING JUSTICE.—Not y« Hyde. Q. Where was she ? A. She stood opposite, Mr. BRITTON.—I don’t know any beside his knees, two or three feet from him, why the cross-examination should be sus) bent forward, with her hand put to her fore¬ Mr. MORRIS.—There are special reasc head, shading her eyes and looking at his face. I desire it. Q. Who came there nest after that ? A. The The COURT.—If the witness shouli first I recollect that came to render assistance, the court-room, Judge Morris may < or anything of that kind, was Mr. Merrill. him ; but if he should not be here, fl Q. What did you do when you discovered the would leave the cross-examination. 1 body there first? A. I directly stooped down. under no obligation to bring him here I saw blood flowing, and put my hand over— purpose. Objected to on the ground of immateriality. Mr. MORRIS.—We will reserve hii Admitted. examination until to-morrow. A. I placed my hand over where the blood Mr. BRITTON.—I do not accept th was, with the intention of stopping the blood. sition that he shall be called by us to-n Q. Did you find the wound ? A. The blood was streaming out of the side of the neck ; I put my hand over that, and I found the blood was still flowing like at the other side of the Margaret Man ie—Sworn, head—another wound where the blood was flowing still; I put my hand on to that. Mr. BRITTON to Mr. MORRIS.-1 Q. Was the deceased then alive, or not? Did any controversy as to whether this v he show any indication of life ? A. I don t before twelve o’clock ? know of any sign of life, with the exception Mr. MORRIS.—No. that under my hand I felt something throbbing. To WITNESS.—Where did you wo:I Mr. Merrill, who was standing by us, said— 26th of January? A. For Mrs. Hyde 1 Q. Never mind what was said. Were you Mr. Windlev. there when Dr. Creamer came ? A. I have no Q. What was his business? A. I recollection of seeing him there. manufacturer. Q. Do you know the brother of Mrs. Hyde ? Q. The same as Mr. Watson’s ? A. 1 A. Yes. Q. Where was that being conducted Q. Did you see him there on that occasion ? the third floor, rear part of the buildii A. Yes. Q. On the date of that occurrence Q. Did you see where he came from ? A. He see Mrs. Hyde in that room ? A. Yes came from the direction of the head of the Q. About what time? A. I won’t< stairs ; I suppose from the flush room ; he must tive. It might have been 11 o’clock, ! have come out from that floor or from up stairs. have been after—I can’t say. ij Q. When he came there was Mrs. Hyde Q. How long did she remain there? - there ? A. Yes. few minutes. Q. What, if anything, did he say to her ? Q. Did you see her brother at that I Mr. MORRIS.—Where was Mrs. Hyde? A. I could not say as he was there at that Still standing there in the same position I first Q. Did you see him there that forei « described. Yes. Mr. BRITTON.—How far off from deceased Q. Did you see him go out? was Mrs. Hyde ? A. From three to four feet. Objected to. Q. Where was this brother ; where did he Mr. BRITTON.—We want to set come from and what did he do ? A. He came he went out before the occurrence. « out from that corner, and as he came out he put proved him there and proved him on his hand up to the post at the foot of the stairs, Objection sustained for the present! 1 he could not come up stairs without coming No cross-examination. over Mr. Watson ; he put his hand out and.took hold of that post and swung around, and at the same time put the other hand up and says : ‘ ‘ Fanny, I told you not to do it. ” At the same time he put the other hand out and swung Kelson J. Stowell—Stan. himself around over the body up stairs. Q. Did she make any reply? A. She did Q. Your business ? A. Gun and xi not, that I heard. Q. Was it in January? A. Yes. Q. Do you know whether or not this was be¬ Q. Did you ever see that pistol ben fore or after the whistle blew ? A. Before the ingonel? A. Yes. whistle blew. Q. Where was it in January? store, 86 Broadway. Cross-examined. Q. Did you dispose of it? A. i Q. What were the circumstanc Mr. MORRIS.—I think, probably, we will with the disposing of that pistol?w save time by reserving the cross-examination of tleman and lady called at my pH this witness until to-morrow ; we would like to gentleman asked me to show him sM have the right to reserve the cross-examination. I showed him this one, and he han a 3 asked her if it suited her; she said Q. Did you make the'post-mortem examination md he paid for it, and they walked out. on the body of Mr. Watson in January last? I>w long did they stay there ? A. Ordi- A. Yes. ne—five to ten minutes. Q. Where was it made ? A. In Brooklyn, at 'bat was said there? A. I could not the house of his father-in-law. fell A. Describe what injuries you found on his jout how long before this occurrence person ? A. I found, on examination, some A. About a week or a week and a half portions of the face and on the left eye-brow jreeks. some skin removed, and on top of the head, a here did you see that lady next ? A. I wound extending over the scalp some inch and ' at Justice Voorhees’ court-room. a quarter ; it looked like an incised -wound. [ you recognize her in the court-room On the right side of the neck, posteriorly, at l. Yes. (Pointing to the defendant.) the back, a shot-wound. i er that, where did you next see the Q. What was the direction of the wound? ? A. I saw it there. Captain Woglom A. Inward, upward and forward. Ivn and fetched it with him. Q. About where would it come out in that No cross-examination. line of direction? A. It would have come out at the top of the head, (witness indicating the top and center.) By removing the scalp, I found the bullet imbedded in the substance of the brain. I Cornelius Woglom—Sworn. Q. Was the bullet about like that ? (showing.) fi are captain of the 5th Precinct Po- A. That's the ball, as near as I can remember. J Yes. Q. What was the nature of the other wounds ) you remember the day of this homi- and abrasions, and how would you think they I do. were caused, supposing the person was shot on ) you see the prisoner on that day ? A. the stairway and fell down stairs? A. They were small abrasions, and might have been A ere? A. She came to the station- caused by falling. If by blows, they w'ould have been in a slanting direction, would have Vo with ? A. Her father and brother. come downward, because the skin was merely Mat time of day was that ? A. Between contused. bwo o’clock. Q. The other wounds were abrasions, and V it occurred ? Did you see this pistol might have been made by falling down stairs ? 13 A. Yes. A. Yes, sir. It is quite possible they might V;re did you see it? A. Mr. Hyde have been caused in that way. 1 to me from his pocket. Q. From what direction, in your judgment, -1 re was a conversation? A. Yes. must the shot that caused that wound have Lir that, what was done as to the pris- been fired, in relation to the party receiving the Wetook her name and pedigree, and shot ? lr up. Mr. MORRIS.—I object to the question. kwas placed under arrest? A. Yes. He may state where it was located, the direction was all that occurred? A. Yes, in- it entered, ilnd the course it took. le; of what was said. Mr. BRITTON.—My question was what rc kept this pistol ? A. Yes. the direction of the wound indicated as to the V n this pistol came into your posses- position of the party firing the shot and of the is t loaded at all ? A. No, sir. party receiving the shot ? 3 EAMER was again called as a wit- Mr. MORRIS.—Objected to. That is not a uwas not present. question calling for the opinion of an expert. I STRICT ATTORNEY said he had He can state how the ball entered and the course ; tlr evidence ready to offer before Dr. but as to the position of the parties, the jury a can judge as well as a physician. C irt then announced to the witnesses Q. If I understand you, the ball came in at h des to be present at next morning at the neck. Was the course of the ball direct or io . tortuous ? A. It was direct, upward and for¬ 8 nonished the jurors not to converse ward. It entered the neck behind the ear, ai jonversation on the case during the and took an oblique direction upward and for¬ n nt; and then adjourned until the ward. ‘y -t ten a. m. Q. Did you discover, in your examination, whether the ball came in contact with anything
—-- that diverted it from its natural course which it had from the start. A. No, sir. SECOND DAY. Q. What was the cause of the death of Mr. Watson? A. The injury to the brain and To spinal cord by this bullet. ]ph Creamer, sivorn for the Q. How long after such a wound would a Prosecution. person be likely to live. A. A few minutes— eight to ten minutes. oi business? A. I am a physician, Q. Was there any other wound tending to iol the position of surgeon of police. cause death? A. No, sir. I found no other 22 cause of death. The only cause I can attribute Q. Who were there ? A. I could i would be the bullet. tinctly recognize but two. I rememb Potts. Cross-examined. Q. Who else can you recollect ? A Q. About how bill a man was Mr. Watson ? no distinct recollection of anybody else A. I am not a good judge of the size. He the brother. appeared to me to be a tall man. I should say Q. State the order in which you sav five feet ten, or something like that. You saw Mr. Merrill first; where did Q. Don't you thiuk he was a little taller than Mr. Potts ? A. The next thing, I loo that ? A. He might have been. the hall was filled I looked up to Mr. Q. Will you state the character of these abra¬ He was in front of me. Then I tun sions on the face ? A. They were abrasions. called for water and looked around tl The skin was merely removed. There was one way, and the passage-way was filled 11 over the left eye ; a small portion of the skin was among them. I would not be was removed, and one down the face ; the skin about any other one. from the lower portion of the nose, and an in¬ Q. The first thing you did you took cised wound through the scalp. Mr. Watson’s head and raised it ? A. ] Q. What directions were these abrasions on Q. What was the first thing you <1 the face ? A. They were downward. Put my hand on the wound. I did c By a JUROR.—On which side of the head the head. was this wound ? on the right or left ? A. Q. You put your hand on the wo On the right side. saw Mr. Merrill, and then looked upw Mr. Potts, and the passage was filled Mr. PIXLEY. —Recalled. then you called for water ? A. As I lc Q. Did you have anything to do with the re¬ to call for water, I saw the passage- moval of the body from the factory ? A. Yes ; fiHed. I helped carry it into the room. Q. How long was it after you got tl ' Q. Did he have an outer garment ? A. Yes. you called for water. A. Not to Q. What was that ? A. That s the garment minute. (producing a spring-overcoat.) Q. Just as you took hold of him to Q. 'Who took it off? A. The undertaker at hand on the wound, you looked up a for water? A. It was momentary. I my house. Q. Were you present? A. Yes. have been within a minute. Offered for the purpose of showing a hole Q. How near was Mr. Merrill to yt through the collar of the coat. Potts ? A. Mr. Merrill was so near i had hold of his head Mr. Merrill hat Cross-examination. his hand, feeling of his pulse. Q. How tall a man was Mr. Watson? A. Q. What was Mr. Potts at ? A. 1 Not quite as tall as I am. I am five feet nine ; know as he was doing anything mor he was about five feet seven or eight. come there, and, as I called for water i Q. He was a taller man than you. A. No, exertion to find it. sir. Q. Who went to get the water ? I Q. I understood you to say that Mr. Merrill did not anybody get it. came there and was the first one you saw after Q. What did Mr. Potts do after u you saw Mr. Watson lying there at the foot of for the water? A. I could not sat* the stairs ? A. The first I recollect. did. Q. Is that the likeness of Mr. Watson ? (show¬ Q. Who assisted you in removing 1 ing a likeness of a man and two girls.) A. I son ? A. Mr. Merrill. should think it was. Q. "Who else ? A. I could not 1 p Q. Have you any doubt it. A. No, sir. who was the other. Q. Can you say whether it is or not? A. Q. But there was some person e To the best of my judgment it is. am not positive about that, but what Q. You cannot be any more positive than Merrill and myself carried him some that ? A. I don’t want to be any more positive might have taken hold, but Merrill 1 than that, that when I tell you that according principally carried. to the best of my judgment it is. Q. You have no recollection whetlil Q. Can you state positively whether it is or else did assist or not ? A. I could n I not? A. If I could understand the necessity tive whether they did or not of it. I cannot understand the necessity. I Q. When you looked up to see thli have not any doubt of it. I give it as my did you see any ladies there ? A. I id opinion. lect of seeing any. Q. How long was it after you got to where Q. About how many do you thiij Mr. Watson was before you saw Mr. Merrill the hall-way ? A. Well, I could lg there ? A. It was almost the same moment. cause it would take about three fronl Q. Did not some other parties come there ? appeared to me to be a solid coin! A. Yes, shortly after. A great number came in About three could stand abreast the passage-way. Q. Were they standing abreast ? L Q. How soon after you got there was it before Q. How near was the front one K these other parties came ? A. I don't sup¬ you ? A. I should say about three ft pose it was a minute. Q. Were you excited at the time i1 28 f.’t know wliat I am to understand by being together. We have proved that this was the ball taken from the deceased. The jury Were you cool and calm? A. I was cool can determine whether the ball fits the pistol. lm. Mr. MORRIS.—Now if the Court please, let [Were you confused? A. No, sir. I was us see where this case stands and wliat the > a remarkable degree for the occasion. District Attorney has proven. He has proven— Then you understood the question when Mr. BRITTON.—Wliat is the motion before •1 you if you was excited, you understand the Court ? :;tinction between the two terms, to say Mr. MORRIS.—I claim I am not called upon as remarkably cool—more than ordina- under the law to make any defense at all, and r A. More than ordinary for such cir- the Court must say so to the jury. nnces. Mr. BRITTON. —Then is the case closed ? fhat is a little indefinite. Can you state Mr. MORRIS.—No, sir; the case is not t it you were excited or confused ? A. I closed. c know as I can give any better explana- Mr. BRITTON. —He has no right to make it than I have. any such request. There is no such practice as lave you ever been under such circum- requesting the Court to charge the jury until c' before to know how parties act under the case is closed. The counsel must rest his ■ fs these? A. No. I-have never been case or go on with the evidence. these circumstances exactly. I have The COURT.—As I understand the practice, rties under some such circumstances. he rests his case for the purpose of his motion. ’on’t you think you were a little excited ? II the Court should not coincide with his view i COURT.—Were you agitated in any de- then he would have the right to go on with his ? A. I could not be otherwise than sorne- testimony. t gitated. Mr. BRITTON.—I never heard of such a rhat did Mr. Potts say to you ? A. If I practice in criminal cases. Perhaps I am li t anything that he said it was merely in wrong. u to the question, he said he could not Mr. MORRIS.—I will state it is a universal a? water. practice, a common practice, a proper practice, id you go for the water. A. I could it the prosecution have proved nothing, if there S8, I did not follow him. is no evidence that would justify the jury in d you recollect of his making that re- convicting, then the Court should say so' to the c A. I think I do ; but at any rate there jury. Now I desire to present briefly my viewrs | water brought, consequently I con¬ with reference to that question. Now' what is ic hey could not get any. this case ? The prisoner here is indicted for o you recollect any remark that any of the crime of willful murder—murder in the first >t rs made ? A. I do not particularly. degree. In order to sustain this indictment the Re-direct. prosecution, in the first place, must prove be¬ yond a reasonable doubt that the accused kiUed 'hen you say you don’t recollect the re¬ the party alleged in the indictment. But w'hen ts lat either of the others made, do you they have proved this they have only taken the 11 say you don’t recollect the remark made first step in proving the crime of murder. They hbrother? A. No, I don’t mean to say must prove that that was done deliberately, a®. J that it w'as done with premeditation, that it was lu do not mean to change your testi- done with an intent existing at the time, to take f t to that? A. No, not at all. his life. The mere fact of killing, it there is CHE PROSECUTION HERE RESTED. ] anything in this case from which that can be inferred, does not constitute the crime of mur¬ • .ORRIS, for the defendant here made a der, by any means. They have not in this case mor the court to instruct the jury that proved or attempted to prove that there was any efidant is not called upon to make any motive whatever, lrom which an attempt to stand said : take life might be inferred. Assuming these t' Court please I respectfully submit facts would warrant the inference that the e pt called upon in this case to make any prisoner killed Mr. Watson, they have not sender the law. I submit to the Court proved any act connected w'ith the killing from he; is no proof of the first element of the which an intent to kill could be inferred. They c murder. I submit that they have not, have simply proven that she purchased this pis¬ -!1 with, proved that Watson was killed tol, produced here, in company with her brother, «jisoner. or that her brother purchased the pistol and RITTON.—In one respect I was mis- asked her it that would do, and she said yes, t iat I supposed to be the concession of and that she went away, she and the brother el or the prisoner. I ask the Court to with this pistol. From that day until the d tified this pistol and bullet, shooting, and from that day until this, there is i )RRIS.—I don't see how the counsel not a particle of evidence in the case, that the at i his mind. We expressly repudiated it. pistol w'as ever in her jiossession, or her hands. : CRT.—The Court will give him that They proved further in reference to the pistol, i that it w'as given to Captain Woglom by the 1 ITTON.—I believe I proved it by husband of the prisoner, so that after the pur¬ ln ^oglom. The pistol was delivered chase of the pistol they proved it next in pos¬ a y the prisoner’s husband, the three session of the husband. They don’t prove it in 24 her possession. They don’t prove a single was not enough, that we must go further t ■word that was said there at the time they proved the proof 6hows the killing was done und< the purchase of the pistol. They show a homi¬ cumstances from which you might reaso: cide, and that shortly after the homicide the infer there w'as an interest to take life. pistol was found in the hands of a third person. Court said here that, ‘ every killing was Now that is all the evidence there is in this inal per se. ’ Such is not Hie law. The case with reference to the pistol ; and what evi¬ cious purpose, the depravity of heart, the dence is there outside of that. They prove that ficient understanding and the will must shortly after the shooting Fanny Hyde was out ever actually exist. They are, each of th( in the hall near this place. They prove by much the essence of crime as the act of k other witnesses that shortly after that the hall The jury must conscientiously believe th was packed full. This was in a public factory ist or else they cannot convict. The killin where there were a large number of employes. human being by another is not neces They prove a large number of people were there a murder or manslaughter ; it may be eitt immediately after the transaction, and the pris¬ cusable or justifiable, and may have be oner at the'bar is only one of the persons they fected under either of those conditions rt have proved to have been there. Now what to by elemental writers in w'hich the wil else have they proved? They proved by Mr. not join with the act, and then it is not crin Pixley that the prisoner's brother came there Now I submit there is not enough h< and made the remark, waving the hand toward this evidence, to convict. You have not the prisoner, “I told you not to do this,” or nec&ssary element that goes to constitu some such remark. According to this testimony crime of murder except the homicide itse of Pixley the hall was crowded, and people were any evidence that any one saw this, nor t standing within three feet. Well, now suppose cumstances under w'hich it was committe. that is true ; assume that, have we got the mur¬ the rule of law’ is that the party is presu: der yet? Have we got a murder? Provided be innocent until proven guilty ; and I the jury come to the conclusion that this evi¬ there is no evidence of the circumstances dence establishes the fact that she shot him, I which it w’as committed, the lawr assumes ask where is there a particle of evidence here justifiable. The law draws the inferem from which the jury can infer that she intended this was justifiable. It would be overt to take his life deliberately? Now the taking all the principles of criminal law’ to i of life is not murder, by any means. Your this a murder because the jury come to t! honor recoil ects the case of the People, vs. elusion, on this evidence, that this prisoi M’Cann. In this case the killing was admitted. the killing, although that is not proved The burden is still, say the Court, “Is still the suming that she did kill the deceased, wl same, and it remains with the prosecution to is proven ? Although nobody saw her, al I show the existence of these requisite elements nobody know's the circumstances that tra' which constitute the crime of murder, and of at the time this occurred ; although ther l these the intention or animus is the principal. ” motive proven at all, yet you infer that i Now I will admit, if the Court please, that it deliberately, intentionally, and is PI there may be a case where the simple proof of the murder. The law don’t presume that, 11 a killing itself would justify the inference it was fully submit to the Court. done with intent. For instance ; Your Honor Now I submit that under this evidel sees two men standing at a distance. One de¬ are not called upon to make any defei. liberately draws a revolver and shoots down the the jury' should convict under this evident J other. Now when they have proved that fact Honor would set aside the verdict and ( and the killing of the man, then the jury may new trial on the spot, without any su^l infer it was done deliberately, and the accused being made by counsel for the defense. ^ is called upon to explain why it was done, and talk about hanging the accused on evio rebut that inference. But unless the evidence this kind! Why, if it was a case involv show's the killing to be done under circumstances betw'een two citizens there is no jury in that justify the inference that it was done tendom would give a verdict on this with an intent to take life they have utterly in favor of the pai'ty claiming the monl failed to make out a case, and in this case they this evidence there is no jury in Chrnfl have no proof of any such killing at all. As¬ would take $10 out of one man’s pots suming now, on this skeleton, this shadow of a put it into another man’s pocket. On 4 case, that the jury may infer that fact. I say dence you ask the life of this prisoner Hj that don’t establish the circumstances under taken. It cannot be done. When the I w’hich it was done, nor enable the jury to say it tion come into court and ask that the * was done with intent to take life. They have this prisoner shall be yielded up, they shj shown no motive, nor the first element that the clearest, most indisputable and unmil goes to constitute the crime of murder. In right under the law to take that bloojj overruling the chargejof the Court below it was cannot guess people’s lives away; yo’X said : “The doctrine of the charge proceeded on infer people’s lives away, unless uponfl the idea that homicide is, per se. criminal, that tion that legally justifies the inference^ the mere destruction of human life by the act of say in this case there is nothing but iiH another is, without any other circumstances, and not evidence enough for an infereu B murder or manslaughter.” Now' that was the which a conviction can be urged. 1^1 charge of the Court below, and the Court of Ap¬ fully submit, therefore, that we are nl B peals expressly repudiated it; it says the killing upon to make a defense in this case. 25
1 ■ COUBT to Mr. BBITTON. —Do you wish on the part of this case assigned to me, not eke any remarks ? without oppressive anxiety, but with the I BBITTON.—No, sir. f COUBT.—For the purposes of your entire approval of my own conscience and da it is taken for granted that all matters with that integrity of purpose that makes suence are true. It appears from evidence t part of the prosecution that the prisoner, me feel strong, and confident of the result enpany with her brother—he officiating— in your verdict. K o a store and bought a pistol shortly be- When I first heard of this case, before I ! jhis occurrence ; the brother handed it to id asked, “Will it suit you?” That pis- knew of the facts,—before I knew any of iithe pistol now produced in court; that the facts of the case as counsel—I did not xis the weapon handed to the Police Cap- believe that in the eye of God or of humani¬ 1 t the station-house within an hour or * ’ter the killing. It is also in evidence ty this defendant had committed a crime. t the time of the killing of the deceased, Before I knew any of the facts leading to d3r by his own hand or by the hand of some this act, before I knew any of the circum¬ enerson, this prisoner stood there, fixedly, tag at him in the face, and her brother said stances leading to this act, before I knew le “I told you not to do it,” and she made any of the previous history of this defend¬ rponse, so far as the testimony on that n is concerned. Now, under all these cir- ant, I did not believe —it was against every isnces, it is not a case the Court can take impulse of human nature to believe that njae jury. The Court thinks the jury are this defendant, a woman of tender age, it I to pass on this question of the guilt or once. The prosecution are entitled to have calmly, coolly, instigated by a depraved, o:) the jury for that purpose. The motion, wicked and malignant spirit, committed ce re, is denied. murder. I believed, and still believe, that TCourt then renewed its former caution hjurors, and took a recess for one hour. it was the convulsion of a mind upon bCourt reconvened pursuant to adjourn- which great wrong, outrage and provocation had been heaped. I know, and you know, that in all convulsions in the material >HING ON THE PAHT OF world some element of nature must have vent, or the sea and air and earth would be THE DEFENSE. commingled in one indistinguishable, cha¬ h. GATLIN.—If the Court please, otic mass; and so I believe the commission 1 entlemen of the jury: of this act was the result of some sudden, t as a subject of serious consultation irresistible, overpowering impulse, some >i the gentlemen who are engaged in convulsion of the human mind as irresist¬ aiing the prisoner, in case the Court ible and uncontrollable as the decree of jl'd to overrule the motion made, fate. And so it was, as we shall prove. 3t ?r this case should be submitted on True, she is charged with the crime of ddence of the prosecution alone, or murder; but, as you have heard already, ■tar you should go into the entire and it is not every killing of a human being atters of the case. We have con¬ that is a crime. A crime is an act against ic, gentlemen, to present this case to the public rights; a crime is an act against full, and to present the defense in the whole community—perpetrated against cse as fully as we can. And gentle- the whole community; and unless the kill¬ a, vast and overwhelming as is the ing of a human being comes under this it confided to me, and the consequent definition it may not be murder, it may jo abilities reposed on me, I meet them not be a crime. True, the indictment is 'kly, with faith in the righteousness presented on behalf of the people. It is ot defense. Clothed in the armor of entitled “ The People against Fanny h nd justice, feeling that I stand on Hyde.” Gentlemen, I can show to you ife; si; of right and humanity, believing that, notwithstanding that indictment t am defending your firesides and may have been properly found on ex parte ie, 3our thresholds and mine, believing evidence before the grand jury, that that 11 ,m advocating innocence and virtue, indictment is false, it is a lie. The people c isequent domestic integrity, I enter of this country or of this State are not 26
tlie real prosecutors of Fanny Hyde. he looks forward to some such an Why, gentlemen, the rule is inverted, and tunity as this to make a brilliant c the people are the defendants in this case. of his official career. He said ye Leave it to the spontaneous sentiments of that he had no professional pride the people of this city, the opinions of the matter. I know it is impossible fo mass, the 'whole community, and I believe to occupy that position without they are all on the side of this defendant; professional pride as if he was and it is the disagreeable duty of counsel. It is perfectly consiste the District Attorney and the family human nature that he should hav of the deceased Mr. Watson, to prosecute in this case, and desire to make an < the case. And right here I want to say one that will surround him as a shiel word in praise—I want to pay one de¬ were, all through his official care served tribute—to the District Attorney can say—“I may be defeated in soi for one act which he has performed in this of lesser importance, but I can | case. Private counsel—one of the most point to the case of ‘ The People i famous criminal lawyers in this or any Hyde ’ with pride, and as a crown! other State—was employed by the friends rel in my official career. ” You ma i of the deceased to help prosecute this de¬ to see the usual case of the law offic ] fendant and help convict her and put a ecuting a defendant for crime, tl i halter around her neck. A large retainer, tion of all the ingenuity, the exil $2,500, was paid to Mr. Charles S. Spen¬ every power, the exercise of every j cer, of New York, to help prosecute this the exercise of every resource that j case. It was expected be would take a sesses, the same as if he were priva j leading and active part in the prosecution; sel. And, gentlemen, you will b» but thanks to the keen appreciation of offi¬ upon to stifle your emotions, sti.) cial propriety—not to say any thing of nobler instincts and impulses in tl | common decency—the District Attorney and to sit there like statues or s peremptorily refused to allow him to take marble, without hearts. Appeals any part in the case and help prosecute made to you to look upon this d this defendant. I say all thanks to Mr. as a hardened wretch—as a Kuloff Britton for this act of common justice to committed deliberate, cold-blood this defendant. I will say further, there der for gain. Why, gentlemen (i is one of your ablest and most honorable were twelve professional adulterer aj lawyers of the city of Brooklyn to whom of twelve honest husbands, if j a retainer of $150 or $200 was sent to help twelve habitual libertines instead prosecute this case; all honor to that man honorable fathers and brothers, i for spurning that money and sending it appeal could meet a response in ;ui back to Mr. Spencer, who sent it to him. soms. If you could look upon But, gentlemen, does not that show a won¬ struction and ruin of a young gii I derful weakness in this prosecution some¬ age of this defendant with cooln s J where? Does not that show this Watson indifference, then, perhaps, such ill family must resort to some extraordinary would meet with a response in yoih effort to convict this girl, and thereby save, If you wTere twelve men hired by e perhaps, the character and memory of the to find a verdict of guilty; if deceased? The District Attorney, as you twelve prosecutors, celebrated i have seen, does not want anybody to help utter heartlessness and want ol hi him in this case. He is a man of large sympathy; if you were twelve e ability and great experience, and he does ers anxiously waiting for a victi not want any outside counsel to help him whose neck you have fixed the try a case which official duty requires him you were twelve savages impatie to try. He is just entering upon his duty ing for the scalp of a defenceless as District Attorney. It is not improbable then such an appeal would not b 27 ired response, and this trial would tem of espionage. Now, under these un¬ ockery. But, thank Heaven, you favorable circumstances under which we bands and fathers, and you cannot a,re laboring, under which this defendant I is not right that you should—shut enters on this trial, I ask you not to stifle i'r nobler instincts: you should bring your nobler and higher instincts and emo¬ : exercise of this case every feeling tions, but listen to it like men, men inter¬ rj faculty that God has given you. ested in the purity and in the existence of u e intellectual faculties, you have our social and domestic circle. Now, gen¬ i; senses, and you have moral qual- tlemen, I come to this case. y i should bring them all into oper- What has the prosecution proven ? Pre¬ , deciding a case like this, of life cisely what we offered to admit, and did lith. And gentlemen, when you admit, until they rejected our offer, and yiir seats in the jury box in a what I propose to admit upon the thresh¬ n case like this, yon take your old of my discussion in the case. I say t ire with all the presumptions in I propose to admit all they have proven o the accused. In every case you in the case, so far as I am concerned—that xsume the accused to be innocent is, the buying of this pistol some time be¬ nved guilty, much more must you fore the shooting, the carrying of it on that v ere that poor, weak girl, with no day,—if you please,—and that George Wat¬ s iE influence, no friends of wealth, son received a fatal wound from that pis¬ tig for her life against the pros- tol in the hands of Fanny Hyde. I pro¬ g ower of the county of Kings, aye, pose for the sake of this opening, for the vole State of New York, aided with sake of this defense, to admit all of that in valth of the family of the deceased, the beginning. But I do say that, not¬ rt l, gentlemen, by the lackeys and withstanding we admit these facts, gentle¬ :r which always hang about cor¬ men, I preliminarily assert that we shall al in the rooms of such a building prove to you, and establish to your entire . Why, gentlemen, I tell you what satisfaction, that no crime was committed -|, he friends of the defendant have in this act. The crime, as the counsel has leged day and night and counsel started out in this case, must be murder. ally been able to consult with wit- There can be no compromise on the middle ffhout its being known outside. ground of manslaughter. We stand here iv t have been sent to persons under to defend this woman of the charge of isc of charity to get some confes- murder. You must acquit her aud let her f this defendant. Snakes have go free and untrammelled; there can be ®8ei there under the cloak of relig- no compromise in the case. And, gen¬ .1 enevolence, so that they could tlemen, I must bring to your minds right ‘ nelamaging statement of this poor here a suggestion that was made to you )®' id tell you what I know, that with by the District Attorney, not an unusual ■ oiaries and spies in jail it was im- nor uncommon suggestion made in the trial elrme to get an interview with my of murder. He says, if there is any iseii w a out being surprised with the doubt about this you can find your verdict ai;ci|c, iparition of some person who of guilty and the Governor can pardon. ilty'-l have been concealed to hear Mr. BRITTON.—“ If there is any eke va: going on. Now, gentlemen, I doubt !” I did not say that. t say in behalf of the District Mr. CATLIN.—Gentlemen, that sug¬ tw ;y hat I do not believe—I know he gestion was made to you. Every gentle¬ jjisHad in this whatever ; but I do man knew what the object of that was— feeirt, same power and the same that if there was any doubt in your minds 3 in; |e which secured able private you can find her guilty, and the Governor l a a heavy price was at the bottom will pardon. Why, gentlemen, your prov¬ 0 stigation of this infamous sys¬ ince here is'higher than Governors, higher 28 than counsel, higher than district attor¬ cause for the commission of thi neys, and higher than Courts, higher than Have they done anything going Presidents. You are the men who are to that the defendant was an abandi determine what shall be done with this son, in any way, shape or manne: prisoner. We ask you not to be con¬ they done anything that shows t: trolled or governed by any such monstrous is depraved, debased, or malignan suggestion or doctrine. We ask you to be ing whatever. You cannot stan< men, and if you have any doubt in this and charge a woman with the case, that doubt goes to this defendant murder without assigning some instead of against her, as the Court will in¬ motive. Now what is the moth struct you, and you will acquit her like it because he would not pay her h men. It appears she was in his employ Now, gentlemen, you have heard the because there was any difficulty I crime of murder defined. It is the pre¬ them of an ordinary character- meditated killing of a human being ; some assign any such motive ? Certs plan must be laid. The old common law, no such motive could be assigns the definition of which is sufficient for a person could not kill ianotht this case, is, that a man or a woman must such reason ; you would say in be of sound mind and discretion, and un¬ she was not of a right mind bee I lawfully kill a human being in the peace of was no adequate motive nor a 1 the commonwealth, with malice and fore¬ for it ? People don’t commit n d thought. The constituent elements are, such reasons. What was the m< a sound mind, memory, and discretion. I ask ? They will say, perha] Second, the unlawful killing of a person revenge. Revenge for what ? .1 who himself is obeying the law ; he must light break in on your minds ? ll be in the peace of the commonwealth. the truth begin to dawn in this l Third, and at the bottom of the whole, their shadowy showing alread' there must be this malice aforethought. you see enough in this casetd Now, gentlemen, in this case you must what a weight of grief must 1 < find that all these elements exist. They down upon this frail creature’1 must be assumed or they must be proven ; heart; that this act was perpeba but you must believe they conscientiously a weight of grief that could not t^< exist in this case. If one is absent, if there You, as husbands, fathers, br « be not sound mind or memory in the case, conceive of no motive of reve;fli| or if the killing was justifiable, and not defendant, if that is their tl)(| unlawful; if there was not malice in the they must assume some theory < tfcl case—that is, if the act was not done under ing up ot the case. If th 1 circumstances showing symptoms of a de¬ theory—that this was reveui- praved heart, showing a wicked, deprav¬ husbands and fathers and bih ed and malignant spirit—you cannot con¬ see no motive of revenge except* vict. The elementary writers hold that there honor, the loss of virtue, the lo« must be malicious purpose. Where do the loss of heaven; through th mi you find it in this case ? Depravity of treachery of the man whom sh«ai heart—where do you find depravity of influence of all these causes, s*« heart ? Each must exist, each is as much gentlemen, if you go home toij the essence of the crime and must be in your daughter tells you that the case as much as the killing. You can¬ has ruined her, you will not rit not separate them and convict a man or stinct of your nature will not a woman of murder. Now, what have they to wait a moment until you hi> proven ? Where have they proven one her dishonor in the blood of If iota of malicious purpose in the case ? And, if stung by her own d*H Have they assigned any motive or any avenges that dishonor by heo* 29
) place her crime in the category of sound mind that she was justifiable, and no ibded murder ? Why, gentlemen, crime was committed. Why, gentlemen, sier very case if they say this was the meanest worm that walks the earth in fi revenge ; and they must assume human form, the frailest thing that revels B 3 they have no case ; and they night and day in the meanest dens of in¬ iw a motive unless it was for some- famy, is mistress of her own body ; and that kind. On their own show- the man who dares to lay violent hands on ould not hesitate to submit this that body against her will, and attempts to ) >u on the evidence now before you. use it against her will, and she kills him, show to you as clear a defense she is justified in so doing, and so the ise as ever shown in any similar Court will instruct you. e shall make it as plain as it can But, 'gentlemen, if women must shoot Ijoe made upon their own theory of men under these circumstances, men are wf sound mind and memory—on in danger ! I reply that is the law under tfeory that this was committed the statute, and I reply such men are in q y—we shall show to you that danger, and such men ought to be in dan¬ »v; no crime, that this was justifi- ger. Men whose base lust will spur them 4 the morning of the commission to such acts of violence are a disgrace to . ft, we shall prove to you that the humanity, and their destruction by the Lab left her workshop and went victims of their lust is a proper doom. If stirs to a retiring-room, and when we find a man deliberately igniting in his if—the deceased following her out neighbor’s house an explosion that carries .i ely—she met deceased at the away his own, he has nobody to blame but f Lie stairs, and when she went up himself. If a man administers intoxicat¬ ail reached the top he suddenly ing poison to another, and that other, un¬ o her with violence, in an indecent der the influence of that poison, rushes r ad insisted upon her accompany - madly on him and takes his life, can it be m an improper place ; and they said that is a murder ? If a man robs a it iggle there and she left the prints woman of her virtue and inoculates her n Is upon his face, as we shall show soul with the poison of guilt, and, under i y reliable testimony. We shall its influence, actuated by its power, she ’c the scratches on his face were destroys the man who has caused this, who ry he defendant in this struggle. It can say that she shall be found guilty of iflbre struggle and she finally suc- the crime of murder. : getting away. But he seized oh So, I say, on their own theory, if we es¬ u and there it was, on this provoca- tablish this state of facts, you will not leuddenly seized a pistol and shot hesitate a moment in acquitting the defend¬ fc, gentlemen, if this be so, on their ant. But, in justice to this defendant, e:y of sanity, here her act was en- and to the cause of humanity, we will lay us liable, as the Court will instruct before you the line of our defense, to which If his was as I have narrated—and we were just as irresistibly driven as was te ou we shall prove every word of the bullet from which Mr. Watson received 111 have related it substantially, his fatal wound. We have conscientiously e as seized upon by this man at the studied this case, and we know, and you f le stairs, insultingly, violently, shall know, and you must be prepared to in icent manner, she broke loose hear a story of wrong and outrage that in leaving the print of her nails scarcely has a parallel in the history of the fa: ; that he seized upon her again, human race. We shall demonstrate to sn t was that she shot him—I say, you, as clear as sunlight, that the defend¬ e this—and we shall prove it— ant was no more responsible at the time of how on their own theory of a firing that shot than the pistol from which 30 it was fired. Her mind was stormed in its such circumstances. Whom Gc citadel, and laid prostrate under a stroke visited man undertakes to judge ai with punishment, as if human reas of frenzy. deputed to revise the course of divi: In former times the defense of insanity idence.” Justice Edmonds, in th< was looked upon with great disfavor, with Keim, tried for murder in 1846, suspicion and doubt ; so, in former times, charge to the jury, said that, “a the victims of this terrible malady were the plea of insanity was some times i as a cloak for crime, it was unfor put to death as beset with devils, thrown equally true that many more perse into prisons, and beaten with great inhu¬ unjustly convicted and condemuei manity. To-day, in the light of the nine¬ fer the punishment for crime, ti teenth century, in this country and all their unquestioned insanity ought been an unfailing protection.” over the civilized world, the victims of this terrible malady are treated with great con¬ The lamented Dr. Brigham, in t sideration, and the defense of insanity, Annual Report of the Hartford when set up as a defense of crime, is received says : “ I do not know of a single not only with great consideration, but is where the insanity of an individ entertained by the courts with tenderness been certified by those well inforr and respect. In the progress of science well qualified by experience with th the phenomena of the human mind has to judge on such a subject, that t become a special branch of study. Men public opinion has decided to beii of great learning and ability have devoted while I know many instances wl their lives and energy to the multifarious plea has been disregarded, which' operations of the human mind, and it is to shown ought not to have been.” their authority, and it is their evidence in Dr. Bell, Superintendent of the such cases as this, that we are enabled to Asylum, near Boston, says: “ Tha' arrive at the truth, and we are enabled to real criminal acquitted on the sco save unaccountable beings from becoming sanity, there have been a dozen victims of judicial murder. In this con¬ executed. ” nection I desire to read some extracts from Dr. Woodward, Superintenden authorities going to show the danger of Insane Hospital at Worcester, M disregarding the plea of insanity when set setts, says, in his Annual Report f up in any such case as this. On this sub¬ “ It may be a consolation and an ject Chief Justice Parker, of New Hamp¬ agement to jurors, in faithfully f shire, a few years since, in his charge to out their own sincere convictioi the Grand Jury, said : law and evidence in such cases, j that in a pretty diligent inquiry e\ “ The public presses, in giving reports event in every case of homicide i of trials, often say : ‘ The defense was, as usual, insanity,’ or make some other ex¬ England, where the accused has i pression indicating that this species of defense of insanity set up for Ij defense is resorted to in desperate cases been acquitted on that ground, it i for the purpose of aiding in the escape of found that not an instance has criminals from justice. Such opinions are propagated in many instances by those where the progress of time has ncj whose feelings are too much enlisted, or antly verified the soundness of tli*l whose ignorance respecting the subject —a fact which ought forever to si: is too great, to permit them to form thoughtless, but perhaps not inco an intelligent and dispassionate judg¬ tial intimations always presented! ment; and they have a very perni¬ cious tendency, inasmuch as they excite cases, that insanity is set up as th 1 prejudice in the public mind, and the un¬ sort of a desperate defense.” fortunate individual, who is really entitled Now, gentlemen, after hearii| to the benefit of such a defense, is thereby authorities of great and good ^ sometimes deprived of a fair and impartial trial. Again, how irreverent and almost not well to listen to the mad ravini impious the taking of human life under ignorant and unskilled against « 31 of such a defense as that set up sanity is the disease itself, of which the i case. Now, that you may better mental aberration is simply the manifesta¬ tion. No fact in medical science is more ate and understand the facts of the elearly established than this of the action : going to show insanity in the de- of the emotions over the circulation of the 1, I desire to read to you some blood in the brain. This form of insanity : of authority on that subject, and is known as transitory mania. -ally on the subject of insanity, ‘1 It may be defined as a form of insanity in which the individual, with or without Las transitoria mania, or tempo- the exhibition of previous notable symptoms, ilanity. I read from Dr. William and with or -without obvious exciting cause, :mond : suddenly loses the control of his will, during which period of non-control he commonly Ire is a form of insanity, which, in perpetrates a criminal act, and then as 1 mating act is extremely temporary suddenly rec'overs, more or less completely, i.aracter, and which, in all its mani- his power of volition. iis, from beginning to end, is of “Attentive examination will always re¬ Ration. veal the existence of symptoms precursory b species of mental aberration is well to the outbreak which constitutes the d,o all physicians and medical jurists culminating act. Though they may be so iire studied the subject of insanity. slight as to escape superficial examination. ” I authors it has been variously desig- is transitoria mania, ephemeral Dr. A. Devergie, one of the most emi¬ -temporary insanity and morbid nent alienists in France, in a paper read before the Imperial Academy of Medicine, ay be exhibited in the perceptional, entitled “ Transitory Homicidal Mania ; l ual, emotional or volitional form, saeral mania. where does Reason End or Mania Begin,” E exciting causes of temporary insan- in the Journal of Psychological Medicine numerous. It may be induced by and Mental Pathology, No. xvi, October, 3 ienic influences, such as improper 1859, p. says : ;:posure to intense heat, cold, or csss, or to a noxious atmosphere ; “ Those physicians who have devoted L ie physical exercise, by disease of themselves to the treatment of insanity ad¬ ijt, by blows upon the head or other mit that beside dementia, mania, andmono- • the body, by certain general and omania, there exists an instantaneous, tran¬ c Leases, by the abuse of alcoholic sient insanity, which they call transitory, s by the ingestion of certain drugs, and as the result of which an individual, i opium, belladonna and hasheesh, until then, in appearance at least, of sound l ssive intellectual occupation, by mind, commits suddenly a homicidal act, E leep, and above all, by great emo- and returns as suddenly to a state of reason. i.sturbances. Among these latter : It would be easy to quote a hundred authors ii excitement, grief, disappoint- of recognized pre-eminence in psychologi¬ Etion, and especially anxiety, by cal medicine, to the effect that such an affec¬ ■ lie mind is kept continually on the tion as temporary insanity really exists. b tortured by apprehensions, doubts The authorities on medical jurisprudence i ;ertainties, by which it is worn are likewise decided upon this point, and r >re surely than by the most terri- the fact is accepted every day by courts of aties. The predisposing causes are law. It is unnecessary, therefore, to ad¬ end in the individual as an inherent duce further support to the doctrine. The fiis organization. They consist in emotions are also subject to insane exag¬ 3 tary tendency to insanity, or to geration, through the influence of motives c ler profound affection of the ner- which act slowly, but with constantly in¬ 6 hem, or of an excitable nervous creasing force. Thus a mother is affected !] ment which is incapable of resist- with emotional insanity from the fact that ■('3 morbid influences which persons her son or daughter has become dejjraved Lgmatic disposition would easily or criminal. She struggles against the ;; d. Thus all men are not affected consciousness that her hopes are blasted, ), disturbing causes, because all men but at last the intellect and the will yield, >1 :ast in the same physical or mental or settled melancholy predominates in all 1 A circumstance which will pro- her thoughts, and she commits suicide, J anity in one person will scarcely unable longer to bear up in the unequal t i equanimity of another. conflict. Here there is no delusion, no h immediate cause of temporary in¬ error of judgment, but simply an inability 32 to apply her reasoning powers to the con¬ clearest evidence of insanity, and on | sideration of the subject, or to exercise might read to you authorities shd her will against the overpowering emotion where there is no other evidence, t that renders her life a burden.” itself is the best evidence that the m Now, gentlemen, it seems to me that the person was unsound. these authorities establish the fact of the Have they proved a particle of ma! existence of a species of insanity, known as purpose toward the deceased ? No. temporary insanity, impulsive insanity, or they wish us to account for the pu mania iransiloria, where an act is performed and carrying of the pistol. On the irresistibly and under uncontrollable influ¬ ing of this occurrence, the condi ences. Why, gentlemen, all see it every Fanny Hyde was notably strange day. We can hardly look at a public looked wildly, stared vacantly, a journal but what we read of the melancholy great distress she cried out—“ Oh, death of some unfortunate individual by I was dead.” On that morning thj his own hand. No person has seen any¬ prove no malice, no word, no thing strange in his appearance, or unusual against Watson. So I can argue in his conduct, and he deliberately buys and to this Court, that we have I poison, or a pistol, and ends his life by reason to suppose that she bouglj his own hand, and all the world cries, “A pistol and had it that morning f I case of temporary insanity,” and there is pui-pose of self-murder, than the} j no doubt about it. If Fanny Hyde had that she carried it for the purpose < died by her own hand, on that morning, ing Watson, from the probabilities' insiead of having killed her evil genius ; if case. It was in a public place, in l she, instead of Watson, had been picked daylight, in the middle of the dad up at the bottom of those stairs, the report public hall-way, opening upon an would have been—“Died by her own hand lie street, that this act was comil in a fit of temporary insanity.” There Now, I ask you if that is th \ would have been no question about buy¬ murderers generally do business ? W J ing a pistol and carrying it two weeks. show to you—and they came ver« Everybody—physician and layman—would showing it to you by one of their la 1 have said, “A case of temporary insanity.” nesses—that at the bottom of thesdi “Insane, insane,” would have been the this defendant was over the corpse c J cry. There would have been no mistake son, wringing her hands in great t about it. The coroner’s jury would have Do criminals have that emotion wlb had a short sitting, and they would have premeditated murder ? Women wi ll returned a verdict of “Death from tempo¬ malice in their hearts—is that the w: i rary aberration of mind ; ” and if Watson’s usually do ? Do criminals delib )1 relations to her had been understood, as walk to their constituted authoriti I they shall be understood, by you, all the deliver themselves up, and the instil world would have cried out : “ Kill him, with which they perpetrated the act ' kill the murderer and seducer of Fanny murderers do that ? That is jus! Hyde.” Brooklyn would be too hot for they don’t do. And I may say riglb| him. There would have been no doubt that the evidence is that this pisl ' about her insanity, there would be no bought two or three weeks befo I doubt about her temporary aberration of commission of the act. There were b mind. Men would not have quibbled dred opportunities in which she con b about her buying a pistol two or three shot him ; places better protecte I weeks before and her carrying it that places murderers more likely woul I morning. They would have said that she chosen. Why, gentlemen, there isoj died while temporarily laboring under in¬ element in this case but shows thj sanity. Now, gentlemen, I say that, in theory of the defense is the true oi»( this case, the act itself is the best and that this woman, at the time she c n 33 lihat deed, was entirely irresponsible, the history of Fanny Hyde in two chap¬ dannot be convicted of crime. At any ters. The first covers that part of her life jt if you have any doubt about it, that prior to her acquaintance with Watson, ut must be construed in favor of the and the other, after her acquaintance with f( dant. We think we can prove by Watson. We shall trace her day by day, r;3stimony, as clear as can be, that the night by night, week by week, year by year, ft dant was insane at the time ; but if up to the time she became acquainted with ! Is, in a photograph gallery, with a hand wife and children that the occasic ;each over his shoulder. One of these, pass by; and again he swore that il the loveliest one—for then she was would molest her more. But a rely—is Fanny Hyde. Think of it, think tlemen, by the same power, by .it, gentlemen, men, fathers, and hus- old influence, by reminding he :ids. Forty-five years of age, his wife at past, that he held her reputatic distance, away from his family, going to end of his tongue, and could blast .agnerreian galleryjand spending his time world as he already had blasted it to C i ndicated in that picture. Why gentle- again accomplished his object. Do in, if any one can now doubt the charac- some one say, “ Why should she stay t of this man—that he was a cold blooded and permit this to be done ?” Go i ucer of innocent girls, I should like to yonder gilded palaces of hell, where ;>wby what process your minds arrive at fairest of onr land are sacrificed ; go in It conclusion. That weighs a ton in this the rural charnel houses, filled with tht !is. We shall show to you that through skeletons of the lost souls of creatures ; 11 criminalintimacy she became pregnant, speak to one of those frail creatures; ask il shall show to you that he furnished her her why she came there and why she don’t o Heine and drugs which brought on her leave ; and then, if your question is not oistrual period. We shall show to you answered, I don’t know how to answer it. h from that time her health began to fail, But I will tell you, gentlemen, it was be¬ ra that time her color, which was a cause he threatened to go wherever she uminent characteristic in her, began to went; because he threatened to ruin her a ;; her body began to diminish, and we reputation. Her parents and relatives, bl show that about fifteen months after although poor, were respectable ; and, b time he seduced her, she met this young with the exception of her husband and m, Hyde, and after a short court-ship this man Watson, she was respectable and a riedhim. Here was a crisis. She had respected by all. It was for this, among u 1 honestly, she had tried with all her other reasons, that she did not leave him. 'Cer, she had to overcome her slavish Gentlemen, conscience was at work. She ofition and leave this man, but she was brooded over her misfortunes. She brooded ible to do it, as you can well understand, over her condition of servitude to this n of observation, intelligence and expe- man until her life actually became too uce. But here was a crisis. Here was heavy for her to bear. She became re¬ cance for a new departure. She had duced in body. She fell away from 125 to n nderstanding with that man, Watson, 95 pounds. Her nervous system was bro¬ i'Ci that time that he should leave her to ken down, and on three years of accumu¬ e husband to spend the residue of her lating horrors, with ail of these three dis¬ f' in fidelity to him and herself; and he posing causes weighing down on her mind, uhis hand on the Bible deliberately and her soul, her heart, is it any wonder that we that he never would molest her on the morning of this occurrence she g:i. But to a man who would puH vir- stared wildly, she looked vacantly, that she «down, an oath had no sanctity. The said, standing by the stove, “I wish I was ufcity of the marriage relation had not dead ?” Is it a wonder that she contem¬ Q< gh in it to prevent him from gratify- plated self-destruction on that morning? lgiislust; and by the same old power— Why, gentlemen, if girls disappointed in 01 can understand it—and by threats of their affections commit suicide, if quiet, SI sore, he accomplished his purpose orderly men who meet with reverses in g£i after that marriage. She so brooded business brood over those losses until their ve; it, it so affected her mind that she minds become overturned and they take nsf:y unbosomed herself to her husband—- their own lives, if Preston King, rolling >1< him about it. They confronted this in luxury and wealth, occupying a high idler and he begged for the sake of his position—Collector of the Port of New 36 mid be so overcome by political In the case of Amelia Norman, indie \at be should drown himself in for stabbing her seducer, the jury i •iver under temporary insanity, dered a verdict of acquittal after an lous, is it strange, that this poor sence of only two minutes. In this < , laboring under those untold the evidence showed an apparent prem joining in contact with the author tation and purpose—namely, the delil liseries on that morning under the ate lying in wait for her victim, and .ances that we shall prove to you— the evidences of thorough design and /onder that reason should have left tent, and yet the jury said she was i >ne and that she should have strick- sponsible. own the author of those miseries The case of Sickles, who killed the woes ? In addition to these predis- ducer of his wife, is still fresh in y ;sing causes, we shall show to you that minds. In this case no medical evide he has hereditary insanity : her grand¬ at all was introduced ; and yet he was father died insane, committed suicide quitted on the ground of temporary while insane. sanity. On that question I desire to read from Gen. Cole, who killed Hiscock, prepa Marc. Yol. 1, page 285: himself with a pistol in Syracuse, went Albany on purpose, and met this sedi “ Hereditary predisposition deserves to be placed at the head of the causes of in¬ —met him at the Delavan House, pu sanity, for it plays so marked a character out his pistol and shot him. He in the production of this malady that promptly acquitted. whenever there is a possibility, in a medi¬ In the case of Pierce, who shot the co-legal investigation, of demonstrating its existence, it is sufficient almost of itself ducer of his sister, which was a sim to establish the reality of a lesion of the case, the jury rendered a verdict of understanding, or to weaken considerably quittal on the ground of irresponsibilil the possibility of its being feigned.” Mary Harris killed Burroughs, who We shall show to you that the grand¬ violated his promise to her of marriage, father of this defendant died while under conduct leading to the act looked like the influence of temporary insanity. We of one preparing to commit murder, shall introduce witnesses to show to you— was acquitted on the defence of tempo men who are experienced in detecting and insanity ; and subsequent events just considering insanity; we shall show to you the propriety of the plea, for to-day si that on this morning the defendant was a confirmed maniac. insane, therefore not responsible for what And these are a few in hundreds of c she committed. We shall also show an¬ where this defence has been set up w l other important fact illustrating causes the facts have not been nearly so stroll leading to this act. Her periods of men¬ in this case. struation are epochs in her life, almost up¬ Now, gentlemen, the charity of our i setting her, they are so severe. We will ute permits the defendant to be a witj show to you that that is a very strong and in her own behalf. She will go on hi powerfully predisposing cause to this in¬ stand and tell her own story. It will II sanity. Now, gentlemen, in my investiga¬ terrible ordeal to her. Why, grave, i tions of the disease of the mind, in my wart, robust men—men who daily bM study of the authorities and cases on the with the world, in going on the wit* question, I have been unable to find one stand sometimes glow weak and falter.nl so perfectly clear in my mind as this. sometimes even faint where but a few HI And, gentlemen, that you may see for dred dollars are at stake. But here ishi yourselves that this is a clear case, com¬ young, timid girl. What must bell pared with other cases where this plea has emotions, what must be her feelings v« been set up successfully, I desire to call she takes her place on the witness-sft# your attention to one or two cases. But the other day a nobleman in EnjJ* 37 its accosted by one of these scientific must be the condition of this defendant, intleman, known as “ blackmailers,” and charged with murder ? To go on that i,s informed that his wife was a woman stand and tell her story will be an ordeal : bad character before he married her, almost unendurable. The District At¬ id demanded money or he would torney has in store for her the rack and ■tke an expose. The nobleman prompt- torture in his cross-examination. We may spurned the threat and the au- expect to see her writhe and groan, per¬ |»r of it. It was the occasion of a suit haps sink; but I trust she may bear bravely I: malicious libel. On that trial Lady up. I hope that God, the friend of the Iriss, who was the lady spoken of, was friendless, will sustain her in this great it on the stand as a witness and subject trial; for I believe that God is on her ; very severe cross-examination. The side. Her days and nights in prison have iiits and circumstances are so well stated not been all dark and dreary ; there has ■: The New York Times of a recent date been one light streaming in on her, it has iiit, with the permission of the Court, I filled her soul with joy and gladness—her a read it : Bible ; it has been her constant companion. ‘During the trial of the Turiss libel Religion has been her daily reliance ; and i t witnesses were produced to prove the every night and every morning, on bended ier falsity of Choffer’s charges, while it vs also proved that he had attempted to knees and with clasped hands she pours )be witnesses in his defense. No one her soul in prayer to God. Ah, gentlemen, hbted that the verdict would completely when the soul is full, when thoughts come r dicate the aspersed character of Lady struggling up for utterance, there is to be iriss, when the case was suddenly ter- found relief in prayer. nated by her flight from London and the l.continuance of the prosecution. The Without money and without price, I ) y intelligent interpretation of her dis- have devoted a few days with affectionate oearance is that she was totally unable energy to this case. I do not permit my¬ i< sustain the torture of a cruel examina- self for a moment to think that your ver¬ fa. to which she was subjected. It can siily be understood that to a sensitive, dict will be any other than an entire idy organized nature, nothing could acquittal. If you have any doubt, that inn worse than the prospects of under- doubt goes to the defendant. Remember ;'ng, in open Court, the subtle cruelty of the awful responsibility of convicting this i mg-continued and remorseless 6ross-ex- irination. The man Choffers, who is an defendant if she was insane. Remember, ibmey, conducted his own defense, and too, we are in awful times. The founda¬ ling the first examination of Lady tions of our social and domestic systems are iriss, subjected her to what the Spectator wavering. Remember that the poison and its the “torture of filthy questions” for Its. She passed the ordeal bravely ; but mildew of licentiousness are corrupting the 1 certainty of its renewal may easily heart of society. The fairest of our land ire filled her with such horror that she are yearly falling into the snares of the iiferred to risk the misconstruction -which Watsons and other monsters of society. wild be put on her flight. The torture Remember that the polished libertine and ilihe examination to which she must be tjected, cannot be comprehended except gross sensualist, with bloodshot eyes, alike >;the victim herself, which, in spite of stand leering across our thresholds. God 1 verdict which proclaimed her unsullied has reiterated in His Holy Book that the Iracter, the mud of the trial through adulterous shall not live. Remember the r ch she had been dragged will still cling, d , manner, to her garments, and she will commandment. Thou shalt not commit Lie gained a notoriety horribly painful adultery, and thou shalt not kill, stand side o, modest woman. ” by side. Through this man this young off, gentleman, here is a woman of girl lost her virtue—the gem -which is the lii rank and noble birth, charged with a honor and glory of every woman. Through p|.tof chastity. That she should be over- him she lost her honor and self-respect, c.e and reason dethroned rather than through him she lost her peace and health, a objected to a cross-examination, what through him she lost her reputation, 38 through him she has lost everything near 1868, possibly a week or two prior to that ti 1 and dear, and for him you say that she Q. How long did she attend your Sui j School? A. For about two years. shall meet the death of the murderer ? Q. What was her attendance, regular or ot There is one piece of evidence I desire wise ? A. Generally regular. Q. Do you know where she lived at that t particularly to call your attention to, it is during that period ? A. The first part of « an open volume, it is evidence that time I do not, but the latter part of the time < you can see and read. If when you go lived in Williamsburgh. Q. Up to what time did she attend sch 1 into this jury room you have any doubt When did she leave ? A. She left the scho ] about this case, I pray you, gentlemen, think, it was somewhere in May, 1870. as you love your homes, as good hus¬ Q. Do you know whether that was befor >i after her marriage ? A. It was just prior to i bands, fathers, and brothers, to turn marriage ; her name was not taken off the b i your eyes and your minds and thoughts until after her marriage. to this poor girl — to the pale, sweet, Q. What was her conduct during the pe You have never seen him since? A. Never. Q. "What was her conduct during that period ? From looking at that likeness, you identi- A. Excellent. as being the likeness of the same man? Q. Did you ever see Mr. Watson at that recognize that to be the man. school ? A. Yes. Never saw him before ? A. I don’t know Q. Do you know where they have lived during ever saw him before or since. that period ? A. The first that I knew where It did not occur to you at that time, that she lived was in Flushing avenue, near Canton ing that bouquet was an act to produce street, if I am not mistaken. ity? A. No. Q. Did she remove to Williamsburgh after What did she do with that bouquet ? A. that? A. Yes, sir. t know. Q. Did she continue to attend that Sunday Did she pick it up ? A. Picked it up. School after that ; after removing to Williams¬ Did she take it away ? A. I cannot say. burgh ? A. Some few times. Did not see what she did with it ? A. No, Q. Was she in the habit of visiting your house ? A. Yes, sir ; at times. .You did not see her do anything herself Q. Have you daughters of her age ? A. Yes. >oked like insanity. A. No, sir. Q. She was a companion of your daughters ? A. Not a companion ; only came from the Sab¬ bath School with the rest of the scholars, and sometimes visiting. Mrs. Jane Thatcher—Sworn. Q. Did Fanny’s sister attend school with her ? A. Yes, sir ; up to the present time, .Where do you live ? A. 275 Fleet street. Q. And that (pointing; is her sister? A. . )o you know Fanny Hyde ? A. Yes. Yes. . low long have you known her ? A. I am Q. What was Fanny’s apparent physical con¬ lice ; it is between three and four years. dition when she commenced going to Sunday • Where did you become acquainted with School ? A. She seemed to be in good health. ? A. In the Sunday School. Q. Did she possess the fullness of face and . ’he Sunday School of Primitive Metho- color of her sister ? A. Some little. s A. Yes. Q. Was she attentive to her studies ? A. Yes, . Vas she in your class ? A. No, sir ; she sir ; very. swas in my class ; it was a small school ; Q. Did she attend church as well as the Sab¬ vier. bath School ? A. Yes ; part of the time. , low long did she, 'to your knowledge, at- 1 lie Sunday School? A. I could not tell No cross-examination. e ct time. :■ onsiderable time ? A. Yes ; she did not n so very regularly ; but until she was rl and sometime after she was married. , '0 you recollect seeing her after she was John Marr—Sworn. T-l ? A. Yes. Q. Where do you live ? A. 263 Hester street, here she attended up to May two years N. Y. ? A. Yes. Q. What is your business? A, Lace manu¬ ■ ow was her conduct ? A. Very good, facturer. ner I saw her ; she was always very Q. Do you know the accused ? A. Yes. le Q. Did she at any time work for you ? A. No cross-examhiation. Yes. Q. For how long ? A. Pretty nearly two years. The COURT. — What years ? A. From Edwin Holloway—Sworn. about July, ’65, until the end of the year 1867, or the beginning of 1868. V here do you reside? A. 38 Division Q. Was she an industrious girl ? A. Very -t. industrious. !• rar business ? A. Machine smith, Q. Her conduct ? A. It was perfectly correct i p you know the accused, Fanny Hyde? while she worked for me Q. Was she in the habit of going to your • ]>w long have you known her? A. A house? A. Yes. • (jsr four years. Q. Did you have daughters ? A. Yes. here did you become acquainted with Q. About her age? A. Yes. ■ 1. In the Bridge street Primitive Metho- Q. What was her disposition toward the chil¬ ^Siday School, where I was Superinten- dren ? A. Very kind. Q. You say she was industrious— more than ■ 1 you recollect the year she commenced ordinarily industrious ? A. Yes ; she was more Qdr|g that school ? A. I think it was the than ordinarily industrious, and more than or¬ of 167 or the beginning of 1868 ; 1867, I dinarily smart at her work. Q. Where was it that she worked for you? 1 a think it was in 1867 ? A. Yes. A. In White street, N. Y. I w long did you recollect of her attend- Q. At the net business ? A. Hair-net business tke ? A. I think two years and a half. at that time. 44 Q. Under whose particular charge was she, Well, what attracted my attention was—tl while with you ? A. Under my wife’s charge. was but Fanny and two more girls at worl Cross-examination. the shop. He used to go among these § and skylark with them, send out after 05- Q. How many daughters had you ? A. Two. stews, buy candy and such like as that forth Q. Their ages ? A. One is now about seven¬ and have it brought in the shop. teen. Q. State any other circumstances ? A. Q. How old were they in 1865, when Mrs. while he was carrying on like this, after he Hyde came there to work for you? A. One been larking with them, he would come would be about ten and the other eleven. my alley, and I have said to him— Q. You say Mrs. Hyde was uncommonly Objected to, what was said to deceased. smart ? A. Yes. Q. Answer this question in “Yes” or “1 Q. Do you mean at her work ? A. Yes. Had you spoken to him with reference to Q. Was not she very intelligent ? A. She freedom ? was quite as intelligent as any girl I employed. Objected to. Objection overruled. Q. Did you know then about what her age A. Yes. was ? A. No ; I did not inquire about her age. Q. Did you ever see him go to his boari Q. Did you form any judgment as to her age ? house? A. Yes. A. No, sir ; I did not have charge of the girls ; Q. What time of day? A. It would be v : my wife had charge of them. they quit at night Q. How do you know about her intelligence Q. Did you ever see him follow her at ; and capacity for work? A. Because I had to place ? A. Well, she could neither stir at. have all the information from my wife; and I the place, neither go in nor out, but wha i was there in the place myself and saw. was following her, both before she was mai ( Q. Then you speak partially from the infor¬ and after. mation from your wife? A. Yes. Q. Do you know of her stopping at the . ] Q. You saw her yourself enough to say some¬ after the other girls left. A. Yes. thing about that ? A. Yes. The COURT.—After the hours of labor-1 Q. If you saw her enough to say about her over? A. Yes; we would all be going awa; > intelligence and smartness, did you not see her gether. enough to judge something of her age? A. Yes. Q. Would she remain in consequence of ;■ Q. What is your judgment? A. She was thing Watson said to her ? A. Yes. about eleven or twelve. Q. What would he say to her on that sub Objected to. The COURT. —It may be shown whethei« stayed voluntarily or by his invitation. Mr. BRITTON.—It is a strange thing al William Newton—Sivorn. you may kill a man and close his mouth, id then justify it by such evidence as this. ’ Q. What is your business? A. Lacemaker. may prove any acts which justify killing ijJ Q. Where is your place of business ? A. 29 I never heard, as a rule of law, that you ij Centre street. prove the declarations of a party deceased ’I Q. Where was it in January' last? A. I justification for killing him. worked in the same place I work now. I left The COURT. —I do not admit it as a ; when he sold the machines, about Christmas fication, but to show an irresponsible sta ot time. mind of this accused, arising from a ce in Q. Where before that did you work ? A. For state of facts which they expect to establisl Mr. Bachman, from July, 1869, up to the end Mr. BRITTON.—Then because Mr. Wim of 1871. asked her to remain afterwards, and his de<.» Q. Where then? A. 39 Centre street tion to her induced her to remain, tends to )* Q. Did you ever work in this factory in Wil- the irresponsibility' of this defendant two in liamsburgh ? A. Yes ; that’s Mr. Bachman’s. afterwards in killing him? I urge this co Q. This business was carried on in Mr. Bach¬ the Court, inasmuch as the people, in ca d man’s name? A. Yes. error, have no remedy. I ask your Hono to Q, You know Fanny Hyde, then? A. Yes; give us the benefit of the consideration of ai* she worked there when I went there. question ; and, of course, we defer to the r ng The COURT.—When did you first know with entire respect. her? A. In 1869. The COURT.—We don’t think we are (lib¬ Q. Where ? A. At Watson’s. erty to reject the question, having in vie- ln- Q. Mr. Watson was interested in the busi¬ class of testimony and the practice in si l*r ness? A. Yes, I suppose so, but his name was trials in this State and elsewhere. never on the books. Mr. BRITTON.—Do I understand this r ng Q. While you were there did you notice the to go to the declarations of the deceased re- conduct of Mr. Watson to Fanny Hyde? A. after on all occasions. Yes, certainly. The COURT.—I don’t propose to liavmj Q. Shite what it was. A. Well, it would be ruling on the question go further than tin- about in October when I begun to take notice, tion to which it applies. I propose to noe when I thought- to myself the right to overrule a question. ! When»he would require her to remain after know ; I am not certain ; I worked at the other others had gone away, he would say, place after he went there. my, come and finish a few of these nets Q. He went away at that time up in the coun¬ Come and cut me some netsor made try? A. Yes; he went to look after the ma¬ rxcuse like that. chines in New Britain. , Were there any persons, to your knowl- Q. Do you know how long he stayed up ; remaining in the shop at that time ? A. there? A. No, I cannot tell exactly. [ know there were no persons there, only Q. Did not he stay there until along down . Batson and Fanny. towards October? A. Yes: two or three { About how many were working in that months. lng? A. Well, at the time I first went Q. Then he did not come here to this factory ? i there might have been eight or ten girls A. He came to this factory when he brought the i working. machines over. {Do you know that girl (exhibiting a pho- Q. He did not stay in this factory while the rih)? A. Yes ; that’s Eliza Jackson. machinery was running in New Britain? A, {Where did she work? A. In the same No. ps we did. Q. Where was Mrs. Hyde during that period? {. ?or about what time did you work in the A. She went there to work, too. J When did you leave? A. I worked Q How long after he went on did she go up ? r< ibout two and a-half years. I left the A. I could not tell; she did not work in our euart of 1871. shop. » Yhat time in 1871 did you leave? A. Q. When he went to New Britain she did not 111 would be when he sold the machines. work in the shop here? A. I could not say; n Id be a week or two before Christmas, I she was not in the shop for a long time. ei Q. How long would you say, one, two, or !■ >o you know how many separate estab- three months ? A. Might be; could not say. nits that building had at that time? A. She did work out of the shop. ; oree on that floor. It was divided into Q. When she was not working in the shop, ;e hops. before he went to New Britain, did she com6 !• here were some on other floors in the there for work to take home ? A. Yes. ie ailding? A. There was a clock shop un¬ Q. Nets to make, and made them at home, it h, and under that a weaving shop, and and brought them to the shop as the result of e: that, on the ground floor, the smith’s her work ? A. Yes. p. There were different compartments in Q. Do you know of your own knowledge how faory. she came to go to New Britain ? A. I do not. • as there a closet on the first two floors? I could tell one thing, they were short of brass 7 bobbin winding, she went to wind the brass , pu were not there during the month of bobbins. U0r last? A. Yes; I think they sold the Q. Being experienced in that line ? A. Yes. kiss in January. I expected to go to work Q. Do you know when she came back ? A. 'e *ain, but did not; thev sold the ma¬ No ; a considerable time before Mr. Watson. les, Q. Then did you know where she went when ) you know the fact of the closet on the she came back before Watson did? A. No. 'I ];or being out of repair in January last? Q. Do you know whether or not she worked 'fcfir. in this factory here ? A. I believe she did nets ]>w often would this occur—Fanny and for her father. She went to live in Wythe ave. Ytson remaining after the other girls? Q. She had a husband then ? A. Yes. '>ofe two or three times; maybe three or Q. Had a husband when she went to New ti es. Britain? A. Yes. h you know how long they remained in Q. Where was her father’s place? A. The rop on these occasions? A. No. same factory. Q. How long did she continue to make nets Cross-examined. for her father ? A. I don’t know. Q. When do you know she found work in II you work in this factory last summer? Bachman’s place ? A. In January. tea Q. The first time you saw her there after re¬ Ys not there a time last summer when turning from New Britain ? A. It would be in iua;inery was not at work? A. It stopped January. uly Q. Were you to work there during that time? Ew long was it that there was no work A. No, sir ; there was no work for me to do. e ? L There never was any more done But I used to go to the shop pretty nearly every e. » ■ day. Yen was it that they stopped off? A. Q. You say there were different compartments at. ly or August. in this factory ? A. Yes. D you know when Mr. Watson went up Q. Machinery, and working men and work¬ ew ritain? A. Yes, I recollect the time. ing women in these parts ? A. Yes. 'Ym was that? A. It would be in the Q. Did the rooms of these different compart¬ Qni ; of June. ments on the same floor communicate, or did •Y you sure he did not go up there and doors lead into the hall? A. They were all aef his work in March? A. I don’t partitioned off in the different shops. 46 Q. There -was no communication between as you say ? A. Until the time they went i each, except|through the hall? A. No. New Britain, 1871. Q. The door from each led into the hall ? A. Q. During that period state anj* specific i Yes, on the top floor. casionswhen you saw him following her? , Q. Which floor was it Mr. Bachman occupied ? I have seen him follow her out of the shop : A. The two top floors. the landing, and out of one shop into the otl • Q. Was the top floor the one you referred to Q. Out of what shop—the shop where ;i where Mr. Watson remained after work? A. was at work, the weaving shop ? A. Yes. Yes. I Q. She went ahead and he followed? A.I, Q. You say that three or four times, to the Q. How soon after ? A. Perhaps a minut1 best of your recollection, she remained at his re¬ Q. That is one instance; tell us another i quest? A. Yes. stance. A. ’Undreds of them. Q. What do you say he said to her ? A. He Q. When is the next occasion? A. Mj would ask her to come and finish him some times a day. nets, or something of that like. Q. State specific occasions when you saw :1 Q. That was before the hands left? A. Just following her. A. I saw him follow her e'J as we were going out. time she went out of the door. Q. You heard it and the others heard it? A. Q, You have stated one occasion when i Yes ; I suppose they heard it. saw him follow her from your room into a Q. They were where they could have heard weaving room, now state another ? A. I to j it? A. Yes. she went down into the weaving room on b Q. When did you first notice that? A. In occasion, but as a general thing I don’t ki a the faU of 1869. where she went, out on the landing I suppo Q. Was she married then? A. No, sir. Q. State any other place or occasion ? A i Q. How long was that before she was mar¬ score or more times on the landing. One tu ried? A. Months. they were talking together outside on the to J Q. How long? A. I could not say. the stairs. Q. Can you fix the time of the year? A. It Q. The hallway, top of which stairs? I would be in 1870 when she was married. The third flight. Q. Can you fix the time of year when you Q. You saw them go out of the room wli first noticed her remaining at the request of they worked, she first and he following anil Mr. Watson? A. November, 1869. the landing of the stairs, and they ta lkedn Q. State just what he said to her. A. I have gether? A. Yes. stated. He asked her if she would stop and Q. Is that all about that ? A. Not exactl; get some nets at one time, and at another time Q. What else ? A. I have seen him with i he asked her to finish some nets. arm around her neck kissing her. Q. She was then working at nets? A. Yes. Q. How many times? A. Once. Q. Before you left ? A. Yes. Q. What was she doing? A. Letting I Q. Did you see anything more of them ? A. kiss her. No. Q. She did not make any resistance ? | Q. And that’s the occasion where, you said in did not see her. your direct examination, he made excuses like Q. When was that first particular occasai that; that is, what you call excuses ? A. Yes, of A. In November, 1869. course. Q. What time of the day was it ? A. >< Q. You don’t know what occurred there ? A. tween two and three in the afternoon. I do not Q. Did you come out suddenly on them ? A Q. How far apart were these occasions these I opened the door and looked out three or four times? A. Within a week, or per¬ Q. Anybody could open the door and ol haps two or three weeks. out? A. Yes. Q. Do you remember any instance of his ask¬ Q. What then ? A. Then I went in agai ing anybody else to stop ? A. No ; there were Q. Did they make any movement to incUt but two others there at that time. they saw you ? A. No. Q. You say he followed her everywhere; Q. Was anj-thing done by which you cili when was this following? A. It commenced tell whether they did see you ? A. I am ce di about October, 1869. they did not see me. Q. When did it terminate—if at all? A. I Q. How long did you look? A. I jusm guess it never did terminate. my head out and drew it in again; might i* Q. How long did you see it continue? A. been out half a minute. Every time she came in the shop. Q. Did you notice whether she was ki n| Q. How long did you stay there ? A. I was him ? A. No. working there steadily. Q. Where was he kissing her? A. OrJ» Q. Down to what period ? A. For two years face. anyhow. Q. What part of the face? A. KissingM Q. From the fall of ’69, for two years you say face; it might be on the cheek, might beoJUl you saw him following her everywhere? A. mouth, might be on the nose. No, I did not say for two years, I did all the Q. Well, he could not kiss all over her ftp• time she was there. one. time unless his mouth was larger tl) i Q. I ask you again, from what time to what think it was ? A. He put his mouth dowiflu time did you notice him follow her everywhere, that, (illustrating!. 47 The side of her face ? A. Yes. the 1st of October, 1868. I worked there until i Which arm did he have around her ? . A. the latter end of July, 1869, the first time. !.e left arm. Q. Was Fanny Hyde working there at that }. Both standing up ? A. Both standing. time ? A. She came to work there about three J. How large a man is Mr. Watson? A. 5 months after I went there. That would bring it 9. it about January, 1869. J. You have stated two occasions—state an- Q. Did you notice Mr. Watson’s conduct to¬ :ier occasion when you saw him following her ward Fanny? A. Not at first I did not; but I m place to place ? A. I could not tell where, sometime afterwards I did. lave seen them going out. Q. State what attracted your attention. A. j. Witness, answer my question. State I always used to think— uether or not you can or not tell another par- The COURT. — State what you saw; not your ; liar occasion of his following her. A. I have thoughts. A. I could not hear, but I saw him in him go out day after day several times ; I speaking to her frequently and the other girls : inot state any more. with a smile on his countenance and all that. i- Can you specify any particular occasion ? Q. Did you ever speak to Mr. Watson about • No. his conduct toward Fanny and the girls ? A. J. Did you ever see him follow her any- The second time I worked there I did, but not 1 ere else except from one work room to an- the first. )er, or out on the stairway? A. No, I don’t Q. You left and then returned? A. Yes. [>w as I did. Q. And when was it that you returned ? A. In ’71 January. Re-direct. Q. What did you notice as to his conduct (. You have seen him follow her out and did after you returned ? A. I noticed that he al¬ 1 know where they went ? A. I did not know ways paid particular attention to Fanny. i;re they were going to. Q. State, as near as you can, what the atten¬ ). You say she was not working in March, tions were. A. It affected me so much-. ■ I ? do you recollect her going to Washington The COURT. - What did you see ? A. I saw uer mother-in-laws to be attended medically? him pay particular attention to Fanny. il know she could go there, but could not Q. Specify what you mean ? A. Speaking to s what time it was. them over their shoulders, tapping them on the 1. Her husband went up to New Britain also ? shoulders, looking them in the face and laugh¬ i Yes. ing, &c. |, He went up there before she went up ? A. Q. You say you spoke to him about it ? A. n not certain, I believe he did. Yes. . The machinery that is used in that building Q. Did you go to him ? A. Yes. 3 :es a good deal of noise in its operation ? A. Q. And spoke to him with reference to his familiarity with the girl ? . So that you can’t hear conversation in the Objected to. :a? A. You have got to be very close to- Q. Was that the subject of which you spoke? f er if you would do it. The COURT.—I am inclined to think you You could not hear them converse in the have the fact. His attention to these girls at¬ !? A. No. tracted the attention of the witness. Mr. Wat¬ What time of day was this that you saw son being dead, I do not know as you want to go i in with his arm around her neck ? A. Be- any further into this particular branch of the, ' n two and three o’clock in the afternoon. case. Mr. MORRIS.—I believe your Honor has in¬ Re-cross. timated that it was proper to ask what Mr. Do you know she went to her mother- Watson said in reply. 1 w for medical aid? A. I don't know what The COURT.—If I have ruled it in, I will ] vent for. adhere to that ruling. I should have to limit you to any remarks in connection with the accused. Q. State all that you can recollect upon that subject; all the acts of Mr. Watson toward the Alexandre Amos—Sworn. accused—acts of familiarity. A. I went up to Mr. Watson and told him-. ' Where do you live ? A. 37 Reade Street, Objected to. ( York. Q. They won’t allow you to tell what you said 1 Business? A. Lace Maker. to him or he said to you. State what his acts 1 Do you know the accused here, Fanny were toward the girl; state all the particulars. i)? A. Yes. A. I have seen him tap them over the shoulders I How long have you known her? A. A and look them into the face when he ought to tf over four years. be paying attention to the work. He was super¬ 1 Where did you first become acquainted intendent of the winding. i her ? A. At her father’s house. Q. Did you ever see him follow her to any 1 Did you know Mr. Watson? A. Yes. place ? A. I didn’t see him follow her. I have 1 Did you ever work in that factory? A. seen him, when he was coming up stairs, turn to the left when there were two or three girls. • When was that? A. I commenced to work Mr. BRITTON.—I ask that this witness be 48 instructed to confine his answers to transactions the most of the time she was with you ? between the defendant and deceased. Yres, the greater part of the time ; perhi Mr. MOEBIS.—With reference to Mrs. Hyde twelve months. particularly. Q. Mostly in company with your daughte ' A. There was more than Mrs. Hyde there at A. Yes. the time I spoke of. I have seen him turn to Q. Do you know of her attending any selio ', the left instead of going to the right into the A. She attended night-school in Moore Str. shop. at the time she worked with me. Q. Do you know a girl by the name of Jack- Cross-examined. son ? A. I do. Q. Did she work there at the time you Q. She was a smart girl, too ? A. Yes. worked there ? A. I believe she did. Q. Smarter than girls usually of her &<' Q. Do you know about how old she was ? A. A. She was the smartest girl. I often mi ■ I could not tell one way or the other ; I knew the remark to girls now that she was the smt l them all. est girl I ever had in my work-room. Q. Do you remember the time Fanny went Q. Yery intelligent? A. Yes. to Washington ? A. I do not. Q. Superior to most girls, and to all gi Q. Do you recollect the time she went to New you know of her age in that respect? A. t Britain ? A. I heard she was gone. our work-room. Q. Do you know when her husband went up Q. How old was she then ? A. When it there. A. Only by hearsay. left me she was pretty nearly fourteen; so ; j Q. You were not working at that time ? A. would be some where near about twelve. 1 No, sir. think I heard her say she was fourteen bef; A’o cross-examination. she left me in 1867. Q. Do you know where she went when > The Court here adjourned until the next left your place ? A. I don’t know unless *, morning at 10 o’clock, having instructed the came along here. I think she lived out a li: jurors not to converse upon the subject among while. each other or with any one else. Q. What circumstance led to her leav; you ? A. I had a young girl six or seven yes, -«♦»-.- the youngest, and they kind of disagreed. was a little, pettish thing, so Fanny complaii 1 THIRD DAY. to me. I think her father thought the child i took advantage of Fanny. She complaii 1 again about the little child teasing her. I sa1, Sarah Marr—Sworn. “Fanny, if you cannot get along, you may ]t Q. Where do you reside ? A. 203 Astor. on your things and go.” So she went, but u Q. You are the wife of John Marr, examined came there often after that. yesterday? A. Yes. Q. The circumstance you have stated resul 1 Q. Are you acquainted with Fanny Hyde ? in her leaving you ? A. Yes, sir. A. Yes. R-direct. Q. When did you become acquainted with Q. After that she was in the habit of visit ? her ? A. About 1865 ; she came to work with me for Mr. Marr. your house? A. Yes. Q. When you spoke of her being smart, ja Q. How long did she continue there? A. Up have reference to her being handy at her wo:? to January, 1867. That was in the work room. A. Yes. Her name was then Fanny Windley. Re-coss. Q. At what business? A. Making hair nets. Q. Was she in the habit of visiting your Q. Didn’t you likewise have reference to r daughters? A. Yes. general smartness ? A. Yes. Q. At your house? A. Yes. Q. The general mental smartness as wells Q. She was under your supervision? A. physical smartness ? A. Yes. Yes. Q. You ,said she was the smartest girl u Q. State whether she conducted herself prop¬ ever knew ? A. Yes, in our work-room. erly or not. A. She was an excellent girl; was Q. She was smart in general mental peci- a good girl in the work-room, and her conduct, arities as any girl of her age you ever had the ? too, was very good. She was an agreeable and A. Yes, a smart, good girl. very nice girl; as good a girl as I would wish to have. I never had any trouble with her. She used to attend the Sabbath school with one of my daughters, and generally brought her Edward Weaving—Sworn. home. Sometimes, of a work-day, when the work was over, she would come and play with Q. Where do you live? A. 562 Mye the children, so that I saw a great deal of her. Avenue. In fact, she was with me more than 6he was at Q. What is your business ? A. Mason. her own home at one time. A. Did you know George W. Watson. AI Q. What Sabbath school did she attend with did. your daughters? A. The Methodist Church in Q. Did you know Fanny Hyde ? A. I did Hudson street. Q. Did you ever see Mr. Watson going i Q. Did she attend the Sabbath school during her house ? A. J did. 49 On more than one occasion ? A. Yes. Q. Never said anything to him about it ? A. When as near as yon can recollect? A. I did not. I first time I ever took notice of it was the e he lived in Kent Avenue, about the middle st January. I noticed him again the time u were living in Wythe Avenue, i What time of day? A. The first time I Isaac P. Maples—Sworn. ic particular notice of it -was about ten C3k in the morning. Q. Where do you reside ? A. 12 Wythe ( In Kent Avenue did anything occur that avenue. :t uted your attention before you went in the Q. What is your business ? A. Engineer. 313? A. No, sir; in Wythe Avenue there Q, Were you acquainted with Mr. Watson i4 and Fanny Hyde? A. Yes. ( State what it was ? A. I went in there Q. Did you ever see Mr. Watson and Fanny jt Sunday to see Mr. Hyde. On entering the at the factory, comer of South Eleventh and x I heard some noise inside, but didn’t First street? A. Yes. ar what it was. Q. State the occasion ? A. I have seen them C Was it loud talking ? A. Yes, ’twas loud there a great many times II ig, but I couldn’t understand the language, Q. Did you ever see them alone together in a n atering the room Mr. Watson and Fanny room? A. No, sir. yi were sitting together. Mr. Watson had Q. Did you ever see them coming alone out s and on Fanny’s shoulder, and after I of a room. A. Yes. ifiid he moved a little one side and began Q. State the circumstances ? A. A year ago Ik g to me. That is all that occurred at that last 4th of July week, I think it was Thursday nr the 7th, one of the three days that we were QHow often have you seen him go to her lying still—repairing engine and boiler ; I had u ? A. I have noticed it in particular got through my engine work and went up stairs re or four times. to fit a key to a lock of a door, about four or five feet from their door ? while fitting the key Cross-examined. Fanny came out; I heard her unlock the door, Q What kind of a room was this where you and he came out right behind her. v iem together ? A. A small kitchen. Q. The door was locked ? A. I heard the bolt (JWho lived at that house ? A. Fanny slide when she took hold of the key, and heard .'•(l and her husband. her take hold of the knob after turning the key. Q.Iid they keep house there ? A. Yes. Q. Were there any other persons in the room? Q.Chis was after they were married? A. A. No, sir. es. Q. How long were you there before they Q. lid you see her husband when you was came out ? A. It might have been ten minutes t'mn that occasion? A. No. sir; he didn’t before they came out ; it might have been n until a few minutes afterwards. longer. Q- le came in while you were there ? A. Q. You didn’t see them go in ? A. No, sir ; ss. I didn’t know anybody was in the room. 4 low long after you entered the room did 1 ci e in ? A. I suppose it was ten minutes Cross-examined. sc He promised to meet me there, and he Q. Did you go into the room out of which s : t hardly on time. they come ? A. Yes. Q- ’id he come in that room ? A. He did. Q. When ? A. Bight away, after they came I Then you entered the room what part of out; they left the door open and went down W3 they sitting? A. On the left as I stairs. nt l. Q. What time of day was it ? A. Afternoon, Q- nwhat? A. On two chairs. sometime. -■ ow near were the chairs together? A. Q. When was it ? A. Fourth of July week, fc'h lose together. a year ago, either Tuesday, Wednesday, or I ith his hand where ? A. Lying on her Thursday. ul r in a careless way. Q. Was that before or after she was married? au didn’t hear any conversation before A. That I cannot say. ’■a( ddressed to you ? A. No, sir. Mr. MORRIS.—She was married two years I ow did they act when you Went in there ? ago this coming May. jat as their manner ? A. Both Mr. Watson Q. Was anything unusual in their appearance ? I r my blushed up when I went in. A. She blushed some and he colored a little. <■ ld they both move? A. Watson moved Q. Was anything said by either of them ? A. ■ Fanny sat still. He moved up a little They were talking to themselves, I did not pay setoward the window where I was sitting, any attention. v as you pretty well acquainted with Mr. Q. Nothing said to you ? A. No. de A. I was. Q. Was the factory running then ? A. No. >w long had you been acqainted ? A. I Q. Nobody there then ? A. Only in the ox must have been close on five years. lower part, men repairing and putting up shaft¬ was a friend of yours ? A. Yes. ing ? .' d you say anything to Mr. Hyde on Q. Was there any one else about the building 5 si iect ? A. I did not. but you ? A. Yes, a number down stairs. 50 Q. Have you any knowledge whether there Cross-examined. were persons on the upper floors ? A. I am Q. How long altogether did Mrs. HydCve very positive there were not on the top floors. with you in the same building ? A 1 ea Q. On any of the floors except the lower floor? months. A. I think in the weaving shop, some one might Q. Where you occupying the same aparti it have been working there ; I know there was no with her ? A. She had four separate r one on the top floors. from me. Q. Which floor was this where you was fitting Q. You didn’t keep house together? A,’o, the key ? A. Top floor ; three flights up. sir. Q. When you went into the room, what did Q. You occupied one set of apartment nc you observe there ? A. Nothing unusual. she the other? A. Yes. Q. Was there any furniture? A. Machinery, Q. Which part of the premises did she oc .py net looms, work table, and chairs. and which did you occupy ? A. She occ ied Q. Is that all. A. Yes. four rooms in front, and I occupied two r ms Q. All the furniture which appertained to the in the extension and rooms up stairs. workroom? A. Yes. Q. What sized house was that ? A. Tw> ad Q. And that only? A. Yes. a half story. Q. She kept house there with her husl .d ? A. Yes. Q. During that seven months, do you on where she worked ? A. She worked ii the house, but I understood she worked ii the factory, she told me that herself. Mrs. Kate Lown—Sworn. Q. Watson’s factory ? A. Yes. Q. Where do you reside ? A. 323 Kent avenue. Q. Do you know where her husband w at Q. You know Fanny Hyde? A. Yes. work at that time ? A. At Mr. Appleton' art Q. How long since you became acquainted of the time, and part of the time in the ry. with her ? A. About eighteen months. Q. How many times could you be able Ra¬ Q. Did she and her husband board with you ? tify that Mr. Watson came there durin the A. They lived at my house, and when Mrs. seven months. A. Well, I would be will ; to Hyde went to Washington, Mr. Hyde boarded say a half a dozen times. with me a few days, while she was away. That Q. Did you take any particular notice iow was in March, 1871. long he staid on these occasions ? A. I dtiot Q. How long was Mrs. Hyde at your house ? Q. How many times was Mr. Hyde the on A. Seven months. these occasions? A. Well, Mr. Hyde was fient at his work when Mr. Watson came durii the Q. She left about March to go to Washington? A. About that time, but I don’t remember the day. In the evening he was always at hoi. date. Q. Did Mr. Watson come as frequently the Q. Were you acquainted with George W. evening as in the day time? A. I think hlid. Watson ? A. Yes ; I knew him by sight. Q. Didn’t he come more frequently i the Q. Was he in the habit of coming to the evening, when Mr. Hyde was there, than hen house ? A. Yes. not? A. No, sir ; I don’t think he did ; lout Q. To see Mrs. Hyde? A. Yes. equally. Q. Frequently ? A. I should call it frequently. Q. Did you ever see Watson and Hy< to¬ gether much ? A. No, sir. Q. " hat time of day would he usually come ? A. Well, I could not just now say, sometimes Q. Do you know of your own knoydge in the morning and sometimes in the afternoon. whether or not the relations between Mr. yde Q. Would that be in the absence of her hus¬ and Mr. Watson were friendly or unfridly. band? A. Yes ; and then in the evening some¬ A. Friendly. times when her husband was at home. Q. How long would he usually stay ? A. I could not exactly say how long. THE COURT.—Give jrour opinion. A. Well, perhaps he staid an hour ; perhaps Sarah Webb—Sworn. longer and perhaps shorter. Q. When she returned from Washington did Q. Where do you reside ? A. 139 sson she return to the house ? A. Yes. avenue. Q. How long did she remain there then ? A. Q. Did you know Mr. Watson by sigh A. A few weeks. No, sir. Q. She went to New Britain after she returned ? Q, Did you ever see a person who it wi said A. As far as that is concerned I cannot say. carried on the manufactory' of hair-nets, the Q. How long was she absent at Washington ? comer of First and South Eleventh street' A. A. J think she went to be gone two weeks; No, sir ; I never saw him fully in the fac whether she staid that length of time, I cannot Q. Did you see him enough to be able say say. whether that, was the man ’'—(showing >oto- Q. Have you ever heard Fanny speak of graph.) A. I could not tell. Mr. W’atson, as to who he was? A. Yes. Q, She never boarded in your house a hie! Q. State who she represented him to be ? A. No, sir ; she had apartments in our bsa Objected to and withdrawn. Q. When was that? A. It must havbeec 51 0 The COURT.—Refreshments? A. Cake— From the 1st of December, 1868—Dec ih things like that. or November, I am not positive which-ntn Q. Did you notice his conduct toward Fanny? the 1st of September, 1869. A. No more than they were friendly. Q. Did you know for whom she was n di the nets ? A. I did not positively. Cross-examined. Q. Do you know where she took the ne sb Q. How often were those refreshments brought made ? A. I am not positive. in while you were there ? A. I cannot say ; Q. Do you know whether or not her the: may be once a week or may be once in two was in that business ? A. He was not tl i ii weeks. business for himself. I think he was emj yea Q. What time of day was it ordinarily ? A. in that trade. It was generally in the afternoon or before din¬ Q. That is his business ? A. Yes. ner. Q. Brought in by way of lunch ? A. Yes. Q. And all the girls and parties in the factory partook of it ? A. Yes ; whoever happened to be in the room. Thomas Whittaker—Sworn. _ A. I live at 502 Flushing avenue; era knew Mr. Watson ; saw him about half anom after he was shot, but he was laid out on me- Arthur M. Thomas—Sworn. thing up in one of the rooms, on a stretcl: a a bench, or something up from the floor. A. I live a t 63 Tyler street, Williamsburgh ; Q. Did you see any abrasions of the hi business is foreman of a paper factory. I know A. Yes ; there were some marks as if the. hat Fanny Hyde. She was employed in that insti¬ been a scuffle or a fight. I did not knor her tution. In January, 1869, I resided in Flush¬ he was shot. I said, ‘ ‘ Where does the .(* < ing avenue and she resided in the same house. come from ? Of course that could not 11 : Q. She went to her work and returned in man.” company with you ? A. The greater portion Q. What in your judgment was it? of the time. Objected to. Q. How long did she work there ? A. About Q. Where else did you notice any abrioni six weeks, of the face ? A. I didn’t notice anythin bn Q. You lived in the house with her about scratches on his head. how long ? A. Altogether about one year. (Witness indicating from the centre ■ tin Q. From what you saw and observed of her forehead toward each side.) what was her conduct ? Objected to, unless knowing the view with Cross-examined. which the question is asked. Q. Did you see any other marks on h fee Mr. MORRIS.—On the question of charac¬ than those you have described on his fortad ter. A. Not to my knowledge. Mr. BRITTON.—Then I don’t object. Q. Were there any marks on his cheek A Mr. MORRIS.—We open the door. I didn’t notice any. Mr. BRITTON.—All right ; we’ll walk in. Q. How much did you examine his ft? oi Mr. MORRIS.—We’ll open it wide. Now that occasion ? A. I didn’t examine any inc what was her conduct? A. Very good. only I saw scratches. Q. You had occasion, when she didn’t work (Witness indicating as before scratch; a in your house, to see her frequently ? A. Very the forehead.) frequently. Q. How much did you examine his face'the Q. Did she used to come to your apartments ? than his forehead ? A. I didn't examintinj A. She visited my apartments continually. thing other than looking in his face and ein Q. Had you a family ? A. I had. the scratches on his forehead. Q. Had you children ? A. Two—small ones. Q. Do you swear the marks ran acrq hi Q. What was her conduct so far as they were forehead ? A. They came across this way concerned ? A. She was very fond of the chil¬ (Witness indicating with his finger mil dren, and they were exceedingly fond of her. scratches from the centre to the sides hi Q. What was her habit as to being home forehead) nights ? A. She was usually employed making Q. Commenced in the centre and ran • th nets. sides. A. Yes. Q. State whether she was at home or out ? Q. Describe the marks? A. Like a sate, A. She was at home. I knew of very few even¬ of the nails. ings she was out during the time I knew her. Q. Was there more than one mark oimc Q. With whom would she be out then ? A. side of the forehead? A. Yes, a good msV- Usually accompanied with her sister. Q. How many? A. I cannot tell; I d nc Q. When did you remove from the house you count them. occupied ? A. In February, 1870. She removed Q. More than five? A. I can’t tell; di previous to that in September, 1869. not count them. . Q. Were there more than seven ? A. I on Cross-examined. suppose there was. Q. Be kind enough to state between the Q. Do you know ? A. I am sure the: ws dates she lived in the same house with you ? A. not that many. 53 >low do you know there wasn’t? A. I Q. Can you describe it any more fully than hink there were. you have ? A. I guess not. \Jo you know that there were not more Q. Did you see her after she passed and went o seven ? A. I don’t believe there was in again until after Mr. Watson was shot? A. ! No, sir. i.)o you know? A. I don’t know any- Cross-Examined. i ibout it; I don’t believe there was. iJid you see any marks on the forehead Q. If I understand you right, you just opened ; 'ere downward or upward ? A. They the door and let her in ; she passed along and e ind of crosswise. and went into this place you have described ? li ition repeated. A. Yes. .. said crossways on the forehead. Q. She did not stop at all ? A. She only stopped while I opened the door. 1. )o you swear you saw the skin broken on 1 ehead at all ? A. Yes. Q. She was at the door when you opened it ? yhat is your business ? A. I keep a A. Yes. y 7 store. Q. Then, as you opened it, she started there ;. low did you happen to go there on that and did not stop ? A. No. is n ? A. The same as other people. They Q. When did it first occur to you that there ic a and collared me, and I went to see the was any thing peculiar that attracted your atten¬ ie; other people. tion ? A. It occurred to me at the time- -right !• [ad you any particular business there ? away. It looked as though she had been crying, N I went as a casual observer there. or something of that kind. Q. Did she look as though she was distressed ? A. I could not tell what was the matter with her. Q. Her face, generally is pleasant and mild ? A. Yes. Henry Potts—Sioorn. Q. She did not generally have red eyes ? A. No. ■ eside in Division Avenue; business is h'eaver; was to work in this factory on Q. You never saw any of these indications casion; have known Fanny Hyde two while yon were there, before this particular i rnlf years; became acquainted with her occasion? A. No, sir. h'actory; was in the habit of seeing her Q. She was generally cheerful? A. Yes. iii'ltly; was in the factory the morning on Q. Good-natured ? A. Well I had never sl'ifr. Watson was shot; saw Fanny that much to say to her. a ’ between ten and eleven; saw her at Q. In appearance she was lively, cheerful and d< • of the plush room on the second floor. good-natured? A. Yes. hat was she doing at the door? A. I Q. Nothing to indicate down to that time that a the bench when I heard a knocking at she was not entirely happy? A. Well I don’t di r. I went and opened it, and it was know that I can remember. ni iyde. Q. You don’t remember any appearance of hat did she do ? A. I let her in. that kind? A. No. ■ . d she say anything ? A. No, sir. Q. Nothing distinguished her appearance lere did she go? A. She went to the from anybody else—in other words, it was r- iset. natural until that time perfectly ? A. Yes. I w long did she remain there? A. I d t say. II you wait at the stove at any time ? v ted at the stove some time. She didn’t 5 t as soon as I expected, and I went Mary Gleason—Sworn. ti pork. Q. Where do you reside ; A. 126 South 4th ^ s there anything in her appearance street; I know Fanny Hyde ; she is not related at ,cted your attention when you went to to me in any way ; have been acquainted with do and saw her there? A. There was her a year and a half; am on friendly terms. tl g singular about her appearance. Q. Were you at work in this factory on the I cribe it? A. I could hardly describe morning this homicide took place? A. I did nl that there was something the matter not work in the factory ; I took work out, but I hi that is all I could tell. was there that morning in my father’s room, I cribe her eyes ? A. Her eyes were that was on the second floor, on the right. ni wollen, and her complexion was darker Q. Who was in that room ? A. I could not 'MI say, two or three girls, I do not know who they y it sort of expression did she have ? A. were. : 11 iow that. Q. What room was Fanny working at the B / did she appear; what did her face indi- time ? A. Mr. Dexter’s, I believe ; I am not I had very little time to take any ap- certain. ,ut because she passed me as soon as I Q. Was Fanny’s step-mother in the room ? 8(1 e door; I looked her in the face, and A. She was. 0® >ack was soon on me. Q. Did you see Fanny that morning? A. I D she have her usual appearance. A. No, did, between eleven and twelve o’clock. She ts&fl came in the room where I was. 54 Q. What did she do when she came in the Q. Did you at all until after the killin room? A. She came in and spoke to her No, sir. mother. Q. Never mentioned it to anybody uu' at Q. Did you hear what she said ? A. No, sir, the killing? A. No, sir. I did not. Q. Is it not a fact that this idea sugge d Q. Where were you sitting, how near ? A. self to your mind after you had found tl ] About five feet. Watson had been killed, and that Fann® Q. Did she speak to you ? A. No, sir. had been charged with killing him? . Y Q. Was that her usual custom? A. No, sir. sir. Q. Did you notice anything in her appear¬ Q. Was not that the time that it first om ance on that occasion, how did she look ? A. to’’ your mind that there was something m Very wild and very much excited. about Mrs. Hyde that morning? A. Ned* Q. What did she do after she spoke to her Q, After this killing the impressic 1 mother ? A. She turned and went out. greater on your mind? A. Yes. Q. Was she facing you when she came in ? Q. Have you talked about it since?A A. Yes, she was. number of times. Q. Can you describe her expression more Q. As you talked about it the imj Bsi fully ? A. I don’t know as I can, only she did grew stronger in your mind ? A. I don ii not look natural. it has. Q. Do you think that if you had n II out of her mind, but I knew it was not Q. Did you see Fanny that morning? A. Yes. Q. Did you observe anything in her actions That she was not in her right mind ? A. that attracted your attention? A. Yes. • t she was. Q. State the first it was? A. I went and /hat do you mean by saying in her right spoke to her up against the stove. ] A. She seemed to be excited, and not Q. Was she standing or sitting ? A. Sitting. 1, Q. What was she doing there? A. She ras it an impression on your mind that seemed as though she was in a deep study. 1 not her faculties ? A. I do not know Q. What time of the morning was it ? '8. A. As near as I can guess, I believe it was ’hat she hadn’t her senses ? A. She about eleven o’clock. ’ et as if she had. Q. You spoke to her, what did you say? A. as that the impression that your mind I remarked “ what an old dress she had on.” i hat time ? A. I cannot say for certain. Q. What reply did she make? A. She said hat was the impression on your mind it was good enough for her. rime—that she did not know what she Q. What else? A. She said she wished she dng? A. I could not say. was dead. m you say that it was or was not? A. Q. Did you notice her face ? A. Yes. 31 Q. What was her expression or appearance ? ien you don’t mean to say either way A. She had a wild appearance. t >ur impression was on that subject ? A. Q. As to color ? A. Quite pale. u not like to say, I could not. Q. How long was she seated at the stove as it not a fact that it did not occur to you you describe? A. May be fifteen minutes, as a ime that Mrs. Hyde did not know what near as I can guess. vi doing? A. No, sir I don’t think it did. Q. Did she use the words as you have given iu don’t think that it occurred to you ? —“I wish I was dead ”—or were they preceded ft sir. by an exclamation ? A. She said she wished d it occur to you at any time from the she was dead, and I asked her what for; she s i came in at the door and spoke to her said, “a good many things !” le until she went out that she did not Q. Was this on the second or third floor? A. v aat she was about ? A. I think it did. The third floor. d you stood within five feet of her Q. Was anything the matter with the closets le md never spoke to her mother about it! on the third floor ; were they out of order that d not. morning ? A. I’m sure I cannot tell; I don’t 1 at she did not know what she was believe I went in that morning. it hat she was crazy in other words ? A. I Q. Do you know whether the plumbers were III say she was crazy. in there that morning ? A. I couldn’t tell. 'iat do you mean by saying that she Q. Where did she go after she left the stove ? t now what she was about, was she— A. £ think she went to her work again at the n ited.) A. No, sir, she might have table. Q. What time of the morning was this ? , 11 don’t think she was. A. About eleven o’clock, as near as I can guess. 1 what way did that impress you that she Q. You were there when she left the room ? 10 mow what she was about? A. Nothing A. Yes. ■ t n her actions. Q. What time was that, as near as you can A at actions indicated that she did not recollect? A. About a quarter to twelve. v ' at she was about ? A. She came in so Q. Do you recollect when she went to work fit y. for Watson ? A. Yes. I iv singularly ? A. I can’t express it. Q. What was her condition as to health at A at actions did you see which led you that time ? A. Very good, as far as I see. di ; that she didn’t know what she was Q. Do you know how old she was when she it? 4. Nothing more than coming in and went to work for Watson? A. I believe she g Id. was about fifteen. C you define what her actions were ? A. Q. What was her physical appearance at the mji time the shooting as compared to what it was T n, impressed as your mind was, on when she went to work for Watson ? A. A great o< sion, on the spot, that she did not deal of difference. < v it she was about, you never spoke to Q. State in what respect ? A. She is not so ■lo ;r on that subject, you didn’t ask her stout as she was by a long way. ier hat she said to her ? A. No, sir. Q. Did you notice after she went to work for Y never interested youself about that ? Watson any change in any other respect? A. I fo, r. don’t know whether I did ; she got very care¬ less about her work. Q. How was it with regard to her appear¬ ance ? A. She seemed to be more careless about Mary Dexter—-Sworn. herself. Q. Did you notice anything with regard to Y are an aunt of Fanny Hyde? A. Yes. her disposition ? A. No, I think she was about 0: the morning of the homicide of Wat- the same. yo: was iu this factory' at work ? A. Q. Did you know her grandfather ? A. Yes, I lived in the house with him. 56 Q. How did he come to his death? A. totally collateral issue, sought to be fc< Drowned. the statement of acts of this grandfather Q. What were his actions previous to that ? he was drowned, which came under | A. Some very curious actions. servation of this witness. Now I would b Q- Can you refer to any act particularly ? least, before your Honor decides on < Objected to by Mr. BRITTON, on the ground question, to know how old this witnes that it is totally immaterial and irrelevant. I and to show her capacity. suppose the purpose is to show that there was in¬ The COURT.—Certainly ; bring that c sanity. I submit that we cannot test that ques¬ limiuarily. tion here in that way. He has drawn out some Q. Where did her grandfather die? 1 peculiar action which he is about to describe. ton, England. If he had ever been declared to be insane in any Q. How old were you when you resid* l legal or judicial sense it would be competent. with him. A. Nineteen. It would be competent to prove it, perhaps, by Q. How old were you when he died? V experts, who knew him, and attended to him ; is eight years since he died. I was in thi t but I submit that we cannot try the question try when he died. here whether her grandfather had become insane, Mr. BRITTON.—She swears that k and then try the question of particular acts indi¬ from drowning ; that is hearsay. Do yo i cating an unsound mind. it is competent ? The COURT.—The question is whether mat¬ Mr. MORRIS.—Certainly. ters happening in the family years ago, coming Mr. BRITTON.—Then I move it be s.< down through successive members of the family out. is evidence of anything happening now. If The COURT.—It is competent to pre tradition ascribes the grandfather to be an in¬ death in that way. sane man, the question is whether you can get By JUDGE MORRIS.—From what u that evidence in here. of her grandfather, from his acts and p Mr. BRITTON.—If the question called for ances, what impression was made upo any such thing ; but the witness speaks of her mind as to whether he was in his right 1 c own knowledge as his having died by drowning, not? and the question is, what were his acts before Objection. that. A. I did not think he was. Mr. MORRIS.—We have a right to prove Mr. BRITTON.—I move to strike o, this back to the fourth and fifth generation ; any answer. branch of the family, lineal or collateral. And The COURT.—Suppose Jfidge Morrisi it is no answer that that should be proved by an his question, ‘ ‘ What was the belief in t expert. We can take the opinion of any per¬ ily as to the condition of his mind?” J son. Upon this question I undertake to say object to that ? that there has never been a case tried that Mr. BRITTON.—I do, under this | the evidence on this point has not been gone facts. This man died, according to las into, and the Courts place great stress on that ment, when she was here, several yea: I fact, and in charging juries have called their at¬ she left, tention to this as one of the predisposing WITNESS.—A little over eight years. , causes. Mr. BRITTON.-She had been awa The COURT.—I understand Mr. Britton not there eight years before he died. Now a to object to your showing the state of mind of question was, “What were the. indicalM any of the ancestors or relatives of the prisoner, insanity?” The question offers to pn but that this witness may not be permitted to peculiarities eight years before his death testify to anything in the career of the grand¬ she was there. I urge this objection tl i father. strenuously, as it is totally impassible f t Mr. MORRIS.—I am simply proving the fact any way to meet such testimony as this. 1 that he was insane ; that is one of the issues to the Court to hold the scales of justice . be submitted to the jury. Counsel says we can¬ ruling equally, because there is no possi'i not try that issue. Yes, we can ; that’s one of meeting any error on that subject the issues we are trying here. Mr. MORRIS.—I don’t know, but It The COURT, to Mr. Britton.—Do you object for granted that this prisoner is not to 1 to the state of the mind of the grandfather at because it might not be in the powei the time of his death? prosecution to contradict evidence that v ( Mr. BRITTON.-No, sir. She is to be tried on the facts and evideia Mr. MORRIS.—It is for the jury to draw the evidence is not to be excluded because i inference. in the power of the District Attorney top Mr. BRITTON.—It is the easiest thing in the diet it. I have never heard such an mi world to get up and say, “ there never was a in a case involving life and death not fi case.” and a thing “has not been done;” but evidence is not competent, but that it slji that don’t establish the fact. Now I concede, as excluded because “we have not the pH a matter of law, the pertinence of proof that contradict it.” the ancestors were insane, and if it is followed Mr. BRITTON.—I have not made jc up to acts tending to show that the party him¬ argument or request. self or herself was insane, it will be perfectly Mr. MORRIS.—That is the inference competent, because insanity is supposed to be Honor is urged to exclude this question >i hereditary ; but this is not the point. It is a it is not in the power of the prosecution) 57 it it. That is one of the considerations The COURT.—If it comes down by tradition sed to the Court. The counsel says it is —family history. This is a collateral ques¬ >mpetent to prove the condition of the tion. ather eight years prior to his death. Mr. BRITTON.—If there is any tradition in I if I understand the rule on this question this question I am not able to see it. - is : We have a right to prove a party in- The COURT.—On that ground, that tradi¬ •t any time, and when we have proven tion is testimony, the Court will admit evidence ct, the Law presumes that that condition of this character. ued until you prove it changed ; and if Mr. MORRIS.—State the facts, or some of i ve that he was insane eight years before the facts, on which you base your opinion ? 1 th, the law presumes he continued insane Objected to. the time of his death, until the contrary Q. State the facts upon which you found that i/n. Why, how could we offer proof of opinion or draw that inference ? c y on the part of any member of the fam- Objected to. Admitted. ?he Courts hold that you may prove it in A. I have known him to take laudanum— 1 nch to any extent, and go back as far as poison. p proper. Insanity may exist in the Q. What was the understanding—do you c ther, and may skip a generation, or two know what it was taken for? A. No, sir. rions, and then reappear. But the object Q. What was the understanding in his fam¬ king insanity on the part of the parents ily V f mdparents, is to show it exists in the Objected to and objection overruled. c the prisoner as a predisposing cause, A. I suppose they thought he was going to i rhich all the authorities, medical and poison himself. :i attach great importance. It is simply Q. Do you know of his having any connec¬ fjf a fact, and we are not to follow that tion with a rope ? A. Yes ; I have known him 5 le counsel suggests, and show that in- to take it up stairs to hang himself with. J as continued regularly along until it has Q. Have you ever known him to sleep with a u this person—by no means. We may butcher knife under his pillow ? A. Yes. e existed in any member of the family, Q. Was it not understood in the family that w n we once have proved it to exist, we he was out of his mind ? oven a predisposing cause. As to the Objection to the question as leading. L he jury will give to such testimony is Mr. MORRIS.—That is a proper objection. at question. That will be left to them Q. Do you recollect the time Fanny went to r e instruction of the Court. They can Washington last spring? A. I know she did go h e question and exercise their own judg- to Washington. d common sense, and say the weight Q. Do you recollect the time it was ? A. No, d ild be given to such kind of testimony, sir. q stion is not to the weight of the evi- Q. Do you know why she went to Washing¬ e, it as to its competency. I did not sup- ton—for what purpose ? A. No, sir. t re would be any question upon this Q. Did you see Watson in the room talking ’ ^ Court is in doubt, I can suspend with her that morning ? A. Yes. >n oroduce the authorities after the recess. Q. In what part of the room? A. At the • LITTON.—Of course the Court will table where they were working. Ai nderstand me, whether the counsel Q. What time was that? A. I could not or ot. I have not a word to say—one exactly say what time it was. t< ard gainsaying all his statements so far Q. Was the machinery in operation at that "1 to prove insanity is concerned. All time? A. Yes. m it shall be proved in a legal way. Q. Could you hear any part of the conversa¬ is 1. Now I submit that to ask this wit- tion ? A. No, sir. 88 0 what her opinion is on those acts, Q. The machinery in that room makes a very iei ane or insane, is not competent. It loud noise. J rei tronger evidence in case of a homicide V1' civil procedure. Calling a woman on Cross-examination. w who saw the party eight years ago, irn y asking her a question whether or Q. Were you examined on the coroner’s in¬ 11) opmion this prisoner’s grandfather quest ? A. Yes. e or not at that time, is a question Q. Did you say anything about this remark 3 f |®pl and should not be put. you have testified to here of Mrs. Hyde’s on URT —Suppose they should ask her that day? A. No, sir; I was not asked that. t8 by yellow fever, would that be Q- Were not you asked at the close of your evidence on that day to state any other fact that B TTON.—I think not, if she had not **?! )r eight years. you knew of which had any bearing on this transaction ? A. Yes, may be I was. - JRT. She would be competent to Q. You did not say this? A. No, sir. re ave to marriages, deaths, and What¬ Q. Was it because you thought it had not any 'S: ln family tradition. bearing on the case ? A. I am not sure; I could . TTON.—Would it be competent to not tell; I did not think of it at the time. ness whether her grandfather died of Q. Did you state on that examination that nd !f’ baymgr> tiled eight years ago in . ie being 3,000 miles away ? you saw Mrs. Hyde and Mr. Watson talking together just before this occurrence, as you 58 state now ? A. I could not say whether I did yourself know' anything about its being or not. his head? A. I was not in the house. Q. If you did not, why did not you state that Q. All you know about that is that yoi there ? A. I was kind ol nervous then. I did some one speak of it? A. Yes, I hea not know hardly what I was saying. I was mother say. frightened, and didn’t remember all I ought to Q. Then the next thing is about this have said. you say he took this rope up stairs to has Q. What time did you leave England? A. I self, how do you know that ? A. I was have been here a little over eight years. Q. How do you know ? A. We seen 1 Q. Where did your grandfather live ? A. In Q. Did you see him hang? A. No, Boston. fetched in the neighbors. He took it Q. What part of England? A. I am sure I hook in the kitchen and took it up stairs cannot tell, a good ways from where I live. I Q. What next ? A. We sent for the lived at Nottingham before he went to Boston. bors. Q. How long before you came here? A. Six Q. What next, what did he do ? A months. know; I didn't follow him, Q. Did he have a family? A. Yes, but they Q. Did you see him there, up stairs, w did not live with him. They were all married rope ? A." No, sir. I was too scared to but one. His wife had died two years before I Q. How do you know he took it up came out. , saw' him. Q. Whom was he living with ? A. I don t Q. How far ? A. A long flight of stai know, he was boarding at Nottingham. Q. You don’t know of your own kn< Were you and he boarding at the same place ? anything he did with the rope? No, sir A. No, sir. Q. These are the things from which y Q. When did you live with him? A. Up to dertake to say he was not in his right mi. the time I was married. Yes; a great many people said so. Q. When was that? A. I have been married Q. Was he confined at home after tl over fifteen years. affair, or after this laudanum affair, or i Q, Then you lived with him down to the time was found with a knife under his pillov you was married fifteen years ago? A. He sir: not to my knowledge. kept house a long while after that. He lived Q. He was put under no restriction? . close to us. sir. Q. He lived by himself a long while after that Q, That was six or eight years before t and kept house; were some of his family with A. Yes, some of it. him ? A. Yes. Q. Where was it that you understo; Q. Where did he live at the time he took this grandfather was found on this occasic laudanum ? A. Nottingham. taken up by the policeman ? A. A lit' Q. Did you live with him ? A. Yes. from home. Q. How" long ago was that? A. Just before I Q. How' far from home? A. The ^ was married. place. Q. How long before you was married did he Q. A public place ? A. Yes. J take this laudanum? A. I cannot exactly state, Q. In what condition was he fom? a little before I was married. Leaning up against a wall. _ j Q. Do you look upon laudanum as a sure Q. Do you think every man w'ho is fo # poison? A. Yes, sir. ing up against a wall has taken laudan l' Q. Do you know what quantity he took ? A. I don't know'. Four penorth, (penny-worth). By a JUROK.—This grandfather—vl Q. Did you see him take it? A. No, sir. the father’s side, or on the mothers! Q. Did you ever of your own personal knowl¬ the prisoner ? A. On Fanny s father s 1 edge know' he took it? A. Yes, sir. Q. What was his name ? A. Windl Q. How do you know it ? A. Because he was Q. Mr. BRITTON —When he w<; found by two policemen. from his home to live by himself to B>,* Q. How did you know that this particular ar¬ he go alone ? A. Yes. ticle caused him to be in that condition ? A. Q. After that so far as you know el Because my mother sent to a drug store. alone? A. Yes. vll Q. You don’t know yourself? A. No, sir. Q. He lived there alone after he leM Q. All you know about it is what your don't know. He went there just befo B mother to'ld you? A. Yes, I saw him next to this country. December, eight yearflN morning. Q. When do you understand he on Q. You have no knowledge of what he took Eight years ago next July. excepting hearsay ? A. That’s all. Q. Do you understand he died in Q. All you know' is that he was found in some after he went to Boston? A. No, I d| condition unusual, by policemen, and it was that I did. told you that he had been taking laudanum ? A. Q. How- long do you understand; there. A. I don't know, I am sine. Q. How about this knife under his head ; when did he sleep with this knife under his Re-direct. head ? A. After I was married. Q. Were you there at the time, so that you Q. Do you recollect of any occasi* < 59 watching him to see that he did not injure Q. How old was he at that time ? A. I guess self ? A. Yes, sir. he would be about thirty. Who ? A. My brother-in-law. Q. Then? A. Yes, or a little more. : Was it not well understood in the family Q. Then it was when he was thirty years of many years that he was not in his right age ? A. It was fifteen years ago just about the I? time I am speaking of. [jected to. Q. Did he have grown up children married le COUET.—The form is objectionable. and off at that time? A. He had not grown up children married at that time, fifteen years Re-cross. ago. He had children. £ What was the understanding in the family the condition of his mind? A. They Re-direct. c stood he was not right. Q. Were you acquainted with Mr. Windley? Q Do you know of your own’ knowledge A. No, sir. il mur brother-in-law watched him ? A. I Q. Do you know about what his age was it. when he died? A. That I could not say. It Re-direct. was about fifteen years ago when I knew of QWere these matters talked over by all the those transactions. I have been here some eleven years. n: ? A. Yes. Q. You lived near him a long time? A. Thirty years. I was brought right up by him. Q. Was not he older than what you have stated ? A. He may have been. He was older John Marr—Re-called. than myself considerably. Q. ^ou were acquainted with Mr. Windley’s Re-cross. hi? A. Yes, sir. Q,hr how many years? A. Thirty years, Q. How old were you then? A. At that (juror the last fifteen or twenty years of his time I should be thirty years of age. o \ at was the understanding, if you know, Q. Why did you say he was about thirty, if oi his family and those acquainted with you say he was considerably older than your¬ ai to the condition of his mind ? self? A. I did not form any particular idea )§ cted to. about his age. I could not answer about his Cl COUET—Is this witness a member of age exactly. f lily ? A. I was br rnght up next house Q. What do you state now as your best im¬ hi his father and mother lived next house pression that his age was when he offered to m; ather and mother. We were all brought bite this chair? A. I suppose his age would tc ther. be probably forty. ■?. rom what you have seen and know of Q. You now say he was probably forty ? A. n lat impression was made on your mind I say “probably,” because I could not fix the io lether he was in his right mind or not ? age. The Court here took a recess, after having Re-direct. cautioned the jurors as at other adjournments. Mr. MORRIS.—Did not she use these yah The Court re-assembled. that she 1 ‘ could not help it ?” A. Sha^ have said something, but I could not heajt Q. Where was she when she made tk a mark? A. Just coming out of the room, i Q. This was shortly after it occurred A John Dexter—Sworn. Yes. Q. She was crying? A. Yes. Q. What is your business ? A. Hair net Q. Was any one with her? A No, sir1 I manufacturer. Q. Was she standing? A. Just comi ol Q. Is your place of business at the comer of of the shop I met her. Eleventh and South First Streets, Williams- burgh? A. Yes. Re-cross. Q. Did you see Fanny Hyde on the morning Mr. BRITTON.—You did not hear he mh| of the homicide ? A. Yes. any such remark? A. No, sir; I cou aoj Q. About what time was it? A. Close on positively say. eleven o’clock. , Q. Do you remember hearing her sa any Q. Where did you see her ? A. In the shop. thing of the kind ? A. I don’t know. Q. What part of it ? A. The third floor. Q. Did she say anything more than yc Ds Q. What part of the shop? A. Against the testified to? A. No, I don’t remember. > I stove, standing by the stove. Q. Did she say anything more than )(f Q. Was there anything in her appearance had been the ruination of her and she b sU that attracted your attention ? A. Yes. him ? A. I don’t remember any more. : ] Q. State what it was? A. Well, she looked white and had a wild look in her. I went and mentioned it to my wife. Mr. BRITTON.—I ask the Court to instruct the witness to answer only the questions asked Margaret Hyde—Sworn, t him. Cross-exa mined. Q. Where do you reside ? A. Was’igW city. Q. Were you present at the time the body Q. Fanny's husband is your step-6cl? a was lying at the foot of the stairs ? A. Yes. Yes. Q. Did you see Mrs. Hyde there? A. No, Q. How long have you known Fan) ? A sir. Since November, 1871. I came on to vitf Q. Not at all ? A. No, sir. sons. They were married on the fith t May Q. Did you hear a remark made by her ? A. I was not aware they were married until ig(| No, sir. Q. Personally, how long have you no* Q. Was you examined before the coroner’s Fanny? A. From about the 7th of NoM« jury? A. Yes, sir. a year ago—1870. Q. Was Mr. Watson 'dead when you got Q. You visited her? A. I remaincjAi there? A. His pulse was beating, but there from Thursday, the 7th, until the next Su™| was no signs of life elsewise. week—ten days. Q. Did you hear your wife's testimony before Q. Did you know the deceased, Mr. hts* the coroner’s jury ? A. Yes. A. I did. I was introduced to him on i Q. Did she testify on the subject of any re¬ my son’s house. marks made bv1 Mrs. Hyde at that time? A. Q. You saw him there at the house? Yes. evening, sir. Thursday and Friday, tdir® Mr. BRITTON. — I desire to recall Mrs. he went to Hartford and returned again 61 but I did not see him until Tuesday even- respect peculiar to married women ? A. Not in igain. the way of family. Did Fanny come to Washington last Q. You merely say that her health was gen¬ ng? A. The first of April, a year ago. erally delicate ? A. I can hardly say what I What was her object in visiting Washing- would like to say. Re-direct. ijected to. le COURT. — What is the relevancy of the Q. You refer to an ailment usual to her sex? tion? A. Yes. r. MORRIS.—It relates to her physical con- Re-cross. n. ie COURT.—If that is the point, let the Q. Was anything said by her while she was with 3ss be questioned upon her then condition. you indicating that there was w’rong in her pre¬ 1 What was the condition of her health ? vious conduct? A. No, sir. She only made be was in a very weak condition. Being this remark, that there was a curse hanging i g, she was very delicate about seeing doctors. over her. She says : “I feel that there is a [ Did she visit any physicians in Washing- curse hanging over me,” and that is why Wat¬ ] A. She did ; Dr. Elliott, President of the son wanted to take her to New Britain. »cal Board of Washington. Q. Was anything said which indicated to C Do you know what was the difficulty with your mind that there had been anything wrong r in her conduct previous to that time ? A. No, e jected to. Q. I call for your own knowl- sir. £> A. I don’t know. Q. How long was this after marriage ? A. C, Do you know ? A. I do know. I can’t They were married in May. I did not see the r ularly word it. She was in a delicate girl until November 6th. Then she visited me a tion—a weak state. in April. It was a year, nearly. Her husband Q Do you mean to say you don’t like to ? went away on the 15th. On his return to New i>, sir. York he wrote the letter for her to come imme¬ Q How long did she remain there with you ? diately back. ! e came on the first of April and left on Q. Nearly a year after her marriage ? A. 3 entieth. Yes. Q Do you know how she came to leave so Q. From May to the following April? A. ">i A. I do ; by a letter from her husband. Yes. Q f was in consequence of a letter that she ■e >d ? A. To return to New Britain. Q How did that seem to affect her ? A. Ellen Curley—Sworn for the Defend¬ h< she received the letter she cried bitterly, tsl 1 her the cause. ants. ( Re-called.) Q. Vhen she left Washington was she suffer- Mr. BRITTON.—We called this witness and ? : m this ailment? A. She was. rested. You must examine her in the direct. Q. s Dr. Elliott your family physician ? A. > irjiot. The COURT.—It don’t matter materially, ifhat did you say he was connected with ? probably. Mr. MORRIS. —You say you first saw I is President of the Medical Board of vsl tgton. Fanny at the first flight of stairs or head of the stairs. Is not this your statement before the hide you were visiting your son, did you *r !r. Watson speak of Fanny ? A. I did, coroner on that subject ?— , t ne. “ When I got to where she was found she was i- Tat did he say ? moaning, and she said to me ”- Objected to that. That is no cross-examina¬ It ;ted to the declarations of the deceased. tion. You have no right to ask such a question. }■ here was Fanny ? A. She was around 1 r n about her work in the adjoining room Secondly, he has no right to ask the question at, 3n, they called it. He told me that he in that form. I do not understand you can cd iat girl ; she was passing, cross-examine after a party has rested. fr BRITTON.—Were these declarations Mr. MORRIS.—The counsel has just cross- de her presence ? A. Yes. examined a witness, on which he had cross- examined and rested. i- here she could hear them ? A. Yes; it ulc ie impossible not to unless said in a Mr. BRITTON.—He has no right to ask her isf, that question except in contradiction of some¬ thing previously said. l■ ! did not whisper ? A. No ; he spoke w is you nowr speak. The COURT.—Is it proposed to contradict? *bj ;ion renewed and question withdrawn. Mr. BRITTON.—It is because he don’t pro¬ pose to contradict; that is the reason why he Cross-examination. asks the question. The COURT.—Put the question to her as to 1 len you used the expression that you whether she recollects any expressions of Mrs. th she was in a “ delicate condition,” do Hyde on that occasion. m a in a technical sense ? A. I can hardly Mr. MORRIS.—State what she was doing? res ayself. A. She was kicking the door and wringing her !■ - you refer to any condition in any hands, moaning. 62 Q. What did she say to you ? A. She asked John Windley—Sworn. me to go into the shop and tell the men to come out. Q. Did not you knock at the door ? A. Yes. Q. You are the father of Fanny ? A. Y< Q. She was by the door when you first saw Q. Where was she bom ? A. In Netting m her ? A. Yes. Q. What is her age now ? A. Eighteen at September. The COURT.—Was this moaning and wring¬ ing before or after the shooting ? A. After. Q. How old was she when she came tc Q. State the manner of her w'ringing her country ? A. A little over ten years of agi hands and moaning—was it loud? Could it Q. Did she come out with you or afterwi A. Afterwards. : have been heard at a distance ? A. No, sir ; it was not loud. Q. When did her mother die ; how old she ? A. She was four years old whet Q. Have you now stated all that occurred : mother died. there ? A. Yes. Q. Who came to this country with her i Mr. BRITTON.—Did you hear any body call¬ Her stepmother, brother, and sister. ing up stairs. A. No, sir. Q. Where did you live when you came t im Q. Did you see anybody before you saw her ? country ? A. I was living at Fordhan m.j A. No, sir. went to keep house comer of Yariek and Ink. Q. Where did you first see her ? A. At the lin streets, N. Y. head of the first flight of stairs. Q. Did you say how long you came ’«([ Q. When you went tow'ard the door ? A. Yes. an she did ? A. I left the 6th of Februai Q. Who went to the door first, you or she ? they left the 25th of October following. A. She was standing at the time at the door at Q. Where did she go to work after she the head of the first flight of stairs, kicking. from the old country ? A. To A. P. Bachi Then I knocked at the same door. 103 Franklin street, New York. ; Q. How long was that after she cann Only a few days ; I was working there time myself, on hair nets. Mrs. Sarah Windley—Sworn. Q. Then she was from ten to eleven y< Q. You are the step-mother of Fanny ? A. age ? A. Y’es. Y’es, sir. Q. For whom did she work next ? A. i Q. Do you recollect when she went to work Man, the person who has been examined. for Mr. Watson? A. Yes, sir. Q. Who else did she work for? A] Q. How long did she continue to live home John Slack, Brooklyn ; then there was where she went to work ? A. Just about a other places where she went to nurse an year. baby, and tend a little girl for a week o| Q. What was her physical condition when she didn’t stay long there ; then she w I she went to work for Watson? A. Very good. work for Mr. Thompson, 22 Frankfort Q. During the latter part of the time when New York. she was at home, did you notice any change in Q. How steadily has she been in empl her health, her physical condition ? A. Yes. since’she came to this country7 to the time occurrence ? A. Constantly employed Q. Can you state whether there was, at time. periods, anything unusual in her physical condi¬ Q. Before she came to this country, tion, towards the latter part of the time she was home ? A. There was. schools had she attended ? A. Evening t- Day School, and Sunday School. Q. After she left home, how long was it be¬ Q. How long had she attended Day an fore you saw her again ? A Certainly four or five months. A. My position at Nottingham did no'* me to keep the children regularly at scl) Q. What was her physical condition then? I ought to have done ; I was poor in oc A. A great deal thinner to what she was when stances and as soon as they were old erj she first went to work to Mr. Watson’s. Q. Fallen away in flesh ? A Yes. had to send them to work, as soon ai able to do it. Q. Had she lost her color ? A. Yes. Q, How old was she when she commeji Objected to as leading. work ? A. Eight years of age. The COURT. •— State the indications of Q. She has worked steadily from that a change in her appearance ? this ? A. Yes. Q. Did you notice anything indicating a Q. Did she attend school at New Y'oii change in her health—if so describe it. A. She Y’es ; evening school. was a great deal more delicate looking ; a great Q. Did she receive any recognition f| deal thinner ; had lost a great deal of flesh. conduct ? A. She did. Q. As to color. A. She had no color at all. Q. What ? A. She received two dip! Q. How was her condition when she went to first two years. M atson’s, as to color. A. Much like her sister Q. What Sunday Schools has she at' 1K,w.—(A young lady beside the prisoner, in A. The school in Hudson street and tin court, of about sixteen years of age, and of ru¬ Duane street, New York, and when bicund and healthful appearance.) Q. This sister here ? A. Yes. New York to come to Brooklyn, she the Primitive Methodist School, in in 2fo cross-examination. street. 63 ; How has she been in her attendance in Q. Was it considered by the family that he i;e street? A. Pretty regularly. was not in his right mind ? ; Was she in the habit of going out, except Objected to as to competency, and as leading. cnpany with yourself and family. A. No, The COURT.—The form is objectionable. n no case whatever. Q. What wras the understanding in that ; You were very strict with her, were you respect ? A. That he was not entirely in his : A. Yes, sir. right senses. j Yre not you rather strict with your chil- Q. Where did you remove to when you first s-1 A. Yes, sir ; more strict than I would came to Brooklyn ? A. Flushing Avenue. neon if their own mother bad been alive ; Q. Near what street? A. Between Vander¬ t3 correcting of my children has been done bilt and Clermont. I moved from there between )■ since their mother died Oxford and Portland. J Fanny is your oldest daughter? A. Yes. Q. Do you know where Watson boarded at j Do you recollect the time she went to work that time? A. I do not. r. Watson ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was it not in his house where you lived ? } Do you remember how long she remained A. No, sir. i after that ? A. As near as I can recollect, Q. Do you know whether it was in Williams- p ild be about twelve or thirteen months. burgh or not? A. I believe it was in Williams- 3 How old was she when she went to burgh. r for Watson ? A. It will be a little over Q. Do you know where the primitive Method¬ j<. ist church was in Bridge street? A. Yes. 3 What was her physical condition then ? Q. How far was that from where you lived 1 very good health ; seldom had any sick- in Vanderbilt Avenue ? A. About fifteen min¬ s utes walk. ). luring the latter part of the time she re- Q. How long did you live there ? A. Nearly a .1 home, did you notice any change in two years. t irticular ? A. Yes ; I noticed a material Q. Your daughter resided there with you a e !, both in manners and in health. part of the time? A. Yes, sir, with the excep¬ |. lad she lost flesh ? A. Yes ; I noticed tion of a week or two. Then she went to >e flesh and her health declined at the nurse a baby or something of that kind. le ime. q>. Where did you move to when you left i.'Vhat sort of complexion had she ? A. A Flushing Avenue ? A. Corner of Marcy rtf red complexion when she went to work Avenue and Rodman Street, Williamsburgh. hi. Q. After you moved there did Fanny attend i. 'id you notice anything in regard to per- the Bridge street Methodist Church ? A. Occa¬ a rppearance, otherwise, as to dress, etc. sionally, not regularly. It was a long distance, V11; I noticed she did not exercise that and if it rained I would much rather she stayed i out her dress, and did not seem to be at home than go. i< as she had been previously ; she seemed Q. Do you know where Mr. Watson resided g v more careless ; I remarked it to her at that time when 3you lived there in Marcy nj. Avenue? A. Yes; I believe he lived in Wilson . ow long after she left home before you Street with a person named Roche. 1' again ? A. As near as I can judge, it Q. How.far was that from where you lived? il ie about two and a half months. A. About seven blocks. . 'hat was her condition, then? A. She Q. After Fanny went to work with Mr. a ;red from her former appearance. I saw Watson did you notice any change in her dis¬ r >reat change in her. position? A. Yes; she did not seem to pay . 'hat was your age when you came to this that attention to my requests that she previ¬ a1 ? A. I should be 30 years of age ; I am ously had done in former times. If I requested her to do anything before, she would do it with • ow old were you when you left your a good will which she did not after that time. e: house? A. About 17. Q. Can you state whether or not she became . ere you in the habit of seeing him up more fretful ? A. I cannot state as to her fret¬ ae ime you came to this country. A. Yes, ting. I noticed one thing in particular, she e less ; I lived some distance from there, got considerably more irritable in temper. A u 1 to see him frequently for all that. very little thing would make her excited. • i aw was he regarded by his family and Q. Do you recollect the time she went to f iquainted with him as to the condition Washington? A. Yes. is ind. Q. Did you see her when she returned from r. HUTTON.—I object to that question; Washington ? A. Yes. r - nor has limited it to members of the Q. How soon after ? A. She came right |M home. r- f ORRIS.—Well, then, members of the Q. How long did she remain there before 1} Do you know how he came to his she went to New Britain? A. A very short h, om what you have beard from members time. 'e mily. A. Yes. Q. Do you know how long she remained in 4 w? New Britain ? A. No, sir, I cannot tell; a t>j; ed to—Objection overruled. week or two. • drowned himself. Q. About when did she return from New 64 Britain ? A. It was some few weeks after the her dress for some reason. I began to qu ic last 4th o ' July. her on the subject, and spoke to her very o about it Cross-examined. Q. She left because you and she did not!« Q. You say that Fanny grew paler and A. Not entirely. thinner as she grew older ? A. Yes. Q. What other cause ? A. There was a : o Q. Did you ever ask her any cause for this ? circulated around, and it came to my ears, \ A. No, sir, I did not. intimacy existing between her and Mr. W « Q. Did you ever hear her state to any one I broached the subject to her ; but at th ii any cause for this growing thinner as you have I set it down as a piece of malicious t described? A. No, sir. circulated around by a man I was at va n Q. Had you any reason to know what the with at the time. I did not pay any regl cause was for growing thinner at that time; to it; I took it to be a malicious report bjj any special reason. A. No special reason? but for all that I mentioned the subj I had no reason for supposing what the direct Fanny. I brought it around in a gentl j cause was. of way as I could, without being positive Q. Had you any reason to suppose at that Q. What did you say to her? A. Yl time that Watson had anything to do with it ? don’t know the exact words I made use o: A. No, sir. she got very excited. Q. How long after she left your house was it Q. You in substance asked her if it w m before she got married ? A. About two months. if there was any intimacy between her am» Q. Did you know her husband before they son ? A. I gave her to understand that 11 were married? A. No, sir. this report. Q. Not at all? No, sir. Q. What answer did she make? A. S Q. Where were they married? A. I believe very excited and told me she was old eno they were married in Myrtle avenue. take care of herself. That was abou t Q. You had no knowledge of it ? A. No, months before she got married. sir ; I had no knowledge that she was going to Q. That is all the conversation you ev be married. with her on the subject ? A. Yes. Q. You never had seen him before? A. No, Re-direct. sir. Q. How soon after you understood they were Q. Did you have any conversation witlra married did you see him ? A. I believe'it was son on the subject of that report ? A. I > L two weeks. Q. What did he say ? Q. Where did you see him ? A. He came to Objected to, as Watson’s mouth is clod, my house one Sunday. death. Q. W hen did you learn they were married ? The COURT.—Statements made in pie« A. About two days afterward. of the accused? Q. From either of them ? A. Yes. Q. She was not present when yon sp ( At your house where you were living? Mr. BRITTON.—I object to this form—the 'es, sir. council and Court will understand the delicacy ( During the time of his intimacy with you of the position I occupy, and I rely on the c you had occasion to take medicine. A. honor of counsel not to take advantage of it. j sir. Mr. MORRIS.—I don’t desire to put an im¬ ( Who furnished those? A. Mr. Watson. proper question. ( Did he ever suggest to you to go over to Q. When you returned from Washington you i York to live ? A. Yes, sir. went to New Britain ? A. Yes, sir ; two weeks ( Did he state where ? A. No, sir. after I left. ( Where did you understand he wanted you Q. Your husband was up there at the time ? 1 ? A. Yes, sir. h BEITTON thought it was an improper Q. Did Mr. Watson ever take you to his ic ion. house ? A. Yes, sir. 1’. MOEEIS.—From his manner, did you Q. How far did he five from New Britain ? jose any place? A. Nine miles. le COURT.—It is no supposition, Q. You were there part of the time when be did he want her to go ? A. He didn’t your husband was absent at the house ? A. y xactly. He said nothing more than he Yes, sir. ued me to go to New York and stop there. Q. Who did you sleep with when your hus¬ ( What did you understand by that ? band was away? A. The first night I slept (jected to. with his little daughter, and the other nights 1e COURT.—Lay the foundation by some with his elder daughter. tt statement, to show that she was justified Q About your age ? A. Yes, sir. i'erring what he meant. Q. Was you there on Sunday night? A. Yes, 5. MORRIS.—Did he ever want you to go sir. <7 physician or any place? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was anything said by him to the family C And was that suggestion made because it about going to church ? A. Yes, sir ; he supposed you were in difficulty ? A. Yes, wanted to get his wife to go ; his daughter had gone and his eldest son was out. C Did you go ? A. No, sir. Q. And what did he say about himself—what C You refused ? A. I refused. he would do ? A. He said he and I could take C You recoRect the time you went to Wash- care of the young children and put them to bed gu? A. Yes, sir. when it was time. (, What did you go there for ? A. Medical Q. While you were at New Britain, did you te lance. accuse Mr. Watson, in the presence of your C, You were suffering at that time ? A. Yes, husband, of having seduced you ? A. Yes, sir. Q. State what you said to him and what he QAnd have you, since the intimacy com- said ? A. I could not recoRect exactly what I 3i id, suffered in consequence of difficulties ? said ; I told my husband about it ; he was very :s, sir. angry and said he was going to put him through Q Much or little ? A Much. the law for it, and Watson begged, for the sake Q You were suffering from that cause on the of his wife and children, not to do it. y " this occurrence ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he make any promise then about Q Where did you make the acquaintance of leaving you alone ? A. Yes, sir. u msband ? A. At the homestead. Q. You and your husband left New Britain Q Where you boarded ? A. Yes, sir. at that time ? A. Yes. Q Did Mr. Watson say anything to you on Q. How long after you got back to Brooklyn i ibject of your getting married. A. Yes, was it before Mr. Watson came ? A. I don’t recoRect exactly—may be three or four months Q Was anything said by him as to whether —perhaps two. y got married he would cease his visits ? Q. Did he call to see you after that ? A. Yes, is, sir. sir ; he called to see me before he came from 3 state what he said at the time ? A. He New Britain. d I got married he would let me alone. I Q. After you returned from New Britain, did ;e him if I got married if he would let me he renew his intimacy with you ? A. Yes, sir. n and he promised faithfully he would. Q. In Williamsburgh ? A. Yes. 3 State the manner in which he made the Q. Under what circumstances ? A. He « se ? A. I made him take an oath on the threatened to expose me, and threatened to teR il my father, and tell everybody. 3 )uring this time had you any confidant Q. Was the subject of your relations with ix friend ; any lady friend that you made a him a matter of much thought and reflection if tnt of ? A. No, sir. on your part ? A. Yes, sir ; I was always think¬ 3'four mother was very strict with you, ing about it. 8 e not? A. Yes, sir. Q. State whether or not you were in the 3- end your father also ? A. Yes, sir. habit of frequently weeping upon that subject ? 3- )id Mr. Watson ever threaten to expose The COURT.—Did I hear an objection ? A you did not comply with his wishes ? Q. What effect did it have on your mind ? ^ , sir ; repeatedly. A. I was always thinking about it, and I cried 3- fid not you frequently entreat him to about it continuaEy. V( ou alone and not pursue you ? Mr. MORRIS.—Were you or were you not, 66 * i during this time, anxious to have him cease his Q. The next place you worked for Mr. 4 visits ? A. Yes, sir. son was at New Britain? A. At the facia yes, sir. Cross-examination. Q. Who went to New Britain first; y< jq Q. Did you leave the factory once or twice, Watson? A. Mr. Watson. while you were there, after you commenced to Q. Who went first, you or your hushi U work there ? A. No, sir ; I left working in the A. My husband. shop. Q. How long after Mr. Watson went | Q. Mr. Bachman was proprietor of the place was it that you went? A. Mr. Watson we1 by name'? A. Yes, sir ; it was carried on in March, I believe, and my husband went t Bachman’s name. the middle of April, and I went the latter Q. Didn’t Mr. Bachman, at one time, in the of April or the first part of May. absence of Mr. Watson, discharge you from the Q. How long did you remain ? A. To factor}’ ? A. I left the shop ; I worked home. Q. With whom did you live? A. I bo:j Q. Didn’t he discharge you from work in the with Mr. Woodhouse. shop ? A. He told me that I could work home. Q. All the time ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Wasn’t that at the time Mr. Watson was Q. Did Watson at any time board there ) absent? A. Yes, sir. He did. Q. Didn’t Mr. Watson remain absent some Q. Who commenced first to board at l two or three weeks on that occasion ? A. Yes, Woodhouse’s, you or Mr. Watson? A. I c. sir. Q. Do you know at whose solicitatio. Q. Is it a fact that you had work from that anybody’s, Mr. Watson went to Woodhor shop during these two or three weeks ? A. Yes, A. His own ; I suppose. sir. Q. Do you know anything on that subi Q. Did you work in the factory during that A. No, sir. period? A. No, sir. Q. Don’t you know it to be a fact that I Q. Who did you get the work from ? A. I husband asked Mr. Woodhouse to have i believe it was from Mr. Watson’s father-in-law, son come there ? A. No, sir. Mr. Pixley. Q. How long was it before you went ( Q. After Mr. Bachman had stated that he that Watson came there? A. Two or s did not wish you to work in the shop, you got weeks, or a week. work from Pixley ? A. Yes, sir. Q. While you were at Mr. Woodha Q. Continued to work right along ? A. Yes, place, did you all the time occupy the i sir ; worked home. room ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Isn’t it a fact that you did not get any Q. Where was that room located in: more work until Mr. Watson came back ? A. house ? A. The back ; it was a two-i No, sir ; it is not. house, and you had to go up stairs to the 11 Q. When was this to which you refer in these Q. How many rooms were there then answers ? A. It was before I was married and Three. afterwards too. Q. On that floor? A. Yes. Q. I refer to the particular period when Mr. Q. Who occupied the other two ? A. J Watson was gone two or three weeks—in July, Watson occupied one, and another gentli 1871 ? A. No, sir ; it was the time I left home. and Mr. Wooilhouse’s son the other. Q. Whenever it was—whatever the particular Q. Did the other gentleman and Mr. 7< date, wasn’t there a time when Mr. Bachman house’s son occupy it all the time ? A. Ye! discharged you—that is,[asked you to quit work¬ Q. Sure about that ? A. I won’t be certn ing ; that you didn’t work there any more until Q. What was the other gentleman’s ni Watson came back two or three weeks after¬ A. Stephen Boberts. wards ? A. I had not been to work in the shop Q. Was he a single or a married man k until two or three weeks before this happened, A single man, for anything that I kuo" b since I left New Britain. passed for one. Q. The question is, whether there was a time, Q. Was he there all the time you were A after you left the factory, that you didn’t take Yes, sir. any work irom the factory ? A. No, sir. Q. You have said that you stated to Mr/4 Q. When was the time to which you refer son, or stated in the presence of your bus nd yon left the factory and didn’t come back till that Watson had improper associations id recently ? A. I left when I came from New you ; on that occasion was there any talk i* Britain ? having a couple of men come from New® Q. Was that the time you refer to when Wat¬ and work up there ? A. Not that I know . son was absent ? A. No, sir. Q. Didn’t you ask Mr. Watson to brim p1 Q. The time I ask you was when you left at couple of men from New York to have M Bachman’s suggestion, Watson being absent? work up there in the factory ? A. No, sill A. It was in March. Q. Isn’t this the language you used, o Q. Before or after you went to New Britian. you made these, what you have deekA A. Before ; before I was married. “accusations,” “you have nothing to say*> Q. On that occasion isn’t it true that you it, for you have had me?" A. No, sir. didn’t get any work from the factory for two or Q. What was it ? A. I told my husband three weeks.' A. No, sir. he followed me up and down. Q. Did you go back to the factory again ? A. Q. Did you ever tell anyone else of thi n No, sir. maey between you and Watson ? A. No. •• 67 \ You had companions, didn’t you ; young have so technical a ruling. It is in the power friends before you were married ? A. No and discretion of the court. ■than the girls in the shop and girls in the The COURT.—It is usual to allow counsel to . y School; I never had a constant com- resume the direct or cross within reasonable ji. bounds. In a case like this we will not restrict .You had charge of the establishment— either side in the exercise of that privilege—or M of the girls there before Mr. Watson’s right, if it be a right. A. Yes, sir. Mr. BRITTON.—The purpose in this case What was your compensation? A. Ten was to examine in chief briefly to see how far I h a week. would pursue the cross-examination, and then ; What pay did the other girls receive ? A. return to the chief. 11 know certain ; Fanny Kelly received $7. The COURT.—I do not feel at liberty to rule Did you have any words with Mr. Wat- against Judge Morris within reasonable limits. 1 the day of his death, in the forenoon, You have a right to return to the cross-examin¬ ! neighborhood of eleven o’clock, in the ation. A. I had words with him in the mom- Q. What did you say to your mother when you went in the room up stairs ? A. I asked , Did he make any accusation against you her if I could go into the private room. : t occasion ? A. He was always accusing Q. Were the plumbers at work ? A. Yes. c going with other men. Q. What was your object in purchasing the .Did he then? A. Yes, sir. pistol ? A. I bought it to give to my husband .Did he likewise accuse you of being with as a New Year’s present. :(me when you were down stairs that fore- Mr. BRITTON.—I object to the counsel ask¬ i A. Yes, sir. ing a few questions and then resting on his ex¬ , Did you have any words with him beyond amination in chief. I will not say it was in¬ i, n that occasion ? A. No, sir. tended to see how far I would bring out these . What time of day was that and where ? other facts on this cross-examination so as to I was in the morning ; I could not state bind me thereby, but it is fair to presume when V what time ; it was in the shop. he returns to these material questions afterwards, . _t was after you had been down stairs and that the purpose was to lay that kind of a trap. i Sack again ? A. Yes, sir. I cannot designate it in any other way. . Ynd in the shop the noise of the machi- The COURT.—You have not fallen into it, > fould naturally prevent the language being Mr. BRITTON.—I know I have not. Hav¬ rby others, if you talked? A. Yes, unless ing failed in that, he proposes to return to the Iked very loud and was very close to him. charge. He should be held to the attempt he , What was the last occasion before Wat- has made. It is not just under the circumstan¬ rieath that you were intimate with him? ces of the case to permit the counsel to ask 5 nday night, these questions in chief. He rests and then , What day was he killed ? A. Friday. goes back to more important issues of the case, , tou don’t mean to say you did not have so far as this particular testimony is concerned. l rnrse with your husband ? A. Of course Mr. MORRIS.—This is a most remarkable m. exhibition. I venture to say it has never been • Did you have any intercourse while in excelled. Britain? A. No, sir. The COURT.—The counsel had not deter¬ . Did you have improper intimacy with mined how far to go on her testimony on the )i;s while you were in New Britain? A. main issue. The Court do not feel inclined to I did not. limit the license of counsel. They have a duty . )id you go to his room while you were to perform to their client. The Court do rot i in the night, from your own? A. No, feel at liberty to restrict them on this ques'i^mi —at this time at all events. Be-dired. Q. You say you purchased this pistol to make a present of it to your husband. Had your t MORRIS.—Your husband was there all husband spoken on the subject of having a pis¬ tile? A. Yes, sir. tol, and do you know what induced him to ? • ’ou slept with him every night ? A. Yes. A. Yes, sir ; there had been two or three per¬ . Yhen you wrent into the room up stairs in sons robbed, and my husband said he would illiamsburgh factory and spoke to your like to have one in the house in case they should 1at the time Mrs. Gleason speaks about, break into our house. t id you say ? Q. How near New Year’s was it ? A. A week BRITTON.—Wait a moment. The coun- after New Year’s. austed the direct examination. We have Q. Why was it not purchased before New *Vj very few questions in the cross-examina- Year’s ? A. Because I had to pay my rent that ■ Now he returns to the direct examina- month and had none to spare. • He should have exhausted her before he Q. You had intended to present him a New e He ought not to be permitted to find Year’s present ? A. Yes, sir. 3 extent of the cross-examination and Q. When you took this pistol on the morning i Jturn to the direct. That is hardly al- of this occurrence had you any intention of i f under the circumstances. shooting anybody? A. No, sir ; I had not. ] MORRIS.—It would be remarkable to Q. What time was it you left the room that 68 morning to come out ? A. About a quarter to Q. Did you suffer much pain from tho dif- twelve. Acuities you have spoken of? A. Yes, si Q. When you were informed you could not Q. You are not near as fleshy as you get in the closet there did you go down stairs ? A. No, sir. A. Yes. Mr. Morris here said to the Court he d rm Q. When you returned up stairs, where did think of anything else upon which to ex Jg you meet Watson? A. I did not go in the the witness ; that there might be a single w shop. I knocked at the door ; the machinery tion that had escaped his memory. was going and they could not hear me. It was The COURT.—The statute gives the pn» near twelve o’clock. I thought I would go back the right to go on the stand and testify i hi and come down again at twelve aiclock, when own behalf. I should be loth to restricjj the door would be open. right as long as counsel think necessary 1 Q. When you went up stairs where did you on. I think it w'ould be wrong in the CcIt meet Watson? A. At the top of the stairs? exclude anything she may have to say. I Q. Did you know he was there before you not think the Court is at liberty further t! if got up ? A. I saw him there before I went up the restrict the consumption of time within r too stairs. I asked him if he was going down stairs. able bounds. He said no ; he had to go back for something. I thought he had gone in ; when I got to the Re-c ross-exam ination. top of the stairs he seized hold of me—at the top of the second flight. Q. How long did you knowr your hu ui Q. In what manner did he seize hold of you ? before you were married? A. Two ora* A. In a very indecent manner. months. Q. Did he say anything? A. Yes; but I Q. How long were you on intimate (■ could not recollect the words. He wanted me with him before you were married? Hmol to go to a room outside somewhere. did he pay attention to you as a suitoi k Q. State the manner in which he spoke ? A. Two or three months. He said I should come with him. Q. During that two or three months din Q. At that time you had the pistol in your have any improper connection with Mr fl hand ? A. Yes, sir. son? A. Yes. Q. Did you take any aim? A. No, sir. Q. How often ? A. I cannot say. Q. Do you know how you shot? A. No, sir. Q. Many times or few during that p od Q. This was right near the door leading into A. It was not so very many times. the room ? 4. Right near the door leading Q. How soon after you were married d j« into the little hall where the other doors lead first have intimacy with Mr. Watson ? l . into. could not recollect exactly how soon. He 91 Q. When he seized hold of you and said you to follow me again within three days aftei 1 should go out with him, did you try to break Q. How soon after did you have thill loose ? A. Yes ; we had quite a struggle ; I got macy with him ? A. It may have beet! free from him, and he seized me the second months. time. Q. It might have been longer than one id Q. After this was done you did not make —might have been two? any attempt to get away ? (No answer.) The COURT.—After the shooting, what did Q. On the morning of this occurrence, t you do ? A. I do not recollect what was done. time he accused you of being with other pil Q. Did Mr. Watson ever follow you to Sun¬ whom did he specify ? A. Mr. Potts. day School ? A. Yes. Q. Anybody else ? A. No, sir. Q. Where did you live at that tune? A. I Q. Did he call you names or epithets o lty believe I was boarding. occasion ? A. Yes, sir. He said I was nail Q. Where? A. At Mrs. Shea’s. but a prostitute and whore, and I shoi f! Q. Where did Watson live? A. He lived with him. with Mrs. Roche, corner of Rush street and Q. When you were inside the room, fii Wythe avenue. you went out in the hall? A. He verjlfl Q. How often did he follow you down to said that. Sunday School ? A. I could not say whether Q. I am speaking of that particular nniijl twice or how many times. before you got out in the hall. When yc«i Q. Did you ever hear Mr Watson say whether before that he charged you with beinjra he had studied medicine ? A. Yes, sir. other men, did he call you any opproi® Q. Did he say what he was giving you those epithets? A. He said I whored with h® medicines for ? A. Yes, sir. and would not with him. Q. To bring on your periods ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he say that likewise out on Qxtii Q. Did that occur frequently ? A. Yes, sir. —outside? A. No, sir; he said that Ik Q. You saw Dr. Elliott in Washington? A. shop. He used the language that I wm-’i Yes, sir. thing but a prostitute and a whore, and ill Q. Did he prescribe for you ? A. Yes, sir. should go with him.” Q. Did he give you medicine ? A. Yes, sir. Q. That was the time you had the infill Q. What has been your health compared to with him before the pistol was fired? A. ® what it was before you went to Watson’s? A. Q. How did you happen to have the J** There has been a great deal ol difference. with you on that day ? A. He had abut! ■ 69 (3 day before, and I took it intending to recollect the fact of its being fired? A. No, sir, ]en him. I don’t. i Was it loaded? A. Yes. Q. That you mean to testify to ? A. Yes. i Did you know it was loaded? A. Yes. Q. When did you first recollect anything \ How many charges were in the pistol at after that? A. I could not say how long it t ,ime to your knowledge ? A. One, I was. is. Q. Where were you ? A. In the shop; Aunt [,ire you sure of that? A. Yes, sir; I Mary’s shop. (3 that was all. Q. Did you hear Mrs. Dexter testify as to a i Did not your husband subsequently fire remark made by you ? A. Yes, sir. bse shots after the shooting? A. Not that Q. That was after you went up stairs ? A. I rtware of. don’t recollect saying it. [ How many times did you shoot on that Q. You were considerably excited, were you ion? A. Only once, to my knowledge. not ? A. I don’t know as I was. [. ifou took the pistol how many days before ? Q. Where do you say you was when you first (i.ly this day. recollected about this thing ? A. In the shop. (You took it on that day for the purpose of Q. Did you then recollect that you had shot fining him? A. Yes. this pistol? A. No, sir; I did not. [Where did you have it about you? A. In Q. Where was the pistol, where did you see Isom. it next ? A. At the station house. [Was it cocked when it was in your bosom Q. You saw it next at the station house ? A. 3, ready for firing? (Showing.) A. Not Yes; my husband gave it to Capt. Woglom. t arn aware of. Q. Have you any recollection where they got [You did not do it when you put it there— it? A. No; I have no recollection how they pt carry it that way to your knowledge ? got it, or that I gave it up. 1, sir. Q. Had you practiced with that pistol before [While this conversation was going on this shot was made ? A. No, sir. nn you and Watson this pistol was in Q. You had not practiced at all ? A. No, sir. r osom ? A. Yes. Q. Not fired at all? A.-No, sir. [With which hand did you take it out? Q. Do you know anything about your brother I on’t recollect that. going where it was bought to inquire how to use [Was it immediately after the use of this it? A. Yes; he went the same night it was g ge which you have described that you bought. II the pistol ? A. I don’t recollect when Q. How came he to go ? A. He had the pis¬ h it or how I shot it. tol and did not know how to work it; neither iYou recollect only what occurred before I, my husband, nor my brother. .. I recollect some. There was a good Q. How do you know you did not know 1 at I don't recollect. how to work it unless you tried? A. They [. low long do you think you talked with tried. i A. I cannot say. Q. Who tried? A. My husband and my ). 'our or five minutes ? A. I don’t know brother. Q. In your presence ? A. Yes. l !an you give us some idea ? A. I could Q. Where? A. In my kitchen; I was getting i eietly say how long it was. supper ready. I )id you intend to shoot Mr. Watson on A. It was not loaded in the kitchen? A, t casion? A. No, sir, I did not. No, sir. ). 'ou had no such intention ? A. No, sir. Q. Where did you go after you left these j. >id you intend to hit him? A. No, sir; premises before you went to the Fifth Precinct id ot take aim at all. Station house? A. No where; we went right [Was it your purpose to shoot him? A. from the building to the station house. ! . Q. How long was it from the time of this fir¬ I■ /hat did you cock the pistol for ? A. I ing until you went to the station house ? A. I I’tpcbllect what for. don’t know. [• 'o you mean to say you don’t recollect Q. How did you happen to go to the station oi g at all? A. No, sir; I don't recollect house? A. I went along with my husband, v was done. father and brother. i- 'o you recollect shooting at all ? A. No, Q. How did you come to decide on going ? A. I do not know. l- o you mean to say now that you have Q. You remember going there? Do you re¬ n illection that you shot him at all ? A. member where you started from ? You say yon n illection that I shot him ? remained on the premises; where did you start i- es. A. I do not know how I done it. from to go to the station house? A. From the i- o you mean to say that you have no re- shop. lei on that you fired this pistol on that Q. How did you happen to start from the asi? A. No, sir; I have no recollection shop ? What led to your going to the station v went off. I have no recollection of it at house ? A. I wanted to give myself up. Q. Did anybody suggest to you the propriety l did not ask if you recollected how you of giving yourself up ? No, sir; not that I re¬ id The question I asked you is, do you collect. 70 Q. It was your own act? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you talk to him before about:1 Q. Did not your husband or brother suggest No, sir. to you you bad better go to the station bouse Q. Did you talk with him at all abi > and give yourself up? A. Not that I recol¬ matter, from the time you bought the lect. down to the time the shot was fired ? Q. It was your own act ? A. Yes, sir. sir. Q. You went on your own vobtion ? A. Yes, Q. Never talked with him about it?—1 sir. did you get this pistol from when you | Q. Do you know where the pistol was when that day and put it in your bosom ? A.' you started? A. No, 6ir. my bureau drawer. Q. Had you any conversation between the Q. It was in your bureau drawer ? A i time of this shooting and the time you started to Q Do you know where your brother i. go to the station house with anybody about the A. No, sir. shooting? A. Not that I can recollect. Q. Do you know whether he is in th a Q. Nothing had been said to you and you said A. I don’t know where he is ; I don’t; nothing to anybody on that subject? A. Not whether he is in the city or not. that I know of. Q. Have you seen him since ? A. No Q, From what room in these premises did you Mr. MORRIS.—He will be on hand aij start to go to the station house? A. Down in you desire him. the room we had been working in; my aunt Mr. BRITTON.—I have desired him i and uncle’s. last two months. Q. When you started, was anybody there ex¬ Mr. MORRIS.—He will be on hand i| cept your brother, husband and father? A. I vou would like to trv him. don’t know. Mr. BRITTON.—I would like to tl Q. Do you remember seeing anybody when now ; it has cost me a good deal of m i you started? A. No, sir; I don’t recollect. try to find him. Q. Do you remember what was said at the Mr. MORRIS.—He will be on hand station house when you got there? A. No, sir; you are ready. I could not remember exactly. Q. All the difference you had with i Q. Do you remember you said anything ? • A. that day grew out of the statement yc! Yes, sir; I did say something. made here about going with other me' Q. To whom did you say it? A. To Capt. No, sir. W oglom. Q. The conversational difference ? ’ Q. Did you say anything to the Sergeant who sir. was sitting back of the desk? A. I don’t re¬ Q. Was there any difference that oi collect. between you and Watson on that day tl. Q. When you got to the station house and have not detailed ? A. He wanted me tel stated this matter to Capt Woglom, did you to a room with him. say this: that you had known Mr. Watson for Q. Anything more than you have i nearly three years, that he had seduced you and A. No, sir. followed you from that time to this, almost Q Mr. Watson, you said, had been! steady ? Did you say that in substance ? A. I habit of giving you medicine ? A. Yes. 1 might have said it. Q. How did he know when these timel Q. Did you also say that you had been an¬ did you inform him, or did he keep tra < noyed by him in the shop, the street, and in himself ? A. He kept track of it himseh your house ? A. I believe I did. The Court here renewed to the juis Q. Did you also say that the night before the caution of the previous days and adjoin day of the shooting you had quarrelled with Mr. the next day. Watson? A. Not to my recollection. Q. Did you say you had quarrelled with him on that day? A. I was quarrelling continually; the day before and morning before. Q. Did you say to him that you had quar¬ relled with Watson on that day? A. I don’t FOURTH DAY. recollect. Q. Did you say to him that you had quar¬ On the opening of Court, Mr. BB relled with him the night before ? A. I don’t said : If the Court please, I regret to si recollect. I have to say, if this trial proceeds, amacfl r Q. Did you say he had abused you and called deem to be in discharge of my official cjd ' you a whore and accused you of going with is simply to call the attention of the ( if other men ? A. I don’t recollect; I was very the fact which has come to my knowledj much excited, I suppose. one of the jurors on this panel, Mr. R‘ Q. See if you recollect that; that’s all I desire I mention the name because it is jus* to know ? A. I don’t recollect, as well as to myself,—took occasion, li Q. Do you recollect then adding—so that you to say to another person—I think one “ could not stand it any longer,” and that you other jurors—after the case was adjoi “shot him for satisfaction?” A. I don’t in his judgment any man who would recollect saying that. girl not over fifteen years of age ougl Q. Have you talked with your brother about shot. It is not necessary for me to f this matter since ? A. N o, sir. thing with reference to the impropriety 71 mark, pending the trial, before it is half circumstances entirely improper and contrary .i ed. But, notwithstanding, I cannot re- to the admonition of the Court already given dfrom saying something on that subject, if the jury. a be the fact, which I hope it is not, yet the The COURT.—There is no motion before the I'c nation came to me in such a way that I Court. Each juror impanneled on the case a not by any possibility ignore it, as a pub- has been sworn to render a verdict according ilcer. I felt it more gravely that such a to the law and the evidence. Their communi¬ ark should be made, because, relying on cations with each other are strictly privileged. i mor and the integrity of this juror, know- and until they themselves commit a breach of gje was a client of the learned counsel on that privilege the Court has no jurisdiction 3 her side, I did not object, having confi- over the jury. There being no motion before n, as I still have, in the honor and integrity the Court the examination of witnesses will 1; action at the conclusion of the case. proceed. I\ MORRIS.—I don’t know the object of Mr. ROWAN (the juror).—I did not under¬ e ounsel’s remarks, not having heard any stand exactly what the District Attorney said. g stion. Did I understand him to say that I said to a 5 BRITTON.—The object in calling the juror on this panel that I thought that— eion of the Court was that the Court might Mr. BRITTON (interrupting).—I understood gsst to the jury the impropriety of such re¬ it to be to another juror. I am not certain of in, pending the trial, and avoid them in that. ; and the further object is to state that, The COURT.—That the juror named said to r understanding, that course of procedure another juror, “that any man who seduced a c itrary to law, and it would be proper to girl fifteen years of age ought to be shot. ” That Cfproceedings after the trial with reference is an abstract proposition, and may or may not i I have no feeling with reference to the have any application to the facts of this case, itr except that this trial should be conducted The facts are yet to be determined from the ri and justly by all parties engaged in it, evidence to come in as well as that which has at at its conclusion, whatever the result been put in. roe, we all may readily acquiesce, Mr. MORRIS.—As the Court has very prop¬ ti MORRIS.—I suppose there was a pur- erly and justly remarked that wras—as stated s n making the statement; but I am inclined by the District Attorney — a communication tnk the purpose was different from that in- from a fellow juror, considered to be privileged. 3: d by the counsel. Now when the jury A more fitting rebuke could not come from the a impanneled the Court will bear me wit- Court. s:! was not the party challenging. Most of Mr. ROWAN](the juror).—I will state for the anusiness in this case was done by the pros- information of the District Attorney that I n m—I undertake to say to a greater extent have no knowledge of making any such assertion h ever has been done in any case in this to any juror, nor to any person that lives. eu where a party has been placed on trial for Mr. BRITTON —I am very happy to know it e. The counsel refers to Mr. Rowan. I if it is so. v never done any business for Mr. Rowan The COURT.—Now let the witness be sworn; 'f life, nor have our relations been at all the juror stands fairly on the record. n than friendly. I believe my partner did n ime or another draw a lease for Mr. >vn; I believe he did some time or another, h that juror was called that was indicated, Joseph II. Barclay—Sworn for d 10 suggestion was made by counsel or re- e that the juror stand aside, because the Defendant. ;t hat the partner with whom I am engaged siness now, some time previous had done Q. What is your business? A. At present n trifling act was too absurd and ridiculous am clerk in a law office with Crooke, Bergen & l ice as having any influence. But no sug- Clement. si n was made by counsel; and, I submit, if Q. Are you acquainted with the accused, e ourt please, the making that suggestion Fanny Hyde? A. Iam. iv 3 not for a proper purpose, and not in the Q. How long have you known her? A. Three o r discharge of official duty, at this stage years, perhaps a little over. d nder such circumstances. Q. During that portion of the time did you 1 BRITTON.—These remarks are wholly reside in the same house ? A. I did, sir, and ic .ed for by the defendant’s counsel. I do reside there now. >t old my official conduct for him to review, Q. That wras about a year before she was 'l' o I mean to follow in the tracks he has married? A. Yes; about a year before she was M«id out before me. I have not complained married I first went to the house. 1 s juror in any sense. As a matter of fact, Q. You was studying law at that time? A. ic pted him and relied upon his honor. But Yes. hi I said I had a right to say in order to Q. You was home most of the time—even¬ a against like circumstances hereafter. I ings? A. Yes, sir. a not arise here to def end my motives from Q. Most every evening ? A. Yes. P ion of counsel; and it is not for me to Q. You had occasion to see a great deal of g;,3t to the Court nor counsel on the other her ? A. Yes. it hat that remark by him was made under Q. So far as you observed what was her con- duct for propriety, and in every respect ? A. suffering from the cause I have stated, o As far as I saw it was very good in every re¬ sudden shock or fright? spect I saw nothing out of the way. She was Objection to the question. very industrious. At night mostly home. The COURT.—The whole question. Q What year was you first acquainted with Mr. BRITTON.—Yes, six. her ? A. I think in 1869. The COURT. —What would be the effe Q. While in the house with her her conduct the mental system ? was uniformly good? A. Yes, very good.? Mr. MORRIS.—The mind. Q. Did you ever see anything that indicated Mr. BRITTON.—I submit that there impropriety on her part ? A. I never did. proof here whatever as a foundation foi question. There is no evidence of any.* Cross-examined. in this case, immediately or at all approxin antecedent to this act. The testimony, t Q. How long did you say you was in the as I understand it, does not show any si house with her ? A. I think about six or eight shock at all. It simply shows that this dt months. ant took a pistol from her drawer that mor Q. What were your means of seeing her that took it to this place in her bosom, and the time? A. I was at work during the day; and person who was killed, as he had often dot evenings after I came home I was studying law fore, accused her indoors of some acts, until about nine or ten o’clock. afterwards outside, and, having lived wit Q. During the time she was at work, and two or three years adulterously, he mad when you was not at home, you saw nothing of vances to her for that purpose, asking her her? A. No; I saw her Sundays and evenings elsewhere, and that he took hold ot her v when I was at home. view of inducing her, or coercing her, m . Q. She occupied part of the house and you a ited sense, as it were, if it may be so const part ? A. Yes. to go out for that purpose ; that some kim struggle ensued, and he was shot. The COURT.—If for the words “stl shock” should be substituted “attack oi John Byrne, M. D.—Sioorn for the person.” Defendant. Mr. BRITTON.—I would not object t: question if it stated the facts and asked Q. How long have vou been practicing medi¬ effect. cine? A. About twenty-four years. Mr. MORRIS.—I suppose the line of 1 Q. Have you given any especial study to dis¬ marks will be considered in the line of hii eases peculiar to the female sex ? A. Yes, sir. fession. I shall not imitate Ins example, • Q. Are you connected now with any public counsel may say that I have not stated it \> institution where those diseases are especially the evidence, but I have a right to state a treated ? A. Yes. thetical question. He may state it in hi Q. What ones ? A. The Women’s Hospital, and I will state it in my way. I shall art St. Mary’s. I have charge of that institution. the jury that the question comes withii The COURT.—Where is it ? A. Dean street, evidence. He may argue the other wa this city. state it as a hypothetical question, ant Q. You are connected with other medical in¬ counsel cannot say, in advance of the judp stitutions ? A I am connected with the Long of this jury, what facts are proven or win Island Medical College ; am Clinical Professor evid -nee establishes. of Uterine Diseases. The COURT.—I am of opinion that tk Q. Give in some idea as to the extent of your evidence in this case as to the health of t; experience in this branch ot the medical profes¬ cused, of her sickness and suffering, sion? A. My experience has been gathered respect to this sudden shock, which is th from pretty extensive and long practice, and jective point in the question, it has its si from having been specially devoted to this tion in the statement of the accused vesti branch of the medical education. that the deceased made an attack on he Q. What is the effect of painful dismenorrhoea, she sought to defend herself. In view o: or menstrual difficulties, on the mind of a person statement the question is admitted. of nervous temperament ? A. The effect is A. The effect would be to totally miner often times disturbing to the mind, and in ner¬ party, and destroy any intelligence as t vous temperaments will intensely increase ner¬ acts, under the circumstances. vous irritability. Q. I will put the hypothetical question :l Q. Have you, in your experience in this other form. Take a young girl of nel branch of the medical profession, known of temperament, who is employed in a fact7 cases of great mental and nervous disturbance fifteen years of age by a man in the nek* that have been attributable solely, as you con¬ hood of forty ; after she has been in his eil sider, to this cause ? A. I have. about five or six months he seduces hers Q. Is it an infrequent cause of producing has a step-mother—her mother having! mental disturbance ? A. Not infrequent at the age of four years—who is stern Q. And is that doctrine sustained by medical strict with her ; her father is also stern! writers on this subject ? A. It is. this man keeps up that intercourse for i< Q. What would be the effect on a person in siderable period of time by threats of expel delicate health, of a nervous temperament, and during this period her health declines, he it 73 iod deal wasted, she broods over this dif- by threats of exposure; she became enciente, and and misfortune, frequently manifesting he procured medicine and compelled her to take 3ars and grief, and begs of him to leave it with the object of bringing on her periods. one ; he still pursues her ; she meets a This occurred frequently; she was irregular in man where she has been living, forms her periods, suffered greatly in consequence of i plain tance, and after two or three months, menstrual difficulties; under her misfortunes a i s him, the man who had seduced her be- marked change took place in her disposition; arriage swearing that he will never pur- she became irritable, less subject to parental I r further if she marries ; he subsequently control, careless as to personal appearance, her 13, and, by threats, holding her in his power, health gradually declined, her formerly health¬ iues a similar intercourse, and this is kept ful color disappeared, and she became pale and I' a considerable period, she suffering emaciated; about fifteen months after her ruin t from menstrual difficulties, and is suf- was accomplished she made the acquaintance of i from that cause at the time to which I her present husband, an apprentice; after a few • she takes a pistol from her house without months he offered marriage; the deceased urged i :ent to shoot any one ; she is seen in the her to marry, promising, and taking an oath to -ig by a number of people, with an un- the effect, that if she married he would never 3 look, looking wildly out of her eyes ; pursue her further; she was married; she hon¬ : kes use of expressions indicating she was estly intended to be true to her marriage vow; eplating suicide; she goes out into the she had been married but a short time when de¬ id suddenly, while thus suffering, this ceased again came to see her, and under threats izes hold of her in an indecent and lewd of exposure, accomplished his purpose as be¬ r/, and declares she shall go out with him. fore; she felt keenly her degradation; she now tio you think, she suffering from the felt the wrong to her husband, and it preyed e l have indicated, would be the effect upon her mind until she declared to her ijier mental condition? A. I think its mother-in-law, without stating the cause, that t ould be to temporarily destroy her rea¬ a curse hung over her; her health and lly, supposing all these facts as to her strength fell away; she suffered much from pain¬ i 1 and nervous condition to be true. ful dissmenorrhoea; her husband became alarmed will state the hypothetical question at her physical condition, and she was sent to ti differently: A little girl ten years her mother-in-law’s, at Washington, for the pur¬ i comes to this country from Eng- pose of seeing a physician. She saw Dr. Elliott > join her father who has preceded and he prescribed for her. She had been there :e had very few advantages of men- but a short time when her husband wrote her to ii ire, having been set at work at a very return, he having gone to New Britain, Connec¬ “age; from the time she was five or ticut, for the purpose of working. She was e3 of age she was in the habit of attend- greatly distressed in her mind, on account of 5i day School, and felt much interested in her misfortune; she wept bitterly, and it was a 3; she was kind and obedient; shortly then she stated that she felt a curse hanging I ‘ arrival here, her father being poor, she over her head. This was in the spring of 1871. p at work, and kept steadily employed; She went to join her husband in New Britain, rt a of the time she attended night-school, where she resumed her labor, although suffering ■e le received premiums for her attention much from causes stated. While here, de¬ in, and good conduct; her nervous organ- ceased took her to his own house and intro¬ 31 delicate, her bodily health remarkably duced her to his own family, and she slept with ’ 1 a fine> Pure complexion, good; his daughter and little girl, and here he contin¬ ftures, round, well-developed form, dis- ued his persecutions until she, in her despera¬ ic kind, fond of children, temperament tion, in presence of her husband, charged him rf ’e and spirit; at the age of 15 she is en- with having accomplished her ruin. He admit¬ i the factory of the deceased, and at that ted the fact, and begged, for the sake of his wife si was pure and virtuous; the deceased and children they would not expose him, and i jin upwards of 40 years of age; she had promised again that he would cease his perse¬ ei with the deceased about six months; cutions. She and her husband immediately left to the factory one day after some mate- New Britain, and returned to Brooklyn. Shortly fo some work, and found him alone; he after he returns and renews his visits, and d e door, and before she left, succeeded threatened to expose her in such a manner that efciching her; she now felt keenly her it would come to the ears of her father, and id.' on, and brooded over her condition, under the power and influence of such threats tang her grief in frequent tears; her he again renewed his criminal intimacy. He H s a stem man; her mother died when dogged her about, watching her wherever she iaf child, and her step-mother, while not went. He tried to induce her to go to New 38,18 aer’ was strict and formal, there York to live. Before the holidays she heard her ? J t that degree of confidence between husband would like to have a pistol; the sugges¬ 11 usually exists between mother and tion was made because some burglaries had been she was greatly troubled in her mind committed in the neighborhood. She made up sec it of her misfortune, and did not know her mind to make her husband a present of one to o; she brooded over it and had no con- and, about the 5th or 6th of January, having II vhom she could relate the story of her had to pay her rent previously, and thus having €>||er destroyer continued his criminal no money on New Year’s day to pay it, she pur¬ coy.e, compelling her to yield to his wishes chased one—her brother being with her—and 74 gave it to her husband. It was kept in the Mr. BRITTON.—I would like to cro house two or three weeks, and on that day she amine him. put it in her bosom. She said that she thought Mr. MORRIS.—The witness is to b it might frighten him and induce him to leave examined in full. her alone and desist his persecutions; that she The COURT.—If the District Attorney v had no idea of injuring anyone; her physical to cross-examine him now, you desire to condition at the time was weak, and she was suf¬ him on the direct ? fering greatly from dissmenorrhoea. Her grand¬ Mr. BRITTON.—I don’t desire couni father was insane, and committed suicide by examine him on any other subject mat! drowning. She acted strangely during the lore- desire to cross-examine now, while the si part of the day of the homicide, which was at is fresh in my mind. about 12 m. She was observed sitting by the Mr. MORRIS.—It will be the same s stove, looking steadily as if some great grief was matter. pressing her mind. Her aunt spoke to her and she replied, “I wish I was dead;” and when asked why, she said for many reasons. On another occasion the same morning, she was no¬ Dr. Charles Correy—Sworn. ticed by a person who was in the habit of seeing her daily, and he states that she had a strange Q. How long have you been practising appearance, and could not describe it; her color sician ? A. Sixteen and a half years. was unnatural, eyes red; and another describes Q. And during that time you have mai her as having a wild, strange appearance. She study of the mind and its disease a spei goes into the room and sees a person there she A. Yes, sir. was well acquainted with and takes no notice of Q. What institutions have you been con i them and does not speak to them. She left the with ? A. The New York City Lunatic All room and went up stairs for the purpose of on Blackwell’s Island, and subsequently, I going to a closet: her strange look then attracted years, at the Bloomingdale Asylum til attention; the closets up stairs being occupied, insane. she went below; the door was locked, and she Q. You was at the Asylum on Blacl ran back up stairs. As she got at the head of Island ? A. Yes. the stairs, the deceased, who had been watching Q. How long were you connected with for her, and whom she supposed was in the A. I was there near a year. room, suddenly caught hold of her, saying that Q. You have been eleven years aequ she should go out with him. A brief struggle with the treatment of these diseases ? A ensued, and in that struggle he was shot. She nearly eleven years. says she did not know how it occurred, that she Q. And since then you have given n» had no idea of the shooting, and took no aim, less attention to the subject ? A. Yes. don't recollect how it was done, don’t recollect Q. Will you state whether delusion, ol to whom she gave the pistol or who took it. siloria mania, is a condition recogniij Now, Doctor, taking all these matters into con¬ medical authorities ? A. It is. sideration, what, in your opinion, was the effect Q. Is it sometimes designated iinpukM upon her mind of this unexpected attack ? A. sanity ? A. It is. Premising, sir, that before this last act of shoot¬ Q. What temperament would be most ing, from the statement made that her mind was to be affected by a sudden shock ? A. 1 in a state of incipient menstrual mania, as de¬ called the nervous or excitable temperam scribed by authorities, I say, premising such, I Q. Is a sudden shock recognized as would say that at the time of the act she was not of producing insanity ? A. It is. in her right mind, she was insane to all intents Q. Is grief, or long continued broodii and purposes. a subject that causes grief, considers Q. Can you state whether producing an abor¬ cause? A. It is. tion upon a young girl sixteen years of age, by q>. You have read Dr. Ray’s Medica drugs and medicines, would have a tendency to prudence ? A. I have. • affect the mind of a person of nervous organi¬ Q. Do you regard that as high authorial zation ? A. It would, as any other debilitating It is considered among the best. circumstance would, by depressing her physical Q. Dr. Beauford, Professor of Psych powers and working upon her nervous system. Medicine, St. George’s Hospital, Lone Q. In your general practice, is it unusual for he considered high authority on this you to find young girls, during certain periods, A. He is. when they are affected with mens final difficul¬ Q. And is it not a fact well recogniz ties, to be affected mentally during that period ? this form of insanity may be suddenly A. They are affected mentally to the extent of and suddenly disappear ? A. Ithiukit. hysterical paroxysms. Q. It is brief in its duration ? A. It Q. And from that cause alone? A. From more marked symptoms. that cause alone. Q. Is it not the fact that the more su Mr. MORRIS.—I desire to withdraw this attack the shorter is the duration ? AJ witness, having questioned him as to this par¬ rally so. ticular branch, and put another on the stand, Q. Is insanity7 in the family consider and then recall this witness and conclude his disposing cause ? A. It is. examination. Q. -And is it not a recognized fac* tha1 75 e generations and appear again ? A. That De Vergie entitled, “Where does reason end and insanity begin ?” Have you read the article by Dr. Jarvis, “Besides these cases of insanity, produced shed in the American Journal of Insanity under all those causes, there Ls another to which lly, 1869 ? A. I have. they give the name of ‘Transitory Insanity’ — That is published at Utica and signed by that is to say, without preceding apparent symp¬ hay ? A. Yes. toms, without causes near or remote, appreci¬ I have the article here ; I will call your able to the world, bursting out as suddenly as a cion to it—(to some portions of it)—and clap of thunder, and ceasing with the criminal whether it agrees with your experience and act. I should be able to discover certain evi¬ ledge of the subject. Referring to mania dences of mental disturbances immediately fol¬ iioria, he says : lowing the criminal act.1’ 'his is a form of mental disorder which Would one of those evidences be an imperfect nly appears in a person previously sane, recollection of the occurrence ? A. Yes, sir. supposed to be unsound in mind ; it has Q. Making no effort to conceal the act? A. i-t duration and suddenly disappears. This That is one of the most marked. j exclusively a new or an old doctrine, but Q. Delivering themselves up to the authori¬ ; been taught in France and Germany and ties ? A. They frequently do so. t countries, and by managers of the insane Q. Dr. Jarvis further says: “ These doctrines l y writers on these topics. It is recognized are further sustained by French lawyers and y psychological authorities of Great Britain judges. Ballard, a jurist of high character, U admitted by Courts and juries having whom no one suspects of being indulgent, says: anagement of persons who have committed ‘ There are some who have suffered a perpetual > hich would otherwise have been considered loss of reason; others for a moment, being cninal, and for which they would other- affected by some great grief, surprise or other eave been doomed to death by the scaffold. ” cause of this kind. There Ls no difference be¬ a o the manner of its appearance and dis- tween these two forms of mania than that of it -ance and its recognition by the authori- duration; and one whose head is turned for i ferred to, does that agree with your ex¬ some hours or some days is as completely insane it ce and knowledge on the subject ? A. It during this ephemeral cause as one who is mad is !r ; but I should like to be understood as for many years.” itng that there always exists, previous to Is it not a well recognized doctrine that a ciurrence of the act of violence, some evi- person may be as completely insane and irrespon¬ icof mental disturbance, sible when afflicted with this temporary insanity i. Jertainly. A. In other words, I would as if insane for a longer period. A. It is so, k understood as sustaining the doctrine sir. t i to a certain moment a person may un¬ Q. “There is no want of authorities to estab¬ is nably be sane, the next moment insane, lish the doctrine of instantaneous insanity. The 1 i lin the next moment perfectly sane. observations made by writers of medical juris¬ lertainly not. I am not aware that doc- prudence of the present day leaves no doubt of le as ever been attempted to be advanced in the existence of this mania, during which men It < >e. A. That is the popular feeling that who have never manifested insanity are com¬ li 1 men are not disposed to uphold. pletely deprived of reason, and give themselves Hereditary disposition you would consider up to the most deplorable excesses. ” or of the pre-existing causes ? A. I should, Does that comport with your knowledge, i ainful dismenorrhoea you would regard reading, and experience on this subject, with m her pre-disposmg cause ? A. Yes. the qualification that you have before you ? A. i- l ave you read the articles published by Yes. . C itelman in the American Journal on the Q. Does change of character, disposition, je ? A. I have. outward habits of person indicate a change in b Mania instantaneous, temporary, transi- the mind and tendency to insanity ? A. They y, leting; a mental disorder which breaks are the most frequent evidences of mental dis¬ . t Idenly like the sudden loss of sense by turbance. ae hysical disease: the subject is urged in Q. Take a person of nervous temperament, aoent to automatic acts which could not whose grandfather had died insane, a change e Uen foreseen.1' Does that accord with takes place in her disposition, her temper be¬ ir periences or knowledge on this subject? comes irritable, becomes careless in her dress It! res. and habits, having been the subject of great I- ois is a French author is he not? A. grief for a long period, and suffering from pain¬ i8‘ ful dismenorrhoea—take those four causes unit¬ b- it not a fact that a great many people ing in a person of nervous temperament, and n itally affected, and yet their ailment is you would say that she was a person in whom s h as to be discovered by the ordinary you might expect this impulsive insanity, or er '? A. Very frequently, this form of insanity to be produced? A. I i- | it not a fact that they are frequently should, sir, or any other form of insanity. m to deceive the physicians of the hos- Q. I call your attention to one or two ex¬ ‘k A. That is so. tracts from Dr. Ray. Please state whether they i- id that, too, when they are unquestion- accord with your experience and knowledge on yi ane? A. Yes. the subject: I fill call your attention to an article by “Yet sometimes, especially on the operation 76 of a powerfully exciting Cause, it breaks out In your reading and expe'flen'de have yoa suddenly and terminates in a few hours. It known a case where the plea of insanity has been called transitory mania or instan¬ been sustained by medical testimony, in wi taneous mania.” pre-disposing causes have existed that the i Now taking the evidence as you have heard it sequent history of the patient did not just on the stand from the witnesses as to the occur¬ Mr. BRITTON.—I don’t like to have rences at the moment of this homicide, would question go in without objection, at least you say that that was a powerfully exciting Mr. MORRIS.—I withdraw it, then. cause in your opinion ? A. I should. Q. I will read one more extract from Q. Again he says in cases like that of same author : Mercer : “Mania, characterized as in these cases “When a man destroys the seducer of his sudden occurrences of a brief duration, wife, sister, or daughter, we often see the in¬ lately been spoken of as if destitute of a pri fluence of the insane temperament; and the foundation in fact. But there is no substai effect has been very much in determining the reason for doubt. I am not aware of a si quality of the act. We also know, as a matter writer on insanity of any mark during the of no very infrequent experience, that insanity forty or fifty years who has not recognizee may be produced instantaneously by a profound existence. Most of them have recorded c moral shock. If a person might be deprived of occurring within their own observation. M his senses on a piece of good news, or of the cases may be found in journals devoted wl death of one very near and dear, is it strange to psychological medicine. Dr. Jarvis, who such results would follow what is calculated had occasion recently to examine the sub above all others to stir the soul to its inmost states that he found from seventy-five tc depths ? What the mental condition actually hundred cases on record. ‘ Indeed, ’ says h< is must be determined by evidence in the case, is questionable if any other phase of insf and any doubt there may be we may be quite has been more satisfactorily illustrated sure, will be given in favor of the accused.” this.’” The announcement of some sudden, great, Is there any more doubt about this fon and good fortune is conceded by the authorities insanity than about any other form ? A. I; as being a cause for producing insanity ? A. is not. Yes. Q. Upon another point I will call your ai Q. That is the doctrine of the books ? A. Yes. tiou to a statement in Beauford : Q. You would consider news of great mis¬ * ‘ Of the sympathetic connection existin i fortune a more prolific cause than news of good tween the brain and uterus is plainly see l fortune ? A. I should. the most casual observer. Many women Q. One form of this affliction is that of the completely prostrated while menstruating I insane impulse appearing suddenly, without suffer intensely in the head. ” previous premonition, and disappearing with Does that accord with your experience ! equal rapidity. The existence of the insane It does. impulse and instantaneous mania is supported “ Q. If we consider insanity makes its api by the lessons of pathological psychology as ance at the time of puberty ; that this peril by the actual case. The rapid and tumultuous more dangerous to girls than to boys;* excess of feelings that rush into the mind, the more girls between the age6 of twelve* reflective powers are paralized, and the move¬ eighteen become insane than boys; the« ments are simply the result of automatic im¬ should expect to find every girl at this tim a pulse, with which the reason has as little to do peculiarly susceptible nervous irritation. 1« as the motives of a new bom infant.” fore, in one who inherits from her anc«st< I I read these from Dr. Kay; and what do you unstable organization, two conditions exis a say as to the doctor there ? A. I believe that favorable for the production of her mentjli is sound doctrine. order. These may be of themselves suf *• Q. Is it not a recognized fact that insane per¬ to originate it." sons may commit acts of which they are fully Does that agree with your experience I conscious and yet utterly unable to resist ? A. this disease and its cause ? A. It does. i It is. Q. Delirium is no longer considered to ■ Q. Do you know Dr. Woodward, Superin¬ only kind of insanity ? A. It is not, tendent of the Massachusetts Asylum ? A. By Q. Insanity exists in many cases withe * reputation, not personally. lirium? A. It does. Q. I will read what he 6ays here, and then Q. Let me call your attention to anothe *n ask you if you can, in your experience, add any¬ graph of Beauford. Speaking of this fci a thing to the exposition he has made: insanity, I trust the Court will be a little ]® “Of all cases that have come to my knowl¬ w'ith me, and the jurors—I know they vjj edge—and I have examined the subject for years cause it may be afterwards said in certaii*? —I have known but a single instance in which ters that the idea of temporary inaaM an individual arraigned tor murder and found absurd—not by this prosecution, but o>» not guilty, by reason of insanity, has not after¬ In speaking of this subject he says : wards shown unequivocal symptoms of insanity ‘ ‘ There is another variety of insan ■ ® in hospitals where he has been confined ; and I rather another class of the insane patieS ■- regret to say that many have been executed who whom no delusions are to be discover* W have shown as clear evidences of insanity as any whose insanity is manifested in what tfjjj of these.” rather than in what they say. It is imls', 77 ji instinctive insanity, the victims of which, the application of a great and sudden excite¬ ner impulse and instinct, do something, com- ment or some strong emotion—I should suppose n some act of violence, for which, being such persons, under such circumstances, would nne, they are not to be held liable, but for be very likely to lose their reason. vljh, were they sane, they would be respon- Q. And added to that at the time of this ex¬ ife.” citing cause, painful dismenorrhcea—that would o you recollect of this author advancing that greatly increase the probability of it ? A. I lcrine? A. Ido. think it would. . Do you think it is sound doctrine ? A. I Q. You have heard some of the testimony in it the case, and from what you have heard, and he COURT.—You mean to say it is accepted the examination_jTou have made, do you think is.iuch in the profession? A. Yes, sir; by the prisoner in this case answers the descrip¬ h e who have made it a study. tion ? A. Very fully. That such cases exist, and are not merely Q. Is Dr. Pritchard regarded as high author¬ n nted by doctors as an excuse for crime, is ity ? A. Yes, sir. niciently proven. Indeed, there can be no Q. Speaking of this form : “In this disorder kbt about the existence of insanity marked the will is occasionally under an impulse which >yucli impulses. My present purpose is to suddenly drives the person afflicted to the per¬ o ider the impulsive acts of the insane, espe- petration of acts of the most revolting kind.” ■if y of those whose insanity not being marked Is there anything in that from which you dis¬ >y elusion is chiefly indicated by the act itself. sent ? A. There is not. Cl act, however, is plainly the out-come of Q. Dr. Gray. Do you know him by reputa¬ oi; idea present for the moment in the mind, tion ? A. I do. >u present possibly only for the moment, and Q. In speaking of this form of insanity, page hi so obliterated that the individual after¬ 15, he says : “The most distinguished authors, rats has lost all trace of it. both home and abroad, have recognized this * Do you recollect this authority having form of mental unsoundness as having exist¬ d need that doctrine ? A. I do. ence independent of delusion. The cases on 1 Do you consider this sound doctrine ? A. record are so numerous the only difficulty is the ! cj1 selection.” As to the fact of the existence of * Is Dr. Maundsley considered good author- this disorder, do you agree with that? A. Yes, tv A. He is. sir. 1 He is an English writer ? A. He is. Q. Is Dr. Bucknell regarded as high author¬ i He has not taken quite as advanced ground ity ? A. Very high authority. in fls subject as some other authorities ? A. Q. He maintains the same doctrine ? A. He It as not had the practical experience in the does. asof the insane that some other gentlemen Q. Esquirol formerly doubted the doctrine ? ia' A. He did, I think. < Speaking on this subject he says that a Q. He fully recognizes it now ? A. He does, iei in under such an attack : “ It is no longer now. n lea the relations of which the mind can Q. In speaking of this form he says : ‘ ‘ The oi stnplate, but a violent impulse into which patient is drawn from his accustomed courses lie, line! is absorbed and irresistibly utters itself to the commission of acts to which reason nor ijption.” And Dr. Beauford says: “This sentiment determine, which conscience rebukes, ei; done, the feeling and idea having ex- and which the will has no power to restrain— ei ed themselves in action, may cease for a acts that are involuntary, instinctive and irre¬ ji until the morbid process is enacted over sistible. This is mania without delusion, or g£ in the br.iin.” Do you find anything instinctive monomania. ” Do you assent to that oe, Doctor, from which you dissent? A. No. doctrine? A. I do. (f Says Dr. Ray : “It would be no greater Q. The action of a person under this form of it to deny the existence of consumption be- insanity would you consider as purely auto¬ u its approaches have not been noticed, matic, without the guidance of the will at all ? ia to deny insanity because its symptoms A. Entirely so. ai not been observed. ” You can speak from Q. Do you recollect whether Dr. Taylor is a ov experience upon that ? A. I can. writer on medical jurisprudence ? A. General C Will you state, if you please, a condition medical jurisprudence. ia you would think favorable, in which you Q. Do you recollect whether he sustains 'oi 1 expect the development of this form of the doctrine of impulsive or paroxysmal isity ? In that I desire you to speak of the mania ? A. I am not familiar with Dr. Taylor ui of the person, admitting a predisposing on this branch. ni, if you were asked to state in what sort of a Q. I will read from a paragraph: “Homi¬ ey you would expect manifestations of this cidal mania, or monomania, is commonly de¬ M A. I should suppose that person in- fined to be a state of partial insanity, accom¬ ei'iQg a jiredisposition to insanity, those panied by an impulse to the perpetration of hi1! general health is impaired by any cause, murder; hence it is sometimes called ‘ ‘ im¬ io who are naturally nervous and excitable, pulsive, ’ or ‘ paroxysmal insanity.' There may ioi, who have been subjected to any great or may not be evidence of intellectual aberra¬ ■ia tf their feelings in any way to cause them tion, but the main feature of the disorder is the ) c ell much on the subject, to regret it and existence of a destructive impulse, which, like a e l ake nights and dream over it. and then delusion, cannot be controlled by the patient.” That agrees with the other authorities? A. I created , in your judgment, any more thai think it does. other physical disease ? A. It is not. Q. He further says on this subject: Q. It has an incubation before it dev “ The impulse to kill is sudden, instinctive, itself? A. Yes. and uncontrollable. It is this form which has Q. I read from Dr. Ray, and I propose t been called impulsive insanity, which has given y»u if that embodies your views upon that rise to so much contention on trials for murder, ject : where insanity is set up as a defense. It is well “Notwithstanding the air of mystery vi to consider the subject in its legal aspect. It is ignorance and misrepresentation have th said that on particular occasions men are seized around this disease, it cannot be said to Pr« with an irresistible impulse to kill, and under anything strange or peculiar, nor are the such impulse may commit acts that otherwise cussions in it involved in any obscurity would be atrociously criminal. It would be ab¬ posed to attend them ! It is just as mucl surd to deny that such impulses may occur, or no more an event of special providence as i the fact that they have occurred and have been diseases ; it follows the same course of ini acted on. ” tion, development, and termination, in co That is of the same tenor, advancing the death, as other diseases, sometimes lying | same general doctrines ? A. The same general rnant for months or even years ; often obw doctrine is implied ; sudden impulse frequently from others and unsuspected by the pe arises among the insane, and not unfrequently himself ; at others suddenly breaking out, in those who have been recognized by the com¬ little premonition of its approach, and i munity as insane before the occurrence of the after being repeatedly warded off by precan act and remedies, finally establishing itself ii Q. I will ask the question in a little different clearest forms. ” form from what I have yet; I asked you to de¬ It has a regular progress as other dis« scribe a person such as you would expect to be do? A. Very generally. subject to this form of attack ; you described the Q. This branch of disease called Mania person and then stated the prisoner answered sitoria is no exception to the rule? A. I i the description. Now, doctor, from the evi¬ not. dence you have heard in the case and the ex¬ Q. You don’t recognize, if I understandi amination you have made, taking all into con¬ aright, the doctrine that persons can be sail sideration—the whole history of the case, what, their lives and then become suddenly ini in your opinion, do you say was the condition and in a few moments, five or ten minute of her mind at the precise time of this homicide ? halt an horn-, be entirely sane again ? A. I A. I have no doubt that she was insane. not say that. Q. Irresponsible ? A. Irresponsible ; I be¬ Q. I know you did not; but I want to '1 lieve the act was from the result of a sudden it out more clearly. You don’t mean ) impulse, the occurrence of which she did not understood any such way as that Ancd foresee and which she was not able to restrain ; insanity is a predisposing cause ? A. Yes. I I believe she had no knowledge of what she was Q. You don't consider that that fact i doing at the time the shot occurred. would be evidence of insanity in a person Ii is charged with having committed a crime:! Cross-examination. By no means. Q. Coupled with that fact there rnusl Q. Can you give us what you deem to be a other indications before the crime ? A. I sill concise definition of insanity ? A. It is very expect to find them. difficult. Q. And you would expect to find them i Q. I am aware it is very difficult, but I know time anterior to the actual commission oi you have made it a study, and I thought you crime charged? A. Yes; might be but «■ might, perhaps, be able io approximate to it; short time. if it cannot be done in a moment, I will wait. Q. Some days? A. Not necessarily. A. It is a disease of the brain, affecting the Q. More than one day ? Not neecstfl mind ; or manifestation of disease of the brain, more than a single day. characterized by derangement of one or more Q. Would you consider that fact alone tt faculties of the mind. person charged with a crirn : of this natural Q- Your definition covers the point I wished ; same day was paler than usual, and at the B it is recognized by authorities, as it is by your¬ time had a wilder expression of the eye * self, that it is a disease of the brain, particu¬ usual, and was more silent than usual - «tl larly that phase of it known as ‘ ‘ mania ? ” A. you consider these indications as suffi® Yes. coupled with the fact that some ancestor 1 Q. It is divided by writers and authorities grandfather, if you please—bad been insai I into various subdivisions, one of which is show insanity on the part of the person ! mania? A. Yes. No, sir. I should only consider these indica* Q. And it is that more especially which yon of a great nervous disturbance. have been testifying to, as distinguished trom Q. They might arise from that and not >1 dementia ? A. That is the general term. any insanity ? A. They might. Q. Bucknell and Ray, and most of those Q. Suppose this person had con ten) plat* i authorities, agree with you that it is a disease that very time when these indications devel* of the brain, affecting the mind ? A. Yes. themselves, the purpose of shooting ano« Q. And that disease is not instantaneously and had in his or her possession on that i 79 .o a weapon for that purpose, and that person afterwards, or in fact at any time, gave herself idd be of a nervous organization—a woman up, is that necessarily an element of insanity? -i.ght it not produce just such indications as A. No, sir. at;? A. On the contrary; it would seem to Q. You have known many instances where ueshat that person who had planned, calmly persons gave themselves up after commission of u: determinedly, to shoot, that that person crime that were sane ? A. Yes. •c d remain calm, collected, and determined. Q Can you state any other circumstance tes- ( Would not that be indicated by paleness tific l to by the witnesses, from which you form f e face ? A. Not necessarily, your judgment in that respect? A. I form my i Might it not possibly? A. Possibly. opinion by including all the material facts as ( Don’t you know some persons in your ex- stated by the witnesses. e: mce who, when excited interiorly, are calm Q. Are there any other facts than those which xt'iorly, and are merely pale in the face ? A. you now state? A. Not that I can enumerate. ’Ll condition, under such circumstances, is Q. To what extent have you examined the loSpreceded by evidence of nervous disturb- prisoner since the transaction ? A. I have had n, The excitement rises as suddenly as the two interviews with her. One during her con¬ tndsive act, finement in jail. I had one nearly an hour at | Then you don’t think that a person who one time. a contemplating the crime is very excited Q. Independent of the statements she made vi1 has that pallor of face? A. Not neces- to you connected with the transaction and the uy- circumstance that led to it, do you find any i Might one be ? A. Possibly, present indications of insanity ? A. I do not. i Would it not be more likely for a person Q. Is it not a material element in the conclu¬ if nervous temperament than for a person of sion to which you arrive in that respect that she i mguine temperament ? A. Yes, sir. wras unconscious of the act at the time it was * In answer to a question from counsel on committed, and did not remember it afterwards ? bother side, you have stated that the prisoner A. That testimony strengthens my convictions mi rial here, answering the condition such as that she was, at the time of the shooting, in¬ o have described, and from the examination sane. if ,e facts and circumstances of this case, that Q. Suppose the fact to be that she, immedi¬ •o|was of the opinion at the time of the com- ately after the shooting, called the attention of aiion of this act, this prisoner was insane, the first person that came there to the fact that fl > is based on the assumption that the testi- the man killed lay at the bottom of the stairs, ncy which you have heard given in the case would that be an indication or not to you that >y rat prisoner on the stand was true ? A. I she was conscious at the time ? A. That would n juite willing to leave out of the considera- be of no importance, the fact being so. io of the case entirely all testimony as given Q. Suppose within a few minutes afterwards jyierself, and my opinions would be the same. she said she had killed him, and then gave her¬ 1 Based on what? A. On other testimony, self up, and gave a motive for killing him, m le assumption that it is true. would that have any influence on your judg¬ What other testimony ? A. Of the other ment as to whether she was insane? A. It si esses. would not. She might be insane and still make s,1 What testimony of other witnesses? A. these statements. king on her condition that forenoon, and Q. Would it have any influence on your judg¬ kchange in her disposition, character, acts, ment as to whether she knew at the time she ta"ts, for weeks and months before. killed him ? A. Under the present circum¬ ‘ Do you mean to be understood as saying stances I think that is an important element in hi the fact that the prisoner grew thinner in the testimony. le,;, changed her habits, became careless of Q. And if she declared that fact, it would Mi, and on that morning looked paler and tend to show to your mind that she did know ri'er in the eyes—that these facts are suffi- at the time she killed him. If she declared the it - to satisfy your mind, independent of this fact soon after, that she did, and gave the reason c that the prisoner was insane ? A. No, sir. why—a rational reason for it—and that she Then what are the other facts upon which knew she killed him at the time she did it. A. v base that conclusion as testified to by other It does not necessarily follow. >'i esses ? A. The fact of her conduct imme- Q. Would it not be probable? A. I think it lii ly before and soon after the shooting. would not. | The facts as testified to by other witnesses? Q. Do I understand you to say that if a per¬ U have them distinctly in my mind as given. son kills another, and within a few minutes | What is that testimony to which you refer afterwards states the fact that she did kill that s ven by other witnesses? A. The fact of other, and states a rational reason for such kill¬ ie igitation, her willingness to surrender her- ing, that that, is no evidence that she knew it at el her making no effort to escape, are all facts the time ? A. It might and it might not be. ci sually expect to find. Q. Well, add to that the fact that two or three Then is it true in your judgment, because hours afterwards she goas to a station-house and ® person who has shot another is agitated delivers herself up without anj' suggestion from ft the killing, that is necessary to go to make any other person that she ought to give herself The element of insanity? A. Not necessa- up, would not that be a circumstance tending to show that she was conscious at that time of the 1 rr The tact that the prisoner, three hours killing? A. Not necessarily. 80 Q. What would it probably indicate ? A. She tend has been proven. The hypothetical hi might feel it was just to do so. tions I put were strictly based on questic Q. Yes; kbut my question is—suppose she the case. claimed in the first instance that she did not know Mr. BRITTON.—I claim that it was no u that she killed the person at the time, and had no counsel stated that that would be a questic knowledge of the killing, claims to have been in¬ the jury. sane at the time, no one tells her from that time Mr. MORRIS.—Well, we both claim 1 down to the time she goes to the station-house there is no evidence on this point; so we | that she has killed any body, and no one tells for once—for the first time. her she ought to go to the station-house, or give The COURT.—I don’t think the quest , any reason why, and of her own volition 6he based ou facts in evidence. goes to the station-house and gives herself up Mr. BRITTON.—Then I shall be oblig as a criminal, would not that indicate to your keep this witness here until the case is c e mind that she was conscious that she had com¬ when we can get the testimony. mitted the crime or had killed the person ? A. Mr. MORRIS.—We won’t object to tha I think it would be the most natural thing pos¬ Mr. BRITTON.—I waive this question sible for her to do. reserve the right to put it afterwards. Q. But would not that indicate that when she Q. Now, suppose a person, receiving a a did deliver herself up she knew she had killed indignity at the hands of another, which r J somebody ? A. By no means. in her killing the person thus offering tl j] Q. By what operation of mind, insane or sane, dignity, how would you determine, by ] would a woman be induced to give herself up to symptoms or facts would you determine wli the authorities? A. That would depend on her the person committing the act wras insa nature. You might have one nature and I an¬ the time, or whether it was the result of pe o other. inciting anger and revenge. A. I should) Q. Do the insane have motives ? A. Cer¬ into account the entire history of the pe j tainly. her family7 history7, hereditary tendencies t Q. Do those who commit crimes under mania orders of any kind, and should consider transitoria have motives ? No, sir. whole history of her general health and vm Q. Now suppose this crime was committed experiences to which she might have been under an insane impulse and there is no con¬ jected ; then the evidence touching the c J sciousness of the fact at that time, and no infor¬ tion of the party accused before the commi a mation has been conveyed—nothing said in the of the act, and the evidence as given beM intermediate time to the prisoner about deliver¬ on her condition subsequent to the act, thebJ ing herself up, and she delivers herstlf up to the ior of the accused. I think it w7ould iu lii authorities, by what operation of mind could everything. that follow except the consciousness of having Q. Assuming it to be possible that the k n| committed the act—what inducement could may have been the result of provocation oi there be to such a surrender except the con¬ from a motive of revenge and satisfaction. ii sciousness of the act. A. If she had not killed might be denominated, what different sta 0 him she certainly would not surrender herself facts would suggest themselves to your :U for killing. than as though it were done under an impui o Q. If she did not recollect she had, and no insanity? A. If it were done for revenf ; one told her, be kind enough to suggest what would not expect to discover any meutalii would induce her to go to the station house? turbances preceding the act. I should sufis A. She would certainly know she had killed the party7 w7ould have taken a less public p* the man. and would attempt to seek his safety7 by fla Q. That’s the point 1 want to get at. She Q. Is it not a frequent occurrence that a would not have gone to the station house unless sons who have killed others, not insane, It she knew she had killed the man? A. No, sir. not sought flight? A. Yes, sir. Q. Suppose, when she arrived at the station Q. Is it not quite a common thing whenti house, she told the transaction in detail, stating sons have killed others through a great pas»i she had killed him, and the motive she had for caused by7 any7 adequate motive, that they (J killing him, and stated reasons which were in not given themselves up—shooting in h effect indignities upon her, and then added that streets and other public places? Do you 'i threats had been made to her, and she killed sider shooting in public places are evident* him for satisfaction ? insanity in themselves ? A. Not of tliemsejS Objected to. There is no such evidence in the Q. Suppose a case of this kind : Here case. young girl, active, and more than usually i- The COUBT.—Is that evidence in the case? ligent, plump, robust and in good health Mr. BRITTON.—It is not, but the counsel say7 between fifteen and sixteen years of i has claimed the right to put hypothetical ques¬ she is seduced by her employer, who is it tions. years of age or upward ; and suppose that d Mr. MORRIS. — I claimed a hypothetical case inal intercourse continues a year or two,I that was based on evidence in the case. continuing pleasant, good-natured and gj Mr. BRITTON.—This is a cress-examina¬ as usual; and suppose that then it comes tit tion, and I intend to show precisely that thing. ears of her father—the rumor of this intunajj Mr. MORRIS. I object to the question, as it and her father gently and quietly suggest assumes a fact that has not been testified to in her this rumor and asks her about it: slio the case at all, and that counsel does not pre¬ plies indignantly that she is able to take cat 81 If, and refuses to converse on the subject; dent facts down to the lime of the killing, it subsequently, and within a few days, was possible from those facts alone to say the : her father’s house and looks out for her- prisoner was not insane ? A. There was very soon afterwards, continuing this inter- strong evidence of a great degree of nervous fe as I have described it, she marries a irritability. ; man, and during the courtship of two Q. Independent of the killiug, are you so :-ee months she continues as before this certain that you think it could not have been :ial intimacy, and then she marries this otherwise ? A. I look upon the killing as the ) man, and even after that continues the culmination of the nervous state. sial intimacy with this same man, renew- Q. Leaving out of your mind the killing and within a month or two and continuing it considering only the circumstances which led to ' and a half longer, and during that period it, as you have heard, would it not be possible cinge has occurred except in health and to say the person was not insane at the time of 3 and assuming at the same time she is the killing? A. Yes sir, it is possible. i't to. one or more diseases of women, as Q. Now, that being so. what particular I asked you what specific act, prior to sider indicative of insanity ? A. I don’t recall ling, is in your judgment evidence of in- any evidence bearing on that question. or tending to show insanity—not suffi- Q. Beyond that it is the absence of acts, in but tending to show? A. Insanity is not your judgment ? (No answer.) uily shown by acts. The condition of Re-direct. dividual himself, his mental disturbance b the only indication there is. Q. Is it an accurate use of terms or words to was there, in your judgment, any act of speak of premonitory symptoms or predisposing soner, prior to the killing, which tended causes as specific acts of insanity ? A. No. V insanity ? A. I think her whole con- Q. Of course not, and the first specific act id demeanor on the morning of the day of insanity was the outburst itself? A. I think i shooting teuded to show a condition in so. Kvell-marked insanity is likely to occur, Mr. BRITTON.—I was not asking that. ou say that was a condition from which Q. But you spoke of her appearance in the ly might result. Now the question I morning as described by witnesses—her flurried ix> put is this: Was there any act prior condition and her appearance as simply show¬ lulling, on the part of the prisoner, which ing that there was some great agitation going c tself tend to show that she was of uu- on in the mind which predisposed it and pre¬ :aind? A. I do not recall any specific pared it for this manifestation, which was the testified to. outburst? A. Yes. hen her condition is indicative that she Q. That was an insane act; and you spoke of ipe a subject of iusanity ? A. Yes. another of those as indicating insanity as an in¬ ow, assume that she was insane, in the accurate use of terms ? A. I look upon it as i: which you have testified, when this act such. : omitted, when, under this evidence, do Q. In forming your opinion you do not sep¬ 6' that insanity occurred? A. That is arate the acts but take the whole case together ? II impossible to say. A. I take into view the entire history of the is it ceased yet? A. So far as I am occurrence. tiudge. R(-;ross. l|b you think it had occurred when she tthe station house two hours afterwards? Q. You don’t consider it an inaccurate ques¬ a not able to say. tion to ask what act indicates insanity if that is . it not a fact that where mania Iransitoria what a person wants to know ? A. I do not in¬ u rates itself in this way that there are tend to say so. ■ ]dications afterwards, and a considerable Q. Will you define, if you please, the differ¬ a awards, indicating that fact generally, ence in the state of mind of a person killing an¬ s uld expect to find them. other while acting under insanity—in otherwords 1 es it not often result in a confirmed in¬ an insane state of mind which leads to killing, i' A. Very frequently. and a sound state of mind under heat of passion I n't the persons who thus suddenly make which leads to killing—what is the difference in n aifestation of insanity frequently con- the state of the mind or brain of the person ? A. t be obviously and clearly insane after¬ If the act were done in passion I should not ex¬ s' A. Not general!y. pect to find any evidence of disturbance previous I;sometimes happens that way? A. It to or subsequent to the act. What the definite t 1 so. state of the person’s mind might be- Oi you specify any act of this accused Q. (Interrupting.) The question I ask you t killing that indicated to you an un- is purely psychological and automatical: What I |te cf mind; and if so what ? is the difference in the condition of the brain or • .ORRIS.—That has all been fully gone of th« mind between a person insane killing a bare. man, and a person sane killing a man ? A. RITTON.—I think not—no specific There must be some disturbances in the condi¬ t prisoner which indicated an unsound tion of the brain, probably a degree of cerebral oftiind after the killing. congestion, an unnatural fullness, in the insane I' ither think it is the absence of any state. lie st that indicated it. Q. In one case there would be a physical T n what is your answer to my question ? disease of the brain? A. There would bean k mind had not been disturbed I think unnatural congestion of the brain. nc probably she would have made some Q. Would not there be congestion in a very tc'Scape. high state of passion when the person was not V: there any affirmative specific act of insane ? A. There would be, but it would be of o’ ny omission of act, after the killing, a different kind. nc ated to you that she was of unsound Q. Well, what is the difference ? A. I do not ■l- In giving an answer to that question know that I am able to define the difference. tlciake into consideration the fact that Q. Insanity arises from congestion of brain, > ? lingly went to the station house. and likewise a high state of passion leads to a Yc consider that a specific act indicating congestion of brain; and now are these states of 'tji| A. It is one of the facts which I congestion of brain different physically in their it’ icessary to take into consideration. nature? A. Yes, sir; in the case of a sane per¬ Is lere any act of her’s, under the evi- son jthere would be no previous evidence of ■ a* the killing, which you would con¬ trouble, and the evidences would subside much 84 more completely and more speedily than in the Yes; with some for so long a period insane. with others less. It is becoming more g Q. Is not there this difference: In one case accepted. the brain is diseased prior to the breaking out Q. Some of the English authorities hi of thin transitory ebullition, in the other case more backward in recognizing these < the brain is sound ? A. It is not necessary that phases of insanity ? A. They have bee there should be a physical disease that we are Q. It was formerly considered that a able to recognize. mind must be utterly obliterated bap Q. Is not that the fact ? Is not that the theory could be considered insane, or irresp. of Ray, Brown, Bushnell and others, that in¬ A. That is so. sanity invariably arises from a disease of the Q. Delusion is not nowr considered brain? A. They suppose it diseased, but we unfailing condition of insanity ? A. NI are not able in all instances to discover it by Q. Dr. Choate has been referred to. I post mortem examination. know whether he goes as far on the si 1 Q. Is not that the accepted theory of all tliese many of the authorities and physician'] writers ? A. They say it is probable, but they believe he differs in some respects, but I fail to find evidence of it. particular I am not enabled to detenni Q. Is not that the accepted theory as distin¬ does not go so far; I am aware of that. guished from actual demonstration, accepted by Q. See if you can agree with him toi the profession ? A. I think they are unanimous tent: in the view that there is a morbid condition of “ There are cases of sudden outburst the brain. nia in persons who have not indicated The COURT.—A diseased condition? A. insanity to the common eye.” Yes. That you regard as correct? A. I Q. Now, is it not an accepted theory in cases edly. of mania Iransiloria that that diseased condi¬ Q. You recognize that as sound c tion must have existed prior to the single act A. Ido. which indicates this outburst? A. Yes; that's Mr. BRITTON.—Is that produced what I have been endeavoring to have the jury Choate’s opinion ? understand. Mr. MORRIS.—I won’t put that! Choate’s opinion. I read from a work tlj in my hand. Q. Did you hear the paragraph I ri Dr. Byrne—Recalled by Defendant. Dr. Beauford to Dr. Correy ? A. Yes. ■ COURT.—Direct examination resumed. Q. With reference to the effect of thj Q. Have you examined the authorities to strual and uterine disorders upon th which reference has been made—Ray, Taylor, A. Yes. Beauford and others—as to what they say on Q. From your experience in those dii the subject of mania iransiloria ? A. Yes. you agree with Dr. Beauford that that I Q. Without occupying much time to read ful cause of producing mental derail them over, did you hear the extracts that I read A. Yes, sir. from those authorities while Dr. Correy wasgon Q. Is it not a fact fully recognized b the stand ? A. I did. authorities that insanity in the family I Q. Do you agree or not with his opinion generations and show itself in succeed upon the authorities ? A. I agree with him. erations? A. Yes. Q. Is it a well established fact that insanity Q. And is not that true whether oil may be produced suddenly by some exciting, female ? A. Yes. overpowering cause, expend itself in an act, Cross-examined. and then pass away shortly after ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Would you consider a person in whose Q. To what extent have you given f family there was an hereditary taint of insanity, sonal attention to cases of insanity ? .. of a nervous temperament, of delicate health, extent that might be supposed of evei!« suffering from painlul dismenorrhcea, one in practitioner. . B whom you would be likely to find such mani¬ Q. You have held no special positional festations? A. Yes. sir. to that disease? A. No, sir. Q. As a predisposing, pre-existing cause, you Q. But incidentally, in accordance 1 would place this menstrual difficulty as one of extensive practice ? A. 1 es, sir. r the prominent causes? A. Undoubtedly, sir. Q. More particularly you have devJU Q. Is it not a fact that a person’s mind may attention to diseases of the female sex be predisposed to insanity, and yet give no out¬ Q. In the testimony which you ll ward manifestation that would be observable to you have given it under questions a* the common observer ? A. Yes. you read those authors for the purpd Q. A sudden shock of any kind has been re¬ trial ? A. I looked into some of thei garded as cause for developing this predisposi¬ purpose. tion? A. Yes, sir. O. Did you know Dr. Choate persoi Q. Don't the authorities maintain the doc¬ No, sir. trine that this form of insanity is as clear as any Q. Do you know what position he p other form ? A. They do; it is the generally A. Yes; I know he is attached to an ip accepted doctrine. for the care of the insane. Q. It has beeu for the last fifty years ? A. Q. Wlmt place? A. Massachusetts^ 85 hat works of his, if any, have you read ? condition of the mind of this prisoner at the c any; I have seen references to his time she went to the station house. It is on ic 3, but have never read any of his works, the question of insanity. inferences to his opinions ’were in other Mr. MORRIS.—I submit to the Court that s A. Yes. this witness and also the accused have been ex¬ iu were asked whether insanity might amined on that subject. I submit to the Court r the sergeant her name and pedigree ; then I Q. Was there anything further said tha j started off for the factory. remember? A. Nothing further that I re: i / Q. What was her appearance at that time ? her. A. Well, she had been crying. She was ex¬ Cross-examination. cited. Q. Did you take down those question) o Q. What was her manner while making this answers ? A. Nearly all of them. statement ? A. Well, she told her story calmly. Q. Have you got them with you ? A i Q. Did she say anything on the subject of where sir. or how it was done, in your presence ? A. No, Q. You were not examined before the n I did not think she did. I don’t recollect the ner? A. No, sir. circumstance. Q. Captain Woglom was ? A. I believe Q. Do you know whether she made any state¬ Q. You knew when the investigatior .i ment to Sergeant Bunce? A. I don’t know going on ? A. I did. what statement she did make. I went out im¬ Q. Were you there? A. I was. mediately to the factory. Q. In the room ? A. I was. Q. Have you stated now all that you remem¬ Y’ou may go. ber of what was said by her or either of the three parties in her presence ? A. Pretty nearly. I don’t recollect now. Q. At what stage of the proceedings was the pistol given up ? A. Mrs. Hyde’s husband gave it to me immediately after coming in. Thomas Langan—Sworn. Q. Any barrels loaded? A. No; I think he said he had discharged it. Q. What is your business ? A. Detect ( the Fifth Precinct. Q. What did he say ? What was his lan¬ guage ? A. I could not say exactly ; something The COURT.—Attached to the polii di partment? A. Yes. of that kind ; either that he had discharged it or drawn the loads. Q. When did you first see the prisoner ’ i Q. There was then no charge in the pistol ? all, to know her? A. I saw her on thert the homicide. A. No, sir. Q. About what time of day ? A. Ik ee Cross-examined. one and two. Q. You say ‘-something of that kind.” What Q. Where ? A. At the station house. | do you mean by “that kind?" Do you mean Q. Did you accompany her any where < In to say now that you have recollection on that day ? A. No, sir. That evening Capt. IV loi subject? A. Y'es, sir. and me accompanied her to the inquest. Q. What did he say ? A. Either discharged Q. Who particularly took charge of he J or drawn them—one or the other. The Captain. Q. Is that all ? A. That is about all. Q. You were walking up there with m A. Sometimes behind and sometimes aim idi A. Did you have any conversation vi bt going up. A. Not that night. Q. When next time did you see her ? h Sergeant George TV. Bunce—Sworn. took her down to headquarters next more j. Q. What is your position? A. Sergeant of Q. What was her manner, so far tvs y on the 5th Precinct Station. describe it, on that first day. A. On tl fin Q. Were you at the station house when the day or night I did not have any conve tkN prisoner and some other parties came in on the with her. day of the shooting ? A. Yes. Q. What was her manner ? A. She tin* Q. What was said to you by the prisoner or to be very culm in her manner. Once in > hi! any of the parties in her presence ? A. I saw she would shed some tears. them talking with Captain Woglom at tirst; Q. Was there anything particular in ht nan what it was then I did not understand. I was ner? A. No. sir. doing some writing there. He referred them to Q. The next day where did you go wither me, and handed the pistol over the desk, and A. Down to headquarters. told her to tell me about it. She stood for a Q. Where are they located? A. Courtn*t moment and did not say anything. I asked her Q. How do you go down ? A. In the r. ■ what it was. Mr. Hyde said, “ Fanny, make a Q. Did you have any conversation uin statement, and tell him all about it.” She said down. A. I did. she had shot Mr. Watson. I asked her where. Q. Did she say anything to you on tl stth She said at the corner of South Eleventh and ject of this homicide ? A. She did. First streets, in the factory. I asked her where Q. State to the court and jury the co:«u* she shot him. She said up stairs. I asked her tion, as near as you can remember it? AiU what she shot him for. She said he abused her I asked her how she came to shoot tl lit and insulted her. I asked her if he struck her. Watson ? She said he had abused her aunl|fl She said no; he abused her and called her her vile names, and threatened to discha e ha names. She said she went down stairs that the day before. morning, and when she came up he accused her Q. Did she say anything about the sh ting of being down stairs with another man, and A. She said she was coming out on the she shot him. and Mr. Watson was on the landing, rd u 87 1< her some very abusive names on the Q. Were you examined before the coroner? cig, and she shot him. A. No. J Did she say anything on the subject of the Q. You were there during the inquest ? A* tier of times she shot him ? A. I asked Yes. ■ iw many times and she said only once, Q. In the room ? A. Yes. j Did she say anything as to what occurred Q. You were not examined? A. No. »:he shooting ? A. No. I do not know as Q. When did you first speak about these ! d after the shooting. things, and to whom ? A. I don’t know. } 4s to where she went immediately after Q. When and to whom did you speak of footing ? A. Oh, she said he fell down stairs these matters ? A. I don’t know as I spoke 1 le followed him down to the foot of the about them to anybody except the District i) and there she remained until Ellen Cur- Attorney7. ime in from some place where she was at Q. How long ago was that ? A. Last week. rnment. She said she remained with the Q. Is that the first ? A. Yes. l;-or with Mr. Watson until their girl came Q. You never mentioned the subject to your captain? A. No, sir. j.Do you remember anything else she said Q. Nor the coroner ? A. No, sir. a g down there ? A. I do not know as I do. Q. You spoke about it first to the District i-Did you say anything to her on the sub- Attorney? A. Yes. t ' why she remained there ? A. Oh, yes, Q. You may retire. : asked her if Mr. Watson had abused her. lie-direct. i .id he abused her several times, and she il not shake him off, or something of that Q. You was not called at the coroner’s in¬ id I asked her- quest? A. No, sir. I MORRIS.—Speak out, speak out, don’t Q. Was not you sent for when you went to imethiug of the kind. the District Attorney’s office ? A. Yes. il BRITTON.—It is not proper to inter- Q. You was inquired of as to what you knew )tn examination that way, whatever might of this matter ? A. Yes. tl purpose and intent. Q. In answer to those inquiries you made L asked her why she did not leave the this statement? A Yes. cnnd go to work with her father, who was Q. That is all there is to that ? A. Yes. ttsame business. She said she could make nnoney with Mr. Watson, that was about l )id she say anything further with refer- ;e) the shooting ? A. No, sir; she said she Ellen Curley—Recalled by tlie Pros¬ . jt mean to kill him. ecution. I Vhat did she say she meant to do ? A. at he meant to scare him. Q. When you came in that day and found y Vhat did she say, it anything, as to the the prisoner at the door as you described it, did pie of her intending to scare him and what she say anything to you on that occasion ? A. ju say to her ? A. I told her it was a very No, sir. ! air. She said she could not help it. She Mr. MORRIS.—This is in rebuttal? s try for it. The COURT.—It goes to her state of mind. )n the puipose of her intent to scare him Mr. MORRIS.—She has been examined very u ask any questions ? A. I asked her ; fully as to what she said and what she did, and : c 1 not give me any answer ; she kind of all about it. ilc ; I asked her what was her intent in Mr. BRITTON.—I never heard of that in¬ n jo, for money or anything of that kind ; sanity until I rested the case. nd of smiled and did not give me any Question admitted. IW'. Q. Did she say anything to you on that occa¬ sion ? A. She told me that Mr. Watson was Cross-examined. lying in the hall and that she had killed him ; ou had charge of her the first night of but I forgot to say that at the coroner’s in¬ i nest, and took her from the factory to quest. ition-house. A. Yes ; the captain and Q.' This was when she stood at the door— was kicking at the door—when she told you? l- ou had charge particularly yourself ? A. A. She said that Mr. Watson was lying in the iil her folks were with her. hall—that she had killed him. <>• /hat was your object in taking her down Cross-Examined. ae 1-quarters ? A. I obeyed an order. I- ou were ordered to take her down there ? Q. You testified before the coroner, did not I is. you, that she was standing there wringing her i- he was in your custody and had been hands and moaning ? A. Yes, sir. er rom her cell ? A. Yes. Q. And that she told you to go into the room I was during that time you pumped these and tell some one to come out, that Mr. Watson ts it of her, or what you considered to be was lying at the foot of the stairs ? A. Yes. ts A. Yes. „ j_ Q. You certified to that before the coroner? 1- rhat was your object in doing it ? A. I A. Yes. nt to get the facts. Q. And that is all on that subject? A. Yes, I • I 88 Rc- tired. Q. Did you go in the evening ? A. I did | Q, Why did not yon state the fact which you Q. Was there anything whatever said on | now state, that she told you she had killed him ? occasion by Mr. Watson on the subject of § / A. Because I forgot it at the inquest to church ? A. There was not. Q. Nothing whatever ? A. No, sir. Re-coss. 0- Nothing said to you on either occasio j Q. I called your attention to the subject when the subject of his staying home with Mrs. 11 you was examined here, especially ? A. Yes, to take care of the children ? A. No, sir. sir. Q. Did you have a nurse there with your | dren ? A. My girL I had only one ser | She was there and acted in the capacity I wi < to have her Q. What were the characteristics of your i Eliza JfT. Watson—For the Prosecu¬ band as a father and a husband ? A. One o i tion. kindest and best of men. Q- What were his habits when in the saint i Q, You are the widow of the deceased? A as to remaining at home ? A. Always at ho, I am. Mr. MOKE IS.—Is that proper testimony Q. Where do you reside? A. Hartford, Con¬ Mr. BRITTON.—If it is not I cert : necticut don't ask to introduce it. Q. Did you reside there at the tune of this The COURT.—If he objects, I shall ha-1 homicide? A. I did. sustain the objection. Q. What does your family consist of? A Mr. MORRIS.—I object. Five children—four girls and one boy. Objection sustained. Q. How long have you been married? A Q. Look at that likeness and see if it hi Eighteen years last September. likeness of your husband ? A. It is. Q. Where was your residence last summer, in Q. Is it a good one ? A. Very good. July? A. Hartford. Q. When was it taken ? A. Three years o Q. Do you recollect the circumstance of he Q. Look at that and see whether that i and Mrs. Hyde coming to your house? A. I one exhibited by Defendant’s Attorney) i i do. likeness of your husband ? A. I think it if Q, Did they come more than once ? A. She Q. Did you ever see a copy of that pi g came twice- before ? .A Yes, sir; I have a copy. Q. About what time did she first come ? A. Q. When did you get it? A. My hns » I cannot fix the exact date the first time; the sent it to me immediately after it was ti i second time it was the 2d of July. Q. How long before that did she come first ? 3’o cross-examination. A- It must have been the last of May or the 1st Mr. BRITTON here asked an adjourmut I of June the court until the next morning in order fc « Q. How long did they stay the first time ? A. cure witnesses to show that there wei* A. From Saturday night until Monday morning. scratches on the face of the deceased V i Q. Did they come and go with your husband ? tend to show there was no abrasion what t A- They did. That is the testimony we propose to go int I Q. What did your family consist of on that do not wish to be understood as abeol^ occasion ? A. The whole family were at home, bound by that suggestion. Q. Did you have any servants ? A. Yes, one. Q. Were they there on Sunday, on either oc¬ casion ? A. They were all there; Mr. and Mrs. Hyde—on Sunday, on both occasions. Dr. Byi'ne—Recalled by the Defend Q. The first occasion when you was there did you go to church ? A. I did and Mrs. Hyde (Dr. Byrne arose from his seat in the fc accompanied me. enee.) Q. Was anything said to you by your hus¬ Q. You have heard the additional testing band on either occasion to induce you to go to Does that change your opinion at all as till church ? A. There was not condition of the prisoner's mind. A It ■ Q. Nothing said on that subject ? A. No, sir. not Q. On the second occasion when they came there how long did they stay ? A. From Satur¬ day until Tuesday morning. Dr. Correy—Recalled by the Ded Q. Sunday being the Fourth of July? A Yes. (And responded from his place in the § Q, On the second occasion, were the family ence.) all there as before ? A. All there the same. Q, You have heard the additional testinij. Q. How old is your oldest girl ? A. Seven¬ Does that change your opinion at all as ti* teen last September. condition of the prisoner’s mind ? A It >■ Q. How old is the youngest ? A. Three. not Q. Did you go to church on that evening— Mr. BRITTON to Dr. Correy.—Is ther* the 4th. A. I did in the forenoon. Mrs. Hyde testimony relating to this transaction tbs '* went in the forenoon with me. could conceive of, as to the conduct of this*- 89 after the homicide, that would change across the forehead, that might have been made unind as to the insanity of the prisoner? by anything sharp in any way. A. Nothing of 1, sir. that kind. ia.e question put by Mr. BRITTON in Q. Were there any indications of injuries on snxamination to Dr. Byrne. A. No, sir. each side of the centre of the forehead. A. ’1 COURT.—Can we make any further Nothing of that kind ; nothing about the fore¬ g ss in the trial to-day ? head except what I have described, which ap¬ 5a COUNSEL.—No, sir. peared as though it might have been produced ’1 COURT.—The counsel must be pre- by a fall. e under the intimation of the Court, to go Q. Was there anywhere on the face a cut into i jury to-morrow. the skin sufficient to produce blood ? A. No, 1 BRITTON.—I shall have to call three sir ; not that I observed. nses, whose testimony will occupy an Q. Was there anything on the head. A. No, u>r so. sir ; not that I saw. I; MORRIS.—I will commence to sum up Q. Were there any such marks about the face a row. as could be denominated scratches. T COURT then gave the usual admoni- Objected to. Let him state what they were. i the jury, and adjourned. He is not an expert. Mr. BRITTON.—There are certain kinds of wounds that have certain names. The COURT.—Let the witness say what he would call those wounds. They are entitled to object to the form of the question. FIFTH DAY, Mr. MORRIS.—Our objection is that the question calls for an opinion. He can state ’b COURT convened at the usual hour. the nature and character of the wounds. Q. Were there any indications on the face of i'<[zo D. Tice— Sworn for the what could properly be designated as scratches? Prosecution in Rebuttal. Objected to the question. It is for the jury to determine what caused them. He may state :• /here do you reside? A. Brooklyn, the shape, and how wide and deep these wounds it® District. were. >, /hat is your occupation ? A. An under- The COURT.—I will allow the witness to say er what he would call these marks. l fid you officiate as such at the decease of Q. What would you call those marks on the . Utson ? A. I did. face? A. Well, sir, had I known nothing of id you make any examination of the the case, and met it incidentally in the street, 3 eto the wounds upon it? A. I did, sir ; I would have said he had fallen from a carriage i cision to do so in laying him out and or a horse, and had been dragged a little on the shjg him. ground. There were indications, marks that rhat did you iind on the face in the way would be made by such a fall, falling and strik¬ 'Dries of any kind. A. I found a wound ing the ground a short distance. in ie left part of the forehead, about an inch Q. Was there on his face any where more ivebe eyebrow. than one distinct mark in any place—that is, . 'hat ? A. A wound. side by side ? A. No other marks except those bruise? A. Yes, a bruise, merely of I have described. o side skin, it did not penetrate through iin ; a bruise as one might receive Cross-examined. nl from a carnage or a horse and being Q. You said there were no other marks on SS a little ; not through the skin, but just the forehead or face of any amount or conse¬ oijir surface, so as to produce blackness. I quence. What did you mean by that? A. I uc ne commencing at the side of the nose, don’t know that I have said that. »ni j to the cheek bone. Q. You said there were no others than those ;. ow wide. A. I should suppose four- you described of consequence ? A. I meant by btl or three-quarters of an inch wide—not that not sufficient to call my attention to it; no lar here as to the extremity, scratches of any kind. i- hat was the nature of that as being Q. You did not see any others of any kind at ou the skin ? A. Not through the skin, all ? A. No, sir. i p luced in the same manner, Q. State what you mean by “any conse¬ i- manner yon think the person had been dragged ? covered Irom the bridge of the nose a lil < A. I would not think he had been dragged a to the side. great ways. Q. Was it prolonged any ? A. No ;. Q. In what part of the person and in what peared to be downward. manner ? A. By being entangled. Q. Was any other on any other part f Q. Entangled, how ? A. In falling from a face? A. Not that I discovered. horse or carriage. I suppose every person has Q. What was that one on the head? i (g sense enough to know ; some persons have was pretty good size, quite large. some common sense. Q. Was it bloody? A. Yes, a little. Q. I want you to give us a little of your Q. What was the direction of that? ( T common sense now; I want to know in what was more round than the others. manner you think a person would be dragged Q. Was that of the same character 31 to have made these appearances ? A. He might others ? A. Yes. have got entangled in the harness. Q. And those were all the marks on ! ( Q. And dragged his face on the ground ? A. and head ? A. Yes. Yes, a short distance. Q. Were any of these sufficiently e ai and deep to cause blood ? A. Nothir m Re-direct. than a little oozing out like perspiratioi Q. Did any body examine the face besides Q. Do wounds of this kind on the fa> si yourself ? A. My son-in-lawr; he is not present. blood at the time of event? A. Yes; 31 Dr. Holmes was the other. vessels of the skin, the capillaries, w: tl out a little blood; not amount to much li are mere abrasions ; get below that, £ i j have blood enough. Cross-examination. Dr. Thomas Holmes—Sworn for the Q. Do I understand you to say there is Prosecution. abrasion on each side of the nose ? A at the side of the nose and one across the ) .e. Q. What is your business ? A. Physician Q. Downward ? A. Yes. and surgeon. Q. One on each side of the forehei' Q. Do you embalm bodies; A. Yes ; am Yes. makmg a specialty of that just now. Q. Did you embalm the body of Mr. Watson ? A. No, sir. Q. Did you have anything to do with pre¬ A. P. Bachman—Sworn for thPr paring it? A. No, sir. secution. Q. Did you see the body before burial ? A. I was called upon in relation to obliterating the Q. What is your business ? Aim marks on the lace. turer. Q. Did you go ? A. Yes. Q. Were you proprietor of the estabhnit Q. What injuries did you find on the face ? where Watson was ? A. I found an abrasion of the skin about the Mr. MORRIS.—It was agreed with t' con size of half a dollar over the left eye about the sel, and announced to your Honor bn uu middle of the temple ; the other one on the that only the evidence would be off u tl other side of less size, and one on the bridge of morning with reference to the scratch* mli the nose the other side of the nose, and another face and forehead. On that annourmu on top of the head. and understanding I have discharge! ill» Q. What do you mean by “ abrasion of the witnesses, and am not prepared to r ?t w skin?” A. Merely struck up; the cuticle lifted other question. up and the lower one exposed. Mr. BRITTON.—That is the most 1 oM Q. Describe the size of the abrasion on the ing announcement I ever heard. I sail |uiet forehead ? A. There was one over the left eye, to the Court, in hearing of nobody it tl oblong, and a little less than a half a dollar m counsel who stood by my side, that th vo* length. probably be all I would want to offer, it th Q. How wide ? A. About an inch and a I did not wish to be bound by this frc 0® quarter. ing any other testimony I might think irupa Q. Was it a single abrasion or divided ? A. and the Court will bear me witness tl I* No, sir, not divided; one abrasion with the that. skin taken off; that was all on the forehead. Mr. MORRIS.—Counsel for the disiki Q. On the face, what was the other one on distinctly understood that this was u 0* the other side ? A. A small round one. question to be examined. Q. Were they discolored, either of them ? A. Mr. BRITTON.—The counsel now:as j Yes. Court and seeks to take advantage of a'icull Q. This on the face below; describe that? favor. A. There was one on the bridge of the nose, Mr. MORRIS.—It is not taking acadni a small one, and one on the side of the nose. tage; it is no favor. Q. What was the character of that? A. It The COURT.—The District Attorndiifl was an abrasion, the skin removed. to the Court he did not want to be ctdinta Q. What v as the shape of it ? A. This one but that ho would not extend his exai'1^01 91 wl not excuse you from examining this Watson, on March, 1870, from the 1st to the h;s. 10th. 3 Are you proprietor of the establishment ? Q. Having so discharged her, how soon did !S. she come back to the factory again ? A. She 2 Where Watson worked? A. Yes. got work out of the factory. She did not work ^ in the year 1870 did you discharge the at the factory at all by the week after that. felant at the request of Mr. Watson? Q. At the time you discharged her was Mr. Jacted to. Does your Honor consider that Watson in the city? A. He was out of the pd faith, on the understanding had last city. JW Q. How long did he stay ? A. About three il BRITTON.—The counsel may object to weeks. ■ estion, but I don’t like these remarks. SI MORRIS.—I object. That was our ex- Cross-examined. s mderstanding, and on that I let our wit- Q. He was up at New Britain, Connecticut ? 5S0. A. No, sir; he was in Hartford. I did not have f’ COURT.—Does this go any further than the New Britain machinery at that time. That s ischarging of the defendant ? was the Spring of 1870. SI BRITTON.—No. Q. Was he at work at New Britain at that D COURT.—Question admitted, time? A. No, sir. i. discharged her at the request of Mr. Prosecution eests—Testimony closed. 92 SUMMING UP FOR THE DEFENSE. ADDRESS OF MR. MORRIS.—If the pronounced, the judgment cannot court please, and gentleman of the jury, I ecu ted; so that it comes back to yoi congratulate you that we are approaching have to pass upon the question of so near the close of this important, and in death. many respects, very remarkable case. And I shall pass by, as unworthy of yc I desire, in the outset, to thank you on be¬ tention or of my consideration for oi i half of my unfortunate client for the at¬ ment, the suggestion that was thro' tention that you have given to the case by the prosecution in the opening • 1 from its commencement, the interest that case, that if there were extenuati i you have seemed to manifest, the attention cumstances they rested with anotl that you have paid to the evidence, and to bunal, that that was a question for tht i all the proceedings that have transpired. utive of the State ; as though that i And I beg, gentlemen, your indulgence have any influence in the determinaa while I present my views of the case to which you wall arrive. You will a you, although it may seem, and I have your verdict of guilty or not guilty, 1 vi no doubt it will seem to some of you, that the Executive of the State out of th n I may be unnecessarily tedious, yet, I can tion, and leaving everything elseoulfI assure you that I shall take much shorter question, except the one tribunal iw time in presenting this case to you, than is own consciences. I shall have, b a ordinarily taken in cases of this kind by get through with this case, son hi counsel for the defense, but I feel, gentle¬ further to say upon that subject, ne men, that it is my duty to present this have something further to say wit! el case fully, to state all the views that I have enceto the manner in which this ps« in regard to the testimony. tion has been conducted, and the lei This, gentlemen, is one of the most im¬ that have been resorted to for the j "pc portant duties that you, as citizens, can of taking that unfortunate girl’s life be called upon to discharge. You are sit¬ The District Attorney, in openin saj ting here as jurors. Upon your verdict that this is a case of murder or n oil depends the question whether this unfortu¬ and declined to call your attention > m nate girl shall live or die. That is the is¬ provisions of law relating to other gw sue. You are to determine that question, of crime. We accept the issue: ea, and you are to determine it upon the evi¬ no middle ground in this case. It i,'ua| dence in this case, upon the conviction that. of murder in the first degree or nojnflt that evidence carries to your minds. Shall of any crime. But, gentlemen, yo du\ she live, and go free from this court with is an important one in any othevies the charitable blessings of all Christian The result of your verdict cannot Up4 men and women, or shall she be sent to an have a great influence either for (oJa awful and ignominious death upon the for evil. As I have told you, the life)! ^ scaffold ? That is the issue involved in unfortunate prisoner is in your ham; th* this trial. Therefore I say, that you, as should be a sufficient consideration^ citizens, can be called upon to discharge no a sufficient consideration to induc-roul more important or momentous duty than give the most careful consideratio n um that devolved upon you in this trial. case. But, gentlemen, there areJOUft True, you do not pronounce the sentence quences wrapped up in the result <■! of the law, and true that responsibility does trial far more momentous than thlifafj not rest with you, yet, without your ver¬ that unfortunate girl. The ques>u i dict, the sentence of the law cannot be whether by your verdict in this cat W*1 93 in is to be sanctioned in the land, fest before I get through, you will pardon, uannot escape the consequences if you because I shall speak asil feel. I shall make u ;that is one of the consequences that no attempt at rhetoric or oratory, I should is flow from a verdict of guilty in this utterly fail if I did. I was not educated in •,e I believe in the old maxim as much that school—I have not had the advan¬ a? one, de mortuis nisi bonum—speak tages thatfcflt one for any such'station; what t f the dead unless you speak well of I say will be as I feel, you may be the >r But we would be recreant to our judges. b unworthy of our profession, if in a But I wish in the first place to impress ie f this kind involving the life of our this fact upon your minds, and the follow¬ n. and the question as to how and why ing counsel. I will venture to say that in i i placed in this position involved in the empanneling of this jury, more chal¬ ■ ,se, we should refrain from speaking lenges were made by the prosecution than i It is a fact in this case, and as a has ever been made by the prosecution in tire must deal with it and we must any case, involving life, in this State be¬ e it. fore. It was not we that objected, except Ifir, gentlemen, it is not necessary that in a few instances. We did not ex¬ hild say anything more, indeed it was haust half the challenges that the law i ecessary that I should say anything gives to the accused, and those were inress upon your minds the important excused because of the suggestions of my tj that now devolves upon you. You associates and myself without giving any 3 fully conscious of that as I am ; reason. But the prosecution come in i lave already weighed it over in your here and say : “We are the people of the u Qinds ; you have reflected upon the State of New York, we are prosecuting dice in this ca^e as it has been elicited this case as the people,” and they walk rr the witnesses, and I believe that into this Court, called the people, and set rman in that panel now has made up four of the people aside from sitting in ind, and that nothing I can say will that panel, without giving any reason or ie or alter it. Yet, it is my duty to any excuse for so doing, when those four !Sit the case to you. The District At- men have answered the questions that show nr in his opening remarks sought to they are competent to discharge the duty pi3s upon you the idea that he had no of jurors. The prosecution in this case s ial feeling in this prosecution, that have exercised a power not possessed by is here simply in the discharge of an the Queen of England. She cannot go in c l duty devolved upon him by virtue Court, through her representatives, and 1 oath of office; and I ask you, right set a subject aside without cause. There e.n the outset, which side, up to this is one State in this Union where it may be nnt, has manifested the most feeling done, but it is an anomaly in the adminis¬ d case ? I wish you to carry that in tration of criminal law and ought to be uninds in this case, and all through done away with. We didn’t ask the ordi¬ 3 se, because the District At1 orney has nary and usual questions in impanneling osing argument, and he will again the jury, except in a few instances : impress upon your minds that he “Have you read of this case? Yes: *: 1 feeling in this case, that he appears Have you formed and expressed an opin¬ e efore you in obedience to a duty im- ion with reference to it ? Yes.” The law ie upon him by virtue of his official says that you are incompetent. That was a >n. Remember the suggestion that not the jury we wanted. My questions, as o make to you—which side, up to this you will bear me witness, were : “Have u nt, has manifested the most feeling you any feeling or prejudice toward the g 3n evidence of being actuated by de- accused that will prevent you from going 3 r victory. What feeling I may mani¬ in that jury box and rendering an impar- 94 tial verdict according to the evidence ? ought not that to be sufficient for the a No.” You are the juror that I want. I cution? Ought they to step one jj did not care what your impressions were. breadth, if they could, beyoi d the si>i If upon your consciences you could swear tion, against the life of a helpless ere fl that you could sit there, and render a true It is not the duty of the prosecut i<| verdict according to the evidence, unpreju¬ strain anything against the life of a lo diced, that is all I desired. That is all I creature, and I say that in this cas< a ask. Was it so with the prosecution in ters have been strained from the beg i this case ? Oh, no. “ Challenge renewed to the end of this prosecution. Dor for principal cause : Have you read of recollect when this unfortunate beir a this case ? Yes. Formed or expressed an upon the stand what an ordeal she p a opinion ? Yes. Have that opinion still ? She restrained her feelings as mu i Yes. Step aside. ” It never has occurred possible, but it was with over and < -i to my knowledge before,—the people be¬ peated suggestions coming from cm coming in reality the challengers, instead that she should. But you could he tl of the counsel for the prisoner. The words, half choked, as they came t people come in court and say, we are the her mouth. parties and we are prosecuting, and yet And when I stopped the examinat ii they set a portion of the people aside with¬ chief, and the District Attorney had a out reason, or without cause, and without examined her, and then when I ar i excuse. For what ? I don’t believe that continue the examination, counsel go the course pursued by the prosecution in and most vehemently objects to the 01 this case has been the deliberate judgment tion, and argues for a considerable t e of the prosecution, but there are influ¬ the court that I having concluded ti< ences, as you will see before I get through, amination in chief, and he having u that have been spurring up, and goading examined, that I should be bound b; hi on in this case. foreclosed, and not permitted to pun*t But, gentlemen, District Attorneys, I examination further. That is a teaii think, are very much like other men; they rule of law, gentlemen, resting in tl'd have their feelings precisely as other coun¬ cretion of the court. But no judge t sel. It makes no difference how they feel land would ever apply such a rule tsi or t! ink they feel, the fact is that they a case. Such a rule would not be a*li have just as strong an interest as any coun¬ among the savages. Let us see iff, sel feels—the interest of success. They there is no feeling in this prosecutii;i don’t leave that feeling behind when they us see if this is disinterested, a dee go into that office. And again I appeal to elicit all the facts, a desire to get t you for the justification of what I say, to whole truth and to lay all the facts 'f< the proceedings all through this trial, from you, because good faith requires tit beginning to end; technical objections in¬ counsel upon both sides. We ha terposed here, technical objections inter¬ right to conceal; it is our duty to 11 posed there, controversies with the court, facts come out to you, all the facts ril and, I almost imagined, on one occasion, out any attempt to conceal. that the court was going to be overruled Suppose now, I ask you, that I ha * entirely. But there has been this continual wrong; suppose that I had exhaust i conflict from beginning to end, and I ask examination in chief before I stoppi; i you if that is not an unusual spectacle, mit that for the sake of argument, arss where a person is placed upon trial for life, pose that I had subjected myself 1 when the judge who sits upon the bench, technical rule that would exclude t fi calm and cool, not influenced by any feel¬ ther facts in the case. Now, I ask ;u ing such as influences counsel on either candid men, called upon to decid ti side, when the judge makes a suggestion case according to your conscience si 95 s« that fact, do you think it would be what do you think would be the duty of ■ uty of the District Attorney, if he the prosecution under such circumstances? J take advantage of a technical rule The person who represents the people is e;lnde the facts from you and to hang supposed to protect the innocent as well as it fill for a mistake? I mean, conced- to punish the guilty—a violent supposition y to be a mistake. Do you think that in many cases. But what do you think, hs the duty of the prosecution? The under such circumstances, would be the n ng out of that testimony in this case duty of the prosecution? Why, to put the 3ab blood; and I say, and I will stand witnesses upon the stand. In this very i that it was an unfair attempt on the court-room I recollect a case where a rt»f the prosecution. person was put upon trial for life, and B; go further, gentlemen. As the coun- evidence and facts were in possession 11 timated in his vehement speech to the of the prosecution which were strongly in in in behalf of excluding this further favor of the accused. They were suggest¬ itiiony, that it was a design of mine, ed to his Honor upon the bench, and there pase that it was a trick of mine ; I will was no dispute or question between the t in the most favorable light to the Court and the prosecution as to what was mention. Suppose that we, the coun- the duty; the witnesses were put upon the l, ad consulted together, and we had stand, and the prisoner went free. ido ourselves, “ well, now, we will stop This is not a case of blood-hunting. This dee how far the prosecution will go in is not a fox chase, this is a court of justice; isxamination, and then we will resume here is where we are supposed to elicit the ” i Suppose that is so ; take it for grant- facts and the evidence. The people come . It would be perfectly legitimate for us here in their majesty through their repre¬ d it, and perfectly proper. But say it sentatives. Is it right tliat they should a rick, say that we did that as a trick, seek to take advantage of any technicality? •r well, gentlemen, do you think it is Is it right that they should seek to take e uty of the prosecution to hang an un- the life of one of the people, their citizen? rtiate being because the counsel have Is it right that they should seek to exclude e:guilty of a trick of that kind? Do testimony upon the ground that it is im¬ •u'bink so? Do you think that it is the possible for the people to contradict it? it of the District Attorney to shut out Is that your idea, gentlemen, of what is icnce that might go to her benefit, and right and proper? I make these remarks lag her ? Do you think so? He rep- to you because I know what will be said to sets the people, at least in theory. Do you in the closing argument in this case. >u;hink now that that was the duty of You will be impressed with the idea that le vrosecution in this case, to seek, be- there is no feeling, and therefore I have u we hadn’t exhausted our examina- deemed it my duty to make the sugges¬ ui to close the mouth of this unfortu- tions that I have made. I leave it to your it> prisoner and to keep back facts that calm judgment to say whether I am right er due to you in order to enable you to or not. You are the final arbiters in this >ri a correct judgment in reference to case after counsel are through and the court iif ase? Suppose the prosecution knew shall have given the case to you. But I t witness who was familiar with facts, beg of you, in advance, do not say that the h i, if disclosed in a trial, would be a counsel for the defense are laboring simply in lete vindication of the defendant for victory, and that the counsel for the ?a st any charge, or a charge of this kind. people is disinterested and has no feeling, O' supposing that the counsel for the and therefore we must rely upon what he ec e knew that there were facts, and that says, when, from the beginning of the case ar is that could prove the facts that would to the close of the testimony, all the feeling 6 complete vindication of the prisoner. and all the anxiety that has been manifest- 96 ed, or if not all the anxiety, all the feeling No act done by a person in a state of m mi has been manifested by the other side. So, can be punished as an offense, and no i person can be tried and sentenced to an; ( at least, I think you will conclude that in ishment or be punished for any crime or < j that respect the defense are entitled to while he continues in that state. some consideration. The District Attorney, in his opem Now', gentlemen, what is the case? The alluded to that part of the statute, altl q counsel read to you the definition of homi¬ not reading it, and he alluded to the « cide or of murder at common law'. This tion of insanity, in referring to the q indictment is found under this provision of mon law definition of murder, that it i the statute: be perpetrated by a person of sound i Such killing, unless it be manslaughter, or and memory and discretion ; so thsll excusable or justifiable homicide, as hereinafter defense in this case had been fully a id provided, shall be murder in the first degree, in the following cases: first, vrhen perpetrated pated and the District Attorney was ; y from a premeditated design to effect the death of what our defense would be. Upoibi! of the person killed, or of any human being. subject, I shall have something to say tit- That is the sub-division under which after. this indictment is found. When perpetra¬ Now, gentlemen, you will bear in ul ted from a premeditated design to effect the language of the Statute, becaust hi the death of the person killed, or of any is important, as the Court will tell y tl human being. Now there is another pro¬ killing is not murder. It may not or H vision of the law to which I will call your justifiable, but there are cases wherfld attention. taking of life would be the highest tfyl Such homicide is also justifiable when com¬ that could be imposed upon you,ji mitted by any person iu either of the following where, should you fail to do it, you udl cases : first, when resisting any attempt to mur¬ der such person, or to commit any felony upon be a miscreant. It must be so comnted him or her, or upon or in any dwelling-house from a premeditated desigu ; and i ent in which such person shall be ; or second, when clearly formed to do the act, capac it committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of his or her husband, wife, parent, child, the time to comprehend the nature o the master, mistress, or servant, w hen there shall act, and a free control of the will, ar ab¬ be reasonable grounds to apprehend a design to commit a felony, or to do some great personal solutely necessary elements in the at injury, and there shall be imminent danger of mission of such a crime. It must b( re- such design being accomplished. meditated, thought over, reflected uu, Those are all the provisions of the distinctly formed in the mind beforilhe statute that I deem it necessary to call act is committed ; and when the inte ii your attention to, with reference to this thus formed, when it takes a definite m. case. My remarks will be addressed par¬ and shape and becomes a fixed fact i the ticularly to the main issue in this case, and mind, then the time that is necessa to that is : is this a case of murder in the first brood over it, or think over it is w illy degree or not ? Well, gentlemen, I think immaterial. It makes no difference o* that your minds have anticipated all that I short a time intervenes between than may say upon that. I think the conclu¬ and the intent, provided the intent isrell sion arrived at in the mind of every one formed, fixed, definite, absolute, ceiin. who heard the testimony was but one way Then it is immaterial how soon thad when the prosecution rested their case, follows the intent, but that mustbefoied for, as I said then, they failed to prove a in the mind, the mind must under-no single element of murder. There was some that it must have that purpose and d'g- slight testimony that justified the Court in in view, it must be the intent clrjr sending the case to you. But I say they formed before the mind moves the ar to did not prove an element. the commission of the act. There is auother provision of the statute Now’ the language of murder at coni-on to which I will call your attention it reads law is, as correctly quoted by the Dhiot ns follows : Attorney, where a person of sound met r? 97 iscretion kills a reasonable creature, and sedate mind, and without any apparent- ing and in the King’s peace, or as it justification, so far as could be observed l be expressed here, in the peace of by the person who saw it. That would be Commonwealth, with malice afore- a case of homicide from which the jury ht either express or implied. That would have the right to draw the inference t the law now, as the Court will ttll that the intent existed to take the life. The statute has changed this defini- But, gentlemen, supposing that occurred i s regards implied malice. There is in a room; nobody heard it, nobody saw it: ich thing now. The words of the suppose you heard a noise there in the ie are, “from a premeditated design room as if a struggle were taking place, Eect the death.” Malice prepense of and you rush in ; you hear the report of a jmmon law might exist without an pistol, and you find a man lying dead upon i to kill, and the killing would be the floor ; is that murder ? Oh, no, no ! nr. That is not the law now. This You infer from those facts that that man i changed by the statute, an intent was shot by the person then in the room, a formed to take life is the very because there is no other person in there ; lie of the crime, an intent premedita- you infer he is shot. Your inference hought over, reflected upon, I care stops there upon that state of facts, and ]>w short the time may be, so long as you cannot infer anything else. Infer that ind has arrived at that condition, he intended to kill, from what fact ? Infer t here is in the mind that formed, that it was not justifiable, from what fact ? d intent of purpose. Then the period Do you know that the man who was shot rlection is wholly immaterial. Bat had not got him by the throat, and his life rmust be that ; it is the very essence was not in peril ? From what fact will k crime, and no killing is murder un¬ you draw the inference ? How will you, iat condition of the mind exists, and in such a state of facts as that, infer that eithat condition of the mind is proven it was not justifiable ? Why, you could tl prosecution. True, gentlemen, we not; the law would not permit you. You n tell what a person is thinking about • simply infer the killing, that is all. You on know what you are thinking about infer that from the circumstances. That s oment ; except we know from men’s is not murder. Blackstone expresses the o i, their appearance, their looks—and idea in this way—and no other author QC!' from that that you are thinking of could express himself as clearly as he—in •ongs that that poor creature has speaking of murder : “ Which formed de¬ Ceiil. We judge of men’s minds, of sign,” says Blackstone, “is evinced by ir ntent and purposes, by their acts, external circumstances discovering that >b r actions, what they say, what they inward intention, as lying in wait, antece¬ ai how they look. The prosecution dent occurrences, formed grudges, and land to show these facts in some concerted schemes to do him some bodily ■date way that is recognized by law, harm.” That is murder, as Blackstone ie .aimer that will convince the mind states. Says Lord Hale : “No man can htury, that will be a basis from which commit a crime unless he has command of W can draw the conclusion that that his own will,” and the Court of Appeals tl intent. have decided that frenzy, mere frenzy, is a k< oere act of killing don’t prove mur- ground of exculpation. Where there is no ■ |f you see a man deliberately raise a discernment there is no choice, and where dy, discharge it, and the man falls there is no choice there is no act of the d, ru prove those facts, and the law will; and unless the will and the act com¬ ifi the inference that he intended to bine, or the will precede the act, there is Tiy ? Because the act was deliber- no crime of murder. The will must act; ; i was done with a deliberate purpose it must be the free act and volition of the 98 ■will; the will must guide the arm, and the as the human mind has painted, su i will must be under the control of the indi¬ the law describes, and such as every - ;i vidual. Unless it is, it is not murder. you understands. Oh, gentlemen, In Would you attach culpability to a machine? I get through you won’t think of s h Does Deity attach responsibility to any question ; you don’t nowr. No, gentl a being, bereft, from any cause, of the con¬ we are not engaged in trying a murcai trol of the mind that is the gift of the although I have no doubt the prose 3 the stand and asked him what bis first element of murder in the statement i ess was, said, “ Did you ever see that made to him ? What was it ? Why, he t before ?” We admitted that it was had seduced her. Now, this is their testi¬ ' isvolver ; we did not dispute it. “ Did mony, not ours ; this is what they proved; iver see that before ?” “ Tes ; by a this is their case, that he had seduced her, r upon it.” We didn’t dispute it at that he had followed her from place to ; here is no question about that, Mr. place ; she had tried to get rid of him, and sict Attorney; we don’t make any. she could not get rid of him. This is ): you sell her that ?” “Yes.” “What their testimony ; this is the testimony that k ” “Two or three weeks ago.” We they offer, and they ask you upon such tes¬ 1 dispute that; that is just what we timony as this to say that the prisoner is 1 and the witness leaves the stand guilty of murder. They proved this. This a vas done for a little stage effect ; they is their witness, this is their testimony : a d to call the witness upon the stand “ He has been the ruination of me,” they l ?k what his business was, and then proved by another witness as her expres¬ '3 3 the pistol. “ Did you ever see that sion. Followed her, dogged her about, :o;?” “Yes.” “Did you ever see ruined her. She could not get rid of him; > isoner?” “Yes.” “Did you sell “persecuted her,” that they say. That is "at?” “Yes.” Hand it over to the their testimony, that is their case. y What an effect! Evidently the What more have they proved ? The lEil is not up in arranging scenes. sergeant, Bunce, testified to some state¬ V have admitted those facts ; now, ments that she made when she went in to atlse do they prove ? Mr. Pixley says him, very similar to those made to Captain ■t rhen he went out there that this Woglom. But there is another officer by seer’s brother came down there, and the name of Langdon, a detective. I o ng his hand back towards his sister, have reserved him for another branch of s.‘I told you not to do it.” I will my remarks, and I leave him for the pre¬ >wpou before I get through with this sent. e jiat there is not a word of truth in Now I ask you, gentltmen, if I have not it, □d upon that you won’t have any fairly suggested to you the evidence for litSion. What else do they prove ? the prosecution ? Do you think it is eS5 roved by Miss Curley that she was murder ? They prove that this man 100 seduced her when she was but a child ; ing, and very clearly, that accordii she is not much more than a child yet. their theory, if you believe the state You have daughters, some of you; I am of the prisoner as to what took pL sure you have. I hope you all have; I the moment preceding the shooting, hope that you have daughters of the age it is justifiable homicide. Accordii that this child was when this great mis¬ their own theory, if you take her j fortune overtook her. How do you look ment, and I think you will, as to upon them, gentlemen? As women, with occurred preceding, because the evi their minds and their judgments formed, that they have given goes to corrol a prepared to enter into a contest with a her statement, facts that they thenrv man of mature age? Do you so regard have call d out; then if you believe u them? Oh, no! oh, no! You regard them it was justifiable homicide accordii as children, they are children fifteen years their theory. Well, gentlemen, strilo of age. her statement as to what occurred They have proven that this man, then, and then I ask you upon what evi accomplished her ruin, and pursued her can you say how it occurred? You day after day, and persecuted her, and to heard the doctor on the stand descri i use her expression, “She could not get course of the wound, of the bullet. rid of him.” That is their testimony. girl is a short girl—you have seen They come in Court—great God! — and Mr. Watson a man, some describing prove by their own testimony that the as five feet ten inches. The ball wa*p- man she shot effected her ruin when she he must have been in contact with h; was a child fifteen years of age, and pur¬ could not have been any distance, sued her with unrelenting feeling for years, had been a distance away from hi until she was driven to desperation and ball would not have gone up as the ■ shot him. That is their case. They ask described it in that direction. Till you to say that this is a case of murder— trict Attorney saw the force of the they ask you to convict this child? Oh! at once asked the doctor 1 ‘ was ther i gentlemen, hers has been a hard life! She thing that obstructed the course came to this country a child; her father bullet?” That is the testimony of he had preceded her. He came to this free own physician, of their own witness ft land to better his condition, where it is Creamer swears positively and dis supposed that people have protection. that there was nothing there to ol Has she wronged anybody? Bear in mind the course of the bullet, to the ques the history of this child from the day that the District Attorney; and I say, £i she landed upon our shores until she fell a ing to their own testimony, these victim to the machinations of this man. must have been in conflict, and shti But I will call your attention to her his¬ have been very near in order th tory more fully hereafter. bullet should have taken that cour. Now that is the prosecution fairly stated. cause if he had been a distance aij The District Attorney may twist it and could not have taken that course, turn it and pervert it as much as he has a dispute about that can there be up' mind to, but those are the facts proven by evidence? Exercise your own col him. They cannot be wiped out of this sense and your own judgment. Ti? case; they stand as a shield to this pris¬ height of this man, the height of tb g* oner. and the testimony of Dr. Creamer,® What is our defense? We say in general say that it corroborates her statM terms that Fanny Hyde was an irrespon¬ that he had hold of her at the til & sible being at the time she shot Watson. this occurred. He was right there t And we say upon their own theory of the time, the very time, the moment. ease, as my associate told you in his open¬ There is other testimonv that the;)] 4 101 ■that goes to corroborate her in this would see some carpenters and mechanics ■jukr. They have proven by her that in whom you had confidence, and you i ed violent language to her on this oc- would employ them to execute those plans. fa; that he used language indicating If you want a portrait painted you go to i feeling, or temper, at least. The na- an artist. If you want a wagon built you tof his remarks showed that he was go to a wheelwright; and so with every j ased ; she at that time, at all events, department of science or branch of indus¬ 3 ot pleasing to him in his relations to try; you go to the parties that you think \ She, at all events, according to testi- have made these particular branches a j called out by the prosecution, was study, that they understand what you ; leasing to him, and the language that want, that they can furnish you what you led denoted that he had some feeling want. But when we come to refer to au¬ >! and would go to strengthen the thors and physicians who have made the ;(y—the fact, that her testimony upon mind, the human intellect, and the brain, ii point is true and correct, taken in the seat of intellect, their special study for loetion with the testimony of Dr. life, up jumps the counsel in Court and ridi¬ ener. cules the idea. “ Well, is not the theory ' ibmit to you that they have corrobor- advanced that some maintain, that every¬ >< by the testimony of their own wit- body who commits crime is insane ? ” 553, or the testimony called out by them “ Oh, no; not at all. That is an evidence css-examination, the statement of the of insanity itself, or at least an evidence of s ler'as to what took place at the very unsoundness of mind in the person who iunt of the shooting, upon this occa- adopts the theory. No authors adopt that, e If they have, then I say that, ac¬ no men of note. Oh, no; not at all.” re lg to their own theory and according Well, I suppose the prosecution will t ir own testimony, this shooting, un- concede, and I think they did concede in r ie circumstances, was justifiable, and the opening that there might be such a d the law to which I have called your condition of the mind that would render ;e»ion. the person unaccountable, and not respon¬ f n aware, and so are you, that there sible for any act that they might commit i me persons in the community—there during its operation. I think at all events n ers, however, are diminishing very he went thus far, that there might be a n y—who imagine that when a defense condition of the mind, not in so many iranity is interposed in favor of life, words, but I gather from the tenor of his it is simply a resort of counsel ; that remarks, and I don’t think he will dispute hi mere pretense; that in order that the proposition, that there might be a con¬ CEt defense should prevail the insanity dition of mind conceived that would ren¬ t.ji party must be so transparent and der a person irresponsible for the commis¬ id it that it is patent to the world. In sion of any act during its continuance. he words, we must have a raving maniac But, say they, this condition cannot be c< rt before we can interpose a plea of brought on suddenly, and it cannot pass is ind properly. And lawyers get up away suddenly ; that this disease of the d ipend a great deal of senseless de- mind is of slow growth. Well, there are ion in regard to this subject; and it different affections of the mind. There cumon in a single breath and single may be insanity without the mind’s being at ce to wipe out all the authors of the affected, at least perceptibly, to any per¬ >t :ty years, and all the men who have son, or perceptible to any physician or any id this subject a study during their expert. A man’s emotions, his feelings, res Yet if you wanted to build a house his affections may be disturbed and de¬ 'ii mid first go to an architect, and you ranged ; his intellect may not. That is mi have your plans arranged. You moral insanity, well recognized by the 102 authorities, well understood. The intellect What is our proposition in this ifl may be affected, the feelings, the emotions, It is the proposition maintained by a h the affections may remain sound. If you medical writers upon this subject fo| see a man rushing at an engine coming full last forty or fifty years. It is the* speed, which to bim is as palpable as the air, trine maintained to-day by all the le J that is intellectual insanity. His mind is physicians of this land who have mac I disordered, his mind is not right, his per¬ mind and diseases of the brain a speed ceptive faculties. But it is not necessary It is that persons having the predispi to go into any elaborate discussion upon causes that have been indicated ii]j the different kinds of insanity. They are case may be deprived on the instai'i various. My remarks will be confined to quick as the flash of lightning, of r a the particular case we have now under con¬ and accountability, and may, during hi sideration. temporary suspension, commit some .1 If an instant of time, as is conceded may violence, take life, and be as irrespo l be the case, may render a person account¬ as though they had been insane all d able for his acts, if the devil seizes hold lives. That is the proposition. We^ of the heart of a man and leads him to the out with the proposition in this case, d perpetration of some act that sends him to that branch of it, that Fanny Hyditf the gallows iu an instant ? I ask why, if prisoner at the bar, had been seduc I by act of Providence the reason is de¬ the person she slew, at fifteen years 04 throned, the man is not unaccountable for had been pursued by him from tha ii what he does during its dethronement ? In until this occurrence; that her 11 murder, an intent to slay, perfectly formed had become broken and she a wreck hi on the instant, constitutes the crime under she was suffering from disease at then the statute of the State, as now construed that her mind was at the time afla and applied by the Court of Appeals, why under great strain, the sense of so men should not the analogy hold good in refer¬ wrong pressing upon it, great grie:U ence to irresponsibility for crime ? If a all these things existing at the timeii second can make a man a murderer, why to that this assault made upon her btl cannot an instant of time create unaccount¬ man, and, like the touching of the ill ability ? The law which says, if a man to the powder, it exploded, and she b ti conceives a murderous intent on the spot, irresponsible. It is said that is a tfl he shall go to the gallows, should also re¬ that cannot be maintained. Is skill cognize that if his mind is wiped out on now ? Is she insane now ? No ; e the spot, he, at that instant of time, be¬ not what you would call insane. You comes irresponsible. heard her upon the stand. We d 0 But, gentlemen, the proposition is not claim that she is an insane being tli in this case advanced and has not been ad¬ There she is, what there is left of Ik vanced, although it seems to be so under¬ wreck ; there is not much life left tal stood by the prosecution, that a mind may —it is small, it is but little. But wl 1 be perfectly sound in all particulars and in tie there is left of the mind is noticJ* every respect, a person may be perfectly we don’t claim that. well and healthy, the mind perfect in all Now, I shall omit, upon this bran) particulars, in an instant become deranged, the case, much that I had intended toll and in an instant the mind and body be¬ your attention, because you heard t!k come healihy again. Nobody that I am timony of the physicians yesterday, id aware of would ever maintain any such seems to me that it has been renden u doctrine as that. It is not the doctrine of necessary ; in fact, I think it won the books, it is not the doctrine of any perfectly safe if I should leave it oukl case that I have examined. That is not gether ; but as I know that this will’t our proposition in this case. burden of the remarks of the counsel subject, it is necessary that I should erfully exciting cause, anything more cal¬ our attention to some authorities in culated to stir the soul and dethrone the siuce to this subject. I beg you to be reason than that ? If you can, when yon ht with me ; I know that you will, retire to your jury room to reflect upon it, s what is this impulsive insanity, as it state what it is. I will be glad to know it. i ed ? You may call it impulsive, or But it seems to me that a more powerfully may call it any other name you like. I exciting cause could not be conceived than l care what name you give it—it is the taking a women suddenly under such cir¬ dion that I have to do with. Names cumstances, while she was in that con¬ i: nothing about, but it is the fact that dition, and making such an infamous (is a person possessed of an hereditary proposition to her as was made, and at ias one of the superinducing causes, such a time. Well, now, the greatest ad a marked change in her habit and author, the greatest medical writer, and pjsition, and other strong indications one who is considered by courts in this jedisposing causes; another strong country and in Europe as one of the great¬ ciposing cause—or evidence, more est writers on medical jurisprudence, says: cy speaking, the evidence that there is ‘ ‘ With such cause it would break out sud¬ singe going on, that the mind is not denly—it would terminate in a few hours. illy free and right. Added to that we It has been called transitory mania, ins an- vjthat her health was broken down, taneous mania.” >r years she had been suffering from Yet lawyers will tell you, “Oh, no ; this ase, which, as testified to by a phy- cannot be so. Don’t insanity have its of high standing, who has made that period of incubation ?” What insanity do ij t his particular specialty for years, you mean ? What phase of it are you •f he greatest importance ; and all the talking about ? Don’t insanity have its h'ities say that that cause itself is periods of incubation ? Yes ; it had it »rh to produce insanity. If, added to here. It had been going on incubating t, there is some sudden shock, some from the time that the deceased wrought answering cause suddenly sprung upon the ruin of this girl. Every pain that she eian in that condition, that that alone suffered in consequence of that was its nigh to cause this temporary depriva- period of incubation; every hour of grief in a ‘ reason that is called by the books consequence of her suffering was its period iprary insanity, or mania transitoria, of incubation ; every tear that she shed in minctive mama or insanity. It makes consequence of this was giving evidence of dierence what you call it, it is the fact this incubation. Every wild and frenzied h hich we have to deal. Sometimes, expression that morning before this fatal ■sully on the application of a pow- act was its period of incubation. When il exciting cause—mark you, gentle- she said in Washington, in the agony of n, on the application of a power- her soul, when she was weeping because iy sciting cause—and can you imagine she had to return to this city, “ I feel that I ore powerfully exciting cause to there is a curse hanging over me,” was n£>n this state that the anthors speak evidence of its incubation. When sitting ju than the party being in the condi- by the stove there that morning, in the n i3tified to ? Can you imagine, I say, agony of her soul, contemplating the ruin 7 'ore powerfully exciting cause than that had been caused, (oh, what a flood en woman, a young woman, is in this must have rushed into her mind at that id ion, suffering intensely at the time period !) and when she said, I wish I was m his cause, and that a man should dead, was its period of incubation. ifeij ly seize hold of her and make such Thank God the day has gone by when >rt isition as was made to her—I ask irresponsible beings can be dragged to the you can conceive of any more pow¬ gallows by the idle declamation of coun- 104 sel. It is oar duty as men, it is your duty world, and when we are trying a def *. as jurors, to examine this subject calmly less woman for shooting her destroyer * and diligently. The Court will do it, and that can all be blotted out by the bres 4 the Court has done it, and for the patience the prosecution. That won’t do, gi|| of the Court and the fairness of its rulings men. You are not going to try thii« in behalf of my unfortunate client, I thank upon any such basis as that. But a it. Let us see what the authorities say the counsel gets up to controvert the * upon this type of insanity: trines that we advance, he must givi* In cases like that of Mercer, where a man de¬ son, and law, and facts. stroys the seducer of his wife, or sister, or Says the counsel to one of the j a daughter, we often see the influence of the in¬ sane temperament, and the fact assists very cians—to Dr. Corey—who for ten or < a much in determining the quality of the act. years has been in charge of an aig (Ray, p. 163.) where these diseases are treated, wl a We also know, as a matter of no very unfre¬ quent experience, that insanity may be produced made it a specialty for many yean* instantaneously by a profound moral shock. still, when I asked him the question, k Thati8, it may instantaneously develope had changed his mind by any of the ti h itself—burst forth from this shock—and I didn’t put it in that form, but t;i then the patient is totally unconscious and what I meant—that they had offered* irresponsible for any act that is committed. the stand after I had rested : “Well,* If a person may be deprived of his senses by tor, could anything that she could a? a piece of good fortune or the death of one near done subsequently change your m 1! and dear to him, is it strange that the same Tesult should follow an event calculated above “ No.” Why ? Because the eviden n all others to stir the soul to its inmost depths ? so conclusive and overwhelming 1 hi (Ray, p. 182.) mind that at the time she committe lb “Oh,” says the counsel, “that cannot act she was irresponsible, that he il be ; it must have its period of incubation. ” not believe otherwise. One form of this affection is that of insane The existence of insane impulse and * impulse, appearing suddenly, without obvious taneous mania is supported as well 1 A premonition, and disappearing with equal rapid¬ lessons of pathological psychology as by si ity. It has been called impulsive mania, in¬ lated cases. Amid the rapid and tumi Ml stinctive mania. (Ray, p. 238.) succession of feelings that rush into the in the reflective powers are paralyzed, a: A What nonsense, gentlemen, isn’t it, for movements are solely the result of him o' authors to be writing about ? And yet, matic impulse, with which the reason i< for the last forty or fifty years the greatest little to do as with the movements of an Ml infant (Id.) medical minds of the civilized world have And yet, with the evidence in thi» been advancing this very doctrine, illus¬ and with the authorities and the fact J9 trating it by hundreds of cases; men who are asked to hang this prisoner. C ir have had charge all their lives of the in¬ Not a day or a moment do I believe ilk sane in insane institutions, who have made this reaches you, after the case is sit this a specialty, say that this is the case. submitted to you, will you allow thuin Isn’t it strange that all these great minds, of oppression to rest upon her, bij® such as Bucknell, and Tuke, and Bland- will say with one unanimous voice, ' .ail ford, and Taylor, and Ray, and Pritchard, that hand and let her go free.” Costello, Woodward, and many others— In medical science it is dangerous to a® isn’t it strange that-they should be for the against facts. last forty or fifty years asserting this doc¬ If it is dangerous, isn’t it more dan im trine, and with unanimity maintaining it, to senselessly deny them without rooi going in courts and testifying to it, courts I wish you to pay strict attentioito listening to it, charging juries as to the paragraph that I am going to readiw fact, and juries rendering their verdict in an authority : accordance with it; isn’t it strange, when In medical science it is dangerous to with one breath, and in this age of the against facts. Now we have an i rumen. n* 105 138 related by men of unquestionable corn¬ They are not fictitious, invented by medical er and veracity where people are irresisti- men for the purpose of puzzling juries or de¬ ipelled to (he commission of acts while feating the ends of justice, but plain, unvar¬ ,j onscious of their nature and consequences, nished facts as they occur in nature; and to set up. 327.) them aside without a thorough investigation, as unworthy of influencing our decisions, indicates Jinsel seem to imagine in this case anything rather than that spirit of sober and i\ if the party had any recollection indefatigable inquiry which should characterize the science of jurisprudence. We need have rat occurred, that that would show no fear that the truth on this subject will not it there was an intent to kill and that finally prevail, but the interests of humauity i 'arty was sane. You have heard her require that this event should take place speedily. (Bay, p. 327.) tiony upon that subject; view it either Is not this author justified in saying that ytake it either way. It makes no dif- the interests of humanity require that this e ze, no earthly difference. The author¬ event take place speedily, when we have ity and the doctors say, “ Some will on record the fact that men who have :cect and some will not recollectit studied this subject, who have studied the n proof either one way or the other, statistics of trials where this defense has t he counsel seem to think it strange been interposed, state, that for every in¬ it the insane should be conscious of nocent person acquitted under this plea, ii an act, and yet be held irresponsible a dozen,—a score,—of maniacs have been "ing an act that they were conscious executed ? In the report of the Massa¬ a the time. Why, gentlemen, there is chusetts Lunatic Asylum, the distinguished king more common. I suppose you physician in charge says : revisited insane asylums, some of you. Of all the cases that have come to my knowl¬ u lay go out to Flatbush, where there edge, and I have examined the subject for ■ ime five or six hundred of those years, I have known but a single instance in which an individual arraigned for a murder f( Lunate beings, and you will be enter¬ and found not guilty by reason of insanity, has al there by some of the insane very not afterwards shown unequivocal symptoms of spably. You go into the parlor, and insanity in the jail or hospital where he has been confined, and I regret to say that quite a u vill find a lady there who will sit number who have been executed have shown as w and discourse most beautiful music clear evidences of insanity as any of these. o:the piano. She will entertain you (Quoted by Ray, p. 341.) it versation as rationally as any person, This is a terrible disease ; it is a terrible i rou would come away, if you were affliction, but oh, what can be said when* a fc ware of the fact, and imagine that person is executed, suffers an ignominious 3 is one of the matrons or had charge death—when it afterwards turns out as it t) institution. Go through the insti¬ has in many of these cases that the persons ll, and you will find many in whom at the time they committed the acts for u ill discover no evidence of insanity which they suffered death were irrespon¬ a ver. But ask that girl her history, sible. That the mind given them by the I ten you will discover the state of her Deity was blotted out, not by any act of nt You will discover more; you will theirs, but by influences entirely beyond icier what it was that produced that their control, by the act of an all-wise and -tof the mind, that ruined intellect, inscrutable Providence, and that they were d aut her up in a living tomb—the unconscious of what they did. Better that erne! the libertine! Oh, I tell you ninety-nine guilty go free than that the 3r is not an asylum in the land, if all laws of God and man should be thus set il be told, that would not emit enough at defiance. m le humanity stand aghast. Mania, characterized, as in these cases, by a sudden occurrence of brief duration, has lately Aj the force of these facts, gentlemen, been spoken of as destitute of a proper founda¬ is be overcame by something more tion in fact. (Id.) mingry declamation against visionary Very lately it has been so spoken of, ao 3s and ill-judged humanity. gentlemen, very lately. But— 8 106 There is no substantial reason for the doubt, dress, and lest it may have escapi and I am not aware of a single writer on in¬ sanity, of any mark, during the last forty or fifty tention, I beg of you to listen whi years, who has not recognized its existence. (Id.') again, because it seems to me tha Have all these men been wrong for the volumes: last forty or fifty years, all these great It may, says he, in his report for 1 some time back, too; the matter wi minds and intellects that have made this a derstood then—It may be a consolat' study for life ? Are you going to say that encouragement to jurors in folio win they are all wrong—are you going to over¬ own sincere convictions of the law in such cases, to know that in a pie ride their collective judgment and their inquiry as to the event in every case < experience, the experience of their lives ? in New England, where the accused Are you going to say, upon the mere naked defense of insanity set up for him, ai quitted on that ground, it has been assertion of a person who has not made no instance has occurred where the this a specialty, are you going to say that time has not abundantly verified the those were all wrong, wipe out all these of the defense; a fact which ought silence the false intimations always j authorities, the medical testimony, and such cases, that insanity is set up as say, “ Well, I guess she was not insane ; sort of a desperate defense. I guess they were all wrong ; I guess, But I have no idea, gentlemen after all, her mind was right; I guess, feeling that has been manifest’ after all, she was not laboring under this case, that it will silence any sut insane impulse ; I guess she was all right; tion, and, therefore, I am taking we will set these authorities aside ; we will of your time than I would in i take the chances and hang her ? ” Oh, no ; these authorities upon your mini I am not afraid of that. Most of them Says Dr. Guy: have recorded cases occurring within their The most distinguished author home and abroad, have recognized I own observation—“most of these writers mental unsoundness as existing indr and these doctors that have made this a delusion. The cases on recoid are S‘ study,” says this author, “have recorded that the only difficulty is that of sele i cases occurring within their own observa¬ “William Brown,” says thil tion,” that is, they have seen the develop¬ “ was executed in Manchester ii ( ment of the disease, they have watched strangling a child he had accide i its manifestations, and they know the fact. one morning while walking in th < Dr. Jarvis refers to some seventy-five or On the trial he said he had neve« a hundred cases of this disease. I don’t child before, had no malice again:! know anyone who disputes it—any physi¬ give no motive or reason why he *8 cian. Leave out the authors. The authors was tried, convicted, and execute'1! are a unit upon the subject—all who pre¬ ing the language of Lord Brougl tend to treat upon it. I don’t know a phy¬ this execution I add that it was t> sician that disputes the doctrine. There nal disgrace of the court that ti are physicians who don’t believe that a But civilization has wrought a miud can become diseased all at once, or a the treatment of persons eith party become insane all at once whose nently or temporarily deprived mind was perfectly sound and whose body Esquirol, one of the most distl was perfectly sound before, and then in an authors upon this branch of info instant all become right again. Nobody ence, while in charge of the 1 disputes that. I maintain no such doc¬ Paris—I think in 1793, if I mists' trine in this case as that. The authorities date—by his influence and by It that I am reading here do not maintain edge of this disease and his hum: any such doctrine as that. That is notour succeeded over prejudice and brul proposition in this case. Dr. Woodward, struck off the chains from the sw<»< to whom reference has been made, was of the unfortunate lunatics, aijl quoted by my associate |in his opening ad¬ them as human beings. But at* 107 ow were they treated? Bound in occur on the completion of the act of violence. !, put in straight jackets, punished A person so affected, should he commit a hom¬ icide, would be likely to justify the act, or fail physical punishment; all that has to remember it, but would very rarely attempt l away. This disease is recognized to conceal his work or fly from punishment. lot as it used to be. A, great many Bear that in mind, gentlemen, in this tr from the affliction; I think about case. four. I think that is about the sta- In speaking of Esquirol I made a mis¬ A great many recover. Science take ; I intended to refer to Pinel; the Ivanced upon this subject, and it is dates would not be consistent. ;e in the day to go back to the time Well, now, I ask you as sober men, in¬ they were treated, not as human be- vestigating this evidence and this case, if fflicted by God, but were treated as this is a new-fangled doctrine that we [easts. It is too late in the day to re- have introduced to you? Is this some¬ ay such ideas as that. We must look thing invented by counsel for the purpose ji disease in all its phases, in all its of freeing the prisoner? Is there no foun¬ ^stations, and whenever a jury is dation for it? Is it all a fiction? We upon to meet a particular case they bring to you Doctors Ray and Woodward, look at that case, that particular case, Blandford, Jarvis, Maudsley, Pritchard, |t all the manifestations of that par- Taylor, Guy, Bell, Esquirol, Costello, }' case and the evidence as bearing Pinel, and others, and we bring living : that, and leave this idle talk about witnesses on the stand who have made a octors, and this idle talk about sanc- specialty of these diseases corroborating \y crime by letting the parties go free, them, and is it to be said that this is some lie talk about the protection of the new-fangled doctrine, that this is some¬ unity, and look at the case upon the thing invented as the last resort of a des¬ I ce as you will, as it is, and as it has perate defense, that there is no foundation 1 licited from the witnesses. Only one for this, that there is no ground for it ? short paragraphs upon this subject Are we to be told that? Are you to be will leave it, thanking you for the at- told that by counsel, and appealed to to ii that you have given to it. I refer lay aside your mawkish sympathy, as it o an article written by Dr. Clark, was called in the opening—lay aside your as a witness in the trial of Pierce, mawkish sympathy, protect by your ver¬ i eminent physician m the western dict the community—check crime ? By no ■' this State. In an article afterwards such idle declamation are you to be swerved 1 bed in the American Journal of In¬ from the strict line of your duty. I will ti, by Dr. Gray, in charge of the asy- tell you before I get through how you can i Utica, he said: best protect the community in this case. c.efmed the state of mind to be an instan- I have called your attention to the med¬ ai abeyance of reason and judgment, t( 1 of using the words impulsive insanity, ical authorities bearing upon the question 3: is it an instantaneous abeyance of judg- presented by the defense in this case, to¬ t during which period, whether it be gether with such general observations as I ;e or shorter, the individual would be a i by mad, ungovernable impulses, that deemed pertinent to the case. I propose b| manifestation would usually be an act now to occupy your attention for a short meditated, motiveless, and entirely out time in referring to certain cases that have K>ing with the previous character and :t: thought of the person. It would be been tried in our courts—most of them in * d by some mental strain or agitation— the courts of this country. Some of them k 3U, gentlemen, it would be preceded by I presume you have heard of, and others I ental strain or agitation—bear in mind itatal strain and agitation of the prisoner, presume that you have not, unless you the morning that this occurred- cul- have given special attention to this sub¬ g in a sudden actual shock. It would y be transient in proportion as it was ject. I call your attention to these cases and the transition would most likely for the purpose of showing you that this 108 defense and this doctrine of insanity has The first case to which I call yo u b -en consistent, and sanctioned by our tion as bearing upon this point g courts; and as I shall show you before I one, occurring in 1795. It is tb i get through, there is now in this country Ann Broderick, and there is an in¬ perfect harmony and accord between the history connected with it. Mr. Ei judicial authorities and the medical author¬ the person who was shot in this (> ities; that the judges recognize the defense formerly been living with this pel that we have interposed here. They re¬ he had left her, transferred his £ i cognize this form of temporary irresponsi¬ to another person, and settled ti bility in the fullest extent, as fully as it what he deemed to be a competeii has been recognized or maintained by any subsequently was married to ano i medical authorities. I do not do this be¬ son, and she desired to see him, a cause I think it absolutely necessary in him letters requesting an interne’ this case ; but as I said before the counsel one of them she said that if nothi « upon the other side has the last oppor¬ induce him to do her this act of ou tunity to address you, and I know not pre¬ justice he must prepare himselix; cisely what arguments upon this subject fatal alternative, as she was de mi may be advanced, and therefore I deem it that he should not lung survives! only proper and my duty to impress this delity ; and in another letter she >sa upon your minds as firmly as I can—this I wish it to come voluntarily from xn our defense, and the form of personal irre¬ or else I will force it from you. Belit that case I would seek you in the fartl. sponsibility arising from this disease—and of the globe, rush into your presence, then I will show you, or try at least to the same rapture that nerved the am show you, that the evidence in this case lotte Corday when she assassinated tb J Marat would I put an end to the e> more than abundantly establishes the the man who is the author of all tl theory that we have advanced. and care that at present oppress tk The idea has been thrown out that the Ann Broderick. person was not insane, could not be insane, One would imagine that they oU if they knew or afterwards had recollection some motive here, some preparatb.m of what had transpired or taken place. thing of revenge in this talk. Som a« Now it is a well-established fact that per¬ after that she goes to the housa sons undoubtedly insane not only recollect Erringtou ; he sees her approac)# what they have done, acts that they have is persuaded to retire to the draw?»l committed, but it is equally well estab¬ and leave the interview for his nit lished that persons insane plan, plot, de¬ manage. She enters the house ad vise, conceal, and yet when they do that quires for him ; is informed that ■» there is no phase of insanity better estab¬ at home. She informs the wife mi lished than that they are irresponsible is but too well acquainted with e» beings. I presume that if you should go of that house and she will exaiwl out to the asylum of our own county to¬ herself. She goes into the drawi;-f» day you would find persons there confined deliberately draws her pistol at slit who would try to conceal the fact that him. Before doing that she exclus. they are insane from you in conversation. am come, Errington, to perform r Conscious of their own insanity they would ful promise!” and instantly prij seek to conceal it and to hide it. It is time trigger. Surprised at his not f> “8* that this idea that the mind must be totally said, “Good God! I fear I having blotted out, that a man must be either a patched you ; but, come, delivemeU raving maniac or an idiot, before his mind the hands of justice.” is in a condition where he can claim irres¬ Well, upon the statement of s&fcf ponsibility for his acts, should be dissi¬ as that you would naturally sa^sba | pated. clearly guilty of murder. ButiM 109 : he had never shown any signs of when he himself determined to discontinue it before—that is, that were observ- them that he should make her pecuniary t< the casual observer. Mr. Erring- reparation, or should give her pecuniary eir supposed that she was afflicted means that would enable her to get along • tb disease. She is tried before the in the world; and he declining to do that, . id the Lord Chief Baron charged she deliberately prepared herself with a ir in a very few lines. knife, goes to his hotel, meets Lim there, o'the law certainly,” he says, “required then appeals t< him for the purpose of in¬ vill should accompany the act to con- ducing him to furnish her some means of : elonious murder. The defense in the support; he again declines, and she delib¬ it se was that the prisoner was incapable tji her will, guiding it, controlling it, erately draws the weapon with which she .gsr will to the perpetration of the crime had provided herself and plunges it into vbh she stood charged. On the whole, him. Compare that case with this. Say j y thought the latent seeds of derange- a>ra convulsive struggle of six months, that there is insanity in that case and re¬ ->e called forth on this horrible occasion, sponsibility in this. And yet the jury toverwhelm the senses of the unhappy without hesitation rendered a verdict of ei they were bound in conscience to : t Jr.” acquittal, as my friend said, that rang isgentlemen, is the talk of a judge with applause from the entire multitude for i£ind in 1795, seventy-seven years blocks around the court-room, and was his doctrine is advanced there, approved, and has been from that day to -e ave lived to see the day now, in this by the ■ community. And the results ejj of our Lord, 1872, when lawyers have shown the justice of that verdict. e up in court and ridicule the idea Oh! gentlemen, recollect that you are h'e is any such condition of mind in this case dealing with a terrible disease. It is a mystery, a mystery probably that re :ves from responsibility, and that 1 ent seeds can be suddenly called will never be fully understood or solved in this world, the operation of the mind and icim, as intimated by the court here is ase. The case adds, “The jury the intellect; no oue can define it, no one can tell what it is. Science has shown us ilt l about two minutes, and then that the brain is the seat of the intellect, tlir verdict, Not guilty.” Subse- the seat of the mind. What is mind ? f ents justified the soundness of You cannot discover it by dissecting the vefict. e ise of Amelia Norman, tried in brain. Science has been unable yet to tell—nobody can tell what the mind is; it Yds, was referred to by my associate 5 cening of this case. That is a case is the spirit. Nobody can tell its opera¬ e is plea was interposed, tried by tions except as it develops itself. Ob! what a fearful disease! In what various it(David Graham, one of the ablest ways it manifests itself! How many phases rs one of the most industrious, do we see in life — how many different hii; lawyers, probably, at that time manifestations! The intellect, like an in¬ ie tate, the author of many able s v on various subjects of law. That strument of a thousand strings, in order ise vas jinterposed, and yet look at to produce perfect harmony all must be tel eration in that case as compared in order. If one is out of order when it tl. Look at the evidence in that is touched it interferes with the harmony; an compare it with the evidence in and yet one may be out of order and all 1 re was a man who had been inti- the rest in perfect harmony. So with the vh this Amelia Norman, and as mind. All the chords of the mind may be -d p her had seduced her. He dis- in perfect order and sound, except some nu i his relations ; not in that case, one with reference to some particular sub¬ • 11, did she seek to have the rela- ject or object that may be desired; and d lontinued, but all she sought was when that is touched the whole frame gives 110 forth its wail of woe. How beautifully lated, or that it was contrary to law >< was the dread and fear of this disease por¬ disgrace to the administration of j; trayed by that pure spirit, Miss Davidson, that he should have been convictr who lived among us but a short time, and hung in order to have appeased of whose intellect, like a fading star, shone justice. He was tried in the city for a moment, and then disappeared in bany, before one of the ablest judges ' darkness. She attempted to describe her State, a man of great experience, w dread of this fatal disease, but before she long been upon the bench—Judge t had concluded the paroxysm seized her boom—prosecuted by the ablest cou; intellect and it was gone. She said, in the the State, including the then Att few broken lines that she had completed: General ; defended by Mr. Bradley,’' There is something which I dread: Mitchell, and by the late Mr. Bra It is a dark and fearful thing; It steals along with withering tread, had the pleasure of healing the a t Or flits on wild destruction’s wing. that trial, and I had the pleasure oi a The thought comes o'er me oft in hours ing Mr. Brady. It was the last arg it Of grief, of sickness, and of sadness; Tis not the dread of death, ’tis more— that he made during his life. It was: ol It is the dread of madness ! argument. I wish I could prese t! And yet, with all these various manifes¬ case to you with but one twentieth tt tations of the mind that baffle science, and the power and eloquence that he dinj thwart the best efforts to solve the prob¬ there. It was his last argument but; ol lem, counsel, without a moment’s exami¬ one, and made in a noble cause. I nation, will get up in court, and proclaim made in behalf of an innocent man, I that all these doctrines are unsound, and dication of virtue, and in defense o a that, notwithstanding the experience of mon humanity. Who, I ask you, frc fl seventy-seven years, or a hundred years, day to this, has condemned the finrg and all these authorities, the verdicts of the jury in that case except those juries and decisions of the courts, the judg¬ ignorant of the subject about wbictk ment of medical writers as given in the talk. Who, I ask yon, has studied t « books—they will say to you in this case it dence in that case, the history of tl « is your duty to take the life in violation of fortunate man, and says that the veicG all law, in opposition to all the evidence, that jury was not right, just and pi* running counter to all authority, disre¬ Tine, while the paroxysm was suddt ■ garding all experience, you are to be told seized him upon the meeting of tli nu in this case that it is your duty to drag who had been the destroyer of his iH what is left of the life of our unfortunate tic peace—yet there was some evideel client to the scaffold and there strangle that case as in this, that he had s her to death. from physical ailmeut, and his mil M The case of Gunn, in California; he was body, his physical condition, wen me tried for the shooting of Murphy, who, that the sudden shock, the thougl tbi as Gunn alleged, had seduced his sister. struck his mind as a flash of light nil);'he He armed himself upon learning the facts, he saw the destroyer of his happinei thf went out and deliberately shot Murphy_ reason deserted him, reason for tl ox armed himself with a revolver, loaded it, ment was dethroned, and frenzy, igo* went to look for him, shot him, killed him. ernable frenzy, uncontrolled by w, b; He was defended upon this plea, and ac¬ memory, volition, did its work. ho. quitted—justly and properly, as experience ask, that knows the facts and his jo has shown. this case says to-day, that the verct« I refer you now to the case of Mr. Cole, the jury was not right, and does not:*^ in reference to which the counsel took oc¬ as a monument to their honor, and t! fa casion, during the progress of this trial, to all time to come, as all such verdict*! say that in that case all law had been vio¬ I refer to another case, because fai Ill n erred to in certain quarters pend- and he did kill four of Mr. Van Ness’ fam¬ iitrial, although differing from this: ily. It was a terrible calamity. It excited r d the case of Mr. Sickles. In that the community, the whole country around tire was no attempt to introduce about was aroused, and he was to be rushed C£ testimony. The transaction was to the gallows without hesitation. A court •r the facts were proven, and the was held, a jury impanneled, and he was 3 ii(l to the jury, you have a right to defended, and ably defended, of course, by rn the evidence, whether this man the late Secretary of State, the now ven¬ e nnsible at the time he committed erable William H. Seward. With all the or not, and the jury said that he contumely that was heaped upon his head n iponsible. He had shot the seducer at that time because he would engage in s ife. He is not insane to-day. I the defense of a person guilty of so atro¬ )t nderstand nor subscribe to the doc- cious a crime as this, yet he believed, tit once insane always insane, when his clear perception and his mind rord shows us the proportion of saw—as he supposed—did see, that ho recover who are afflicted with this was an irresponsible being, that li ‘ase in its various forms. But what he had been afflicted by the disease >ei the verdict of the nation in that —not of his own fault, but by the act of ' Think of it as you may, I ask you, the Deity—and he defended him. He was Is been the verdict of the nation in convicted. The case went to the higher e: e to that case? Since that he has court, and upon exceptions taken upon the a ded armies, he has represented our trial, a new trial was granted. Pending fa at one of the important courts in the new trial, he died in prison. A post ■p is to-day the representative. Why, mortem was held, and upon the examina¬ v dd think from what we hear now, tion of his brain it was discovered that, be¬ t;s whole nation would rise up and yond all question, he was an irresponsible k thing must be stopped. Oh, no! being, and was irresponsible at the time ny have had their differences, may that he committed this act, that his brain efferent opinions, different political was diseased to such an extent that there n, and different biases, but all can could be no question about it, and there e chord in unison when a question of was no difference of opinion upon that sub¬ td comes up—when it is a question ject between the doctors. Had it not been b’ by a verdict of the jury the liber- for the efforts of William H. Seward—and sdl be encouraged in his work, or all honor to his name—when he stood up h • virtue shall be protected and de- there amid denunciation and contumely, 3'by the strong arm of the law and defending the person that he believed to be '(lict of a jury, all differences cease, innocent,—I say all honor to his name— d heart of the nation beats in unison had it not been for his noble efforts, that 3 onest portion of the nation in favor poor unfortunate victim would have suffer¬ i< a decision. ed an ignominious death upon the scaffold, e years ago, a long time ago—I think been hung, when he was no more responsi¬ :s hirty-four or thirty-five—a colored ble for his acts than the child just born. t the name of Freeman was sent to As I said, the day has gone by when intel¬ * rison, charged with horse stealing, ligent men, men appreciating the responsi¬ innocent of the crime, as subsequent bility of citizens, will hoot or scout at a de¬ t showed. When he came out he fense of this kind. u g|t actions for false imprisonment You have heard the case of Pierce refer¬ i those who had made the false accu- red to. That was a case occurring in the 'tjagainst him. He failed, or was western part of the State, and was tried in n d in his efforts, and he conceived Lockport, last October. The defense in i* a that he must commence killing, that case was impulsive insanity, the same 112 as this. There Mr. Bullock had seduced the facts better than I can—I confess i the sister of Mr. Pierce. He tried to per¬ I have feeling—I will read a few lii , suade him to marry her. He had provided what the District Attorney said in tha « himself with a revolver, and went to see in opening it to the jury: him. He expostulated with him, and plead I think I am warranted in saying you i with him, and begged of him to save his tried a similar case before. It is unprecet 1 in the annals of crime. We expect to she h sister’s honor by marriage. He refused to the prisoner at the bar armed herself ^ * do it, and the last remark that he made deadly weapon in the city of Chicago, th il when spoken to by the brother about the came to Washington, repaired to the Trni building. After inquiring of the doorli marriage was, “ I will see you in hell first,” for Mr. Burroughs, the doorkeeper tolE and upon that he shot once, twice, three there were two persons of that name ernji times. He killed him—pursued him and in the Treasury Department. She loot the book where the names of the empi shot him down. If a remark of that kind, were recorded, and, turning to the nai under the circumstances, will dethrone rea¬ Adoniram J. Burroughs said he was thei son, upset the mind and destroy all power tleman whom she desired to see. She wi' the room, turned the bolt, when she sal of control, I ask you, gentlemen, what may object of her search standing at his desk you expect of a nervous disposition, a discharge of his official duty : her envy w i cited. Good heavens! what'was there to I feeble body, pale and emaciated, suffering this unchristian and pitiable spirit! Hovi from the disease to which I have referred, she measured him, she marked him, she ref: being attacked in the manner in which she upon his death; she retraced her steps dov I hall, then, turning to the left side, she tl was on the morning that this occurred; I stand behind a high clock which reached o ask you what you will say? That she was the floor almost to the ceiling; here slJ sane and Mr. Pierce was insane, or do you waiting for the approach of her unsusptl victim. Great God! what a position • disagree with the verdict of the jury in that woman. Armed with a deadly weapon j case? Who is it that questions the correct¬ with malice in her breast, in a public buij ness of that verdict, what class of commu¬ in the metropolis of a Christian nation, si a w oman con tem pin ting the crime of mi < nity, what is their business, how do they She could hear the ticking of the clock i live, how do they spend their time, or who could observe the movements of the hi Is there was time for passion to subside, for r* are they that question the justice of the to resume her sway. One would supposm verdict in the case of Eratus F. Pierce? she would have seen with the eyTe of fanu Oh! no, gentlemen. That verdict met a wife pointing to her child—alas! alas! he i norant of the tenable fate that awaited hiif response in that community, unanimous almost at the very moment the instrume; I almost—excepting always the class to which death is pointed at his back by the assaiii I referred—a unanimous response, and so hand. He is walking down the hall in m pany with a friend, engaged in conversi* will your verdict, when it is delivered in As he passes the clock the prisoner draw-jd this case, when it goes outside of this court pistol, and, without a word of winning ,nity, and to-day she is a confirmed First. We say we have shown by evi¬ in the asylum at Washington ; has dence here uncontradicted and beyond ;en there by Dr. Correy, recently. question, that there was hereditary predis¬ , it is possible to hang a person who position in the family. We say that this ponsible for his acts, and the case is established by the evidence in this case aently be not very well understood. without any dispute. :rse, when a person is hung the evi- Second. We say that wre have shown a : tops there; there is no further de- change of temperament, the accused be¬ ent, as a general thing. But in the coming irritable, less attentive to.her ap¬ ■ Mary Harris, the jury did their pearance, and that these are regarded as y this unfortunate being, and she strong indications of some change going ;is hopelessly insane, and has been on in the mind, and, the mind of the per¬ e day of that occurrence, son thus changed, that predisposes it to sence, who attempted the life of any sudden convulsion from any sudden (nt Jackson, provided himself with shock, from any sudden cause. I won’t >i loaded it, went deliberately to the stop to call your attention to the authori¬ k where the President was attending ties on the subject; I have them noted aeral of a member of Congress, and here upon my points. I will not weary e.tely aimed it and snapped it at the you by calling your attention to the i ilagistrate. He was defended on authorities; I say the authorities place pund of insanity, although he had great stress upon that as one of the indi¬ e tely prepared the weapon, and he cations. u uitted on that ground. Nobody, Third. Then we say we have shown in tit day to this, has questioned the this case great misfortune and grief. li ss of that verdict. If it had been Fourth. We say that on the day that h’e, the result might have been dif- this occurred, the evidence shows beyond t. We have seen, lately, a farce en- any peradventure that some overpowering i England that must be looked upon subject was oppressing the mind of the ri be looked upon always by all na- accused; that there was some trouble a 1 all men of intelligence as a farce. weighing her down; that there was some¬ 7 convicted, for attempting to force thing preying upon her mind, unnerving >uen to sign a petition, of an assault, her; that she didn’t act naturally, didn’t is ictually sent to prison for a year, look naturally; that there was evidence of adf sending him to an asylum, where something oppressing her mind, some tg; to have been sent. I will venture great weight and overwhelming grief. 7 at there is not one man in a mil- Fifth. We say that we have shown in D' one physician in ten thousand, this case that she was suffering from one wild hesitate for an instant to say of the most fruitful causes calculated to tit was the act of an insane person fit a subject for the reception of just such 91 le that it was committed. a manifestation of insanity as was brought w,;entlemen, having called your at- out by this sudden shock, this sudden as¬ 'n o a few of these cases—many I sault that was made upon her. or tted because time is progressing, And we say further, gentlemen, that all I )n’t want to weary you—I have these causes combined in this one case, ca d your attention to a few of the when the medical testimony is and the ag >nes; let us see, and I desire to medical authorities say that if a subject ier e them right here, whether or possessed either one of them, it would not wp the predisposing causes in this be strange to find such manifestations of at I desire you to carry them in insanity. And yet we have them all com¬ m ds as I state them. I shall not bined here, all in the one person, and you ss em at this point. are asked to set all this aside, and to say 114 that in this case this prisoner at the holding'in their hands the life of a fellow mi are told by Mr. Justice Park, that, as rega time she committed this act did it delib¬ the effect of insanity on responsibility for crii erately and intentionally, and that it was “it is merely necessary that the party sho prearranged in her mind, thought over, have sufficient knowledge to discriminate tween right and wrong.” In the trial of Oxf conceived, reflected upon. three years later, this doctrine w’as repudia I shall call your attention for a few mo¬ by Lord Denham ; and three years later, in ments, and I will be very brief, to the legal trial of Higginson, it was re-affirmed by Mr. 1 tice Maule. The test was again held up, in standard of accountability. My purpose original nakedness, in the case of Stokes, (18-1 is to show that there is perfect hannony when the Court, Baron Rolie, said that “ ei ■ between the legal and judicial standard of man is held responsible for his acts to the ■ of his country, if he can discern right fi i accountability with reference to these cases wrong.” and to this subject. A knowledge of right Well, gentlemen, if at so short a perl and wrong, of good and evil, were former¬ back, thirty or forty years ago, the jud i ly held in England to be the tme criterion in England, the great minds there, 3 of accountability. Of course there is no great judges, were so uncertain in reg 1 such criterion now suggested in England to this question of account ability, i or in this country. It is not the test at all. question of responsibility, so ignorf Lord Chief Justice Mansfield once held upon this subject, I ask, will you sit h s this doctrine, and promulgated it in the having the life of this prisoner in j i case of the unfortunate Bellingham, tried hands, in view now of the advanced for the murder of Perceval. Lord Lynd- science upon this subject, and incretd hurst modified the doctrine a little in the investigations, in view of all the disco r- case of Oxford, by saying that “ if he ies that have been made, in view novi didn’t know when he committed the act, the decisions of the courts aud of t. << what the effect of it if fatal would be, with great authors, that are uniform, will >n reference to the crime of murder,” he was say that, notwithstanding we have advai d not guilty. Even this modification would in science, notwithstanding our know! ? have saved the unfortunate Bellingham, has progressed with reference to these b- yet there is not a judge in England or this jects, notwithstanding all these aut r* country, who would assert this to be the say that now there is no test, that we n- law now with reference to the accounta¬ derstand more of this disease than weid bility of the insane. The medical juris¬ before, notwithstanding judges procla ii prudence of insanity up to a very late from the bench in this country, from li- period has been vague, contradicting, fornia to New York, and throughout be conflicting, and uncertain. You will allow' whole land, are you to say, well, we ill me to read a paragraph here to show' how- go back, we will go back to the uncer n- uncertain and unsettled a few years ago the ty that existed in England forty years?*, law was in England upon this subject. and we will hang this woman by that le- Butwe are advancing, science is advancing, and we will acquit that man by an aw knowledge is advancing, with reference to rule, which, if it had been applied hdw this subject as with reference to all other one hung before, would have acqu^d subjects. that one ? Will you go back to the rion One principle after another, says this great of uncertainty, and pass upon the I*.® author, has been successively abandoned and resumed, either with the sternest disregard of con¬ a prisoner, or will you take now tl sistency or the most extraordinary ignorance of knowledged authorities upon this ]iit previous decisions. Thus, the old maxim that medical and judicial, and say, upon insanity does not annul criminal responsibility in one who retains the power of distinguishing we stand, upon them we plant oursrw. right from wrong, was abandoned in the case to them we pledge our consciences M of Hadfield, re-affirmed in that of Bellingham, right or wTong, we are free ; we have out again abandoned in that of Martin, modified though approved in the same year by Lord according to law, according to the atH#1, Lyndhurst, and again, in the year 1837, a jury ities, and according to evidence, al ^ 115 canee, a person has been set free who ment, yet she acted upon facts and circum¬ stances which had an existence, and which were ;. not to have been, you will have the calculated upon the ordinary principles of hu¬ .station of knowing that you discharged man action, to produce the most violent resent¬ ifluty conscientiously, ment. Mr. Errington had just cast her off and married another woman, or taken her under j'd Hale repudiated partial insanity his protection. Her jealousy was excited to i efense, and held that there must be such a pitch as occasionally to overpower her understanding. But when she went to Erring- cil obliteration of the mind. This ton’s house, where she shot him, she went for rv doctrine was first subverted in the express and deliberate purpose of shooting lid’s case, where the great Erskine him. She didn’t act under a delusion that he had deserted her when he had not, but took rht his giant intellect to bear, al¬ revenge upon him for an actual desertion.” ii h I will show you in a moment, with If such great minds as these will differ nice to a case to which I have ad- in regard to this question, are we to send t( he changed his opinions with ref- an unfortunate creature to the gallows, i' to this question of insanity. With saying that, to our minds, the case is so giat intellect, his great learning and clear that there is no reasonable doubt g;at research, he admits as much as upon the question of the responsibility of a|i if he had been on the jury in a the party at the time of the commission of ;ai case he would have convicted the the act ? tjand yet he says that he was mis- Liberty of will and of action is absolutely iiin his view in regard to this question essential to criminal responsibility. Insanity, tc iunt ability. says the same great author, is a disease hren’t come yet to the question of before the prospect of which the stoutest heart may quail, but how much more ap¬ b There is nothing but doubt in this palling is it made by the reflection that in i, oubt upon every point—it was hard- some slight paroxysm it may be followed by legal consequences that will consign its unhappy o le dignity of that, even, subject to an ignominious death. Shocking as fir these various conflicting authori- it is for one bearing the image of his Maker to id decisions, and this vacillating take the life of a fellow-being with brutal ferocity, how shall we characterize the deliber¬ rs of the courts in England that I ate perpetration of the same deed under the e tiled your attention to, in 1840, the sanction of the law. tr e began to dawn upon the courts a Upon this subject I read a brief extract e ore clearly, and then insanity was from Dean’s Medical Jurisprudence, as dji, first into a total intellectual insan- reported in this case. (Fair trial.) P'tial intellectual insanity, total moral Irresponsibility, where it arises from deranged -fif, partial moral insanity. or perverted action, should absolve from all ac¬ el ion, said Lord Erskine, when there is countability ; because, first, the act is unavoid¬ able, and the actor, therefore, no more a subject re y or raving madness is the true charac- of punishment than a machine for going wrong >f sanity, and when it cannot be predicated when some part of the machinery is out of n a for life or death for a crime, he ought h ny opinion, to he acquitted. order. To administer punishment under such circumstances would shock all the moral sym¬ o' I read you a sentence or two from pathies of man. r larks of Lord Erskine in reference And as referred to by my learned asso¬ hi irst case to which I called your at- ciate in his opening, says Dr. Bell, that dc, reported in a volume I have here “ for every real criminal acquitted on the ■el irated trials tried in 1795, the case score of insanity, there have been a dozen dr Broderick : maniacs executed.” You all recollect the nit be a consolation, he says, to those grand doctrine, the merciful doctrine, and ~ iecuted her, this is Lord Erskine, that where and by whom it was enunciated: acquitted, as she is at this time in a most id and deplorable state of insanity. “It is better that ninety-nine guilty go L nfess, if I had been upon the jury who free than that one innocent should be pun¬ ,i|: I should have entertained great doubts ished.” o iculties; for although this unhappy iaipad before exhibited strong marks of Now a word or two with regard to the ail arising from grief and disappoint¬ judicial view of this subject. Says Chiei 116 Justice Shaw, one of the ablest judges tion. “A vicious will, without a vicious w Massachusetts ever had : says Blackstone, “is no crime.” So, on other side, an unwarrantable act, withoni In order to constitute a crime, a person must vicious will, is no crime at all. So that to c have intelligence and capacity enough to have stitute a crime against human laws, there m a criminal intent and purpose ; and if his reason be first a vicious will and secondly an unlaw and mental powers are either so far deficient act consequent upon such vicious will If th that he has no will, no conscience or controlling be a doubt about the act of killing, all will c mental power, or if through the overwhelming elude that the prisoner is entitled to the ben violence of mental disease his intellectual of it ; and if there be any doubt of the fact power is so far. for the time, obliterated ; he is of the prisoner to discriminate between ri, not a responsible moral agent and is not punish¬ and wrong, why should he be deprived of able for criminal acts. benefit of it when both the act and the will Upon this point I desire to call your at¬ necessary to make it a crime. tention to a case that has occurred in our But if the proof leaves it in doubt whet the act was intentional or accidental, if own State, decided by the Court of Appeals, scales are so equally balanced that the jury c where they refer to this doctrine. Judge not safely determine the question, shall not prisoner have the benefit of the doubt, ant Brown says : I read from the case of The he is entitled to the benefit of the doubt in People against McCann, reported in 16th gard to the malicious intent, shall he not be New York—that decision is in no wise titled to the same benefit upon the questioi" his sanity and his understanding ? modified or changed by the decision in Recorder Hoffman said, in the case’ the cases of The People against Ferris— Wagner: (35 N. Y., and Walter 32 N. Y.)—these de¬ I have been requested to charge you, thi t cisions don’t change at all the doctrine the prisoner committed the act in a momen ( laid down in this case. It consequently is, frenzy, he cannot be convicted of murder in ) says the Judge, true that first degree. I not only charge that prop- tion, but if his mind was in that condition.; Sanity is the normal condition of the human cannot be convicted of any offense. mind, and in dealing with acts, criminal or otherwise, there can be no presumption of in¬ Judge Crawford, in the case of Sick, sanity. But it is, not true, I think, upon the said : traversing of an indictment for murder when a The law does not require that the insa:r defense of insanity is interposed and the homi¬ which absolves from crime should exist for f cide admitted or not disputed, that the issue is definite period, but only that it exists at e reversed and the burden shifted. The burden moment when the act occurred with which e is still the same aud it still remains with the accused stands charged. prosecution to show the existence of those requisites or elements which constitute the I will read once more upon this bran crime, and of this the intention or malice-ani¬ of the subject and then pass on : mus of the prisoner is the principal. A prisoner must have sufficient memory, i- In referring to the charge of the Judge, telligence, reason and will to enable him to t- which is overruled by the Court of Ap¬ tinguish between right and wrong in regar o peals, he says : the particular act about to be done, to k » and understand that it will be wroug, and it The doctrine of the charge proceeds upon the he will deserve punishment by committinft. idea that the homicide is per se crime, that the He must have intelligence and capacity enob mere destruction of human life by the act of to have a criminal intent and purpose, an if another is, without any other circumstances, his reason and mental powers are either sc> murder, or some of the degrees of manslaughter. ficient that he have no will, no controlling r)- That is the doctrine here in this case ; tal power, or if, through the overwhelrig voice of mental disease, his intellectual pot there is the killing and that is all there is is for the time obliterated, he is not a resp- in the case : sible moral agent, and is not punishable ft The killing of a human being by another is criminal acts. not necessarily murder or manslaughter, it may But the counsel will say, she provid be either excusable or justifiable homicide ; it may have been effected under either of those herself with a pistol, and he will ring to conditions referred to by the elementary writers, changes on that all through. She wen# in which the will does not join with the act, and then it is not criminal. Sound memory this store with her brother ; she conti- and discretion at the time of the killing is often¬ plated this murder ; she bought this pisl; times the only material question in the trial oi it was loaded ; and you will hear an indictment for murder. They are essential elements of the crime, to be established upon ringing all through this case, from be li¬ the trial as a point of the case of the prosecu¬ ning to end. She bought the pistol; i® ctemplated this at this time; this was The insane, says Esquirol, group and ar¬ range their ideas, carry on a reasonable conver¬ i arranged ; this was preconcerted ; this sation, define their opinions with subtlety and r understood in advance; as I have even -with rigid severity of logic, give rational aed your attention to many cases where explanations, and justify their acts by highly plausible motives.” sties have purchased or provided them. "Winslow also says when speaking upon » es with weapons, and that that is not this subject: trange freak of the insane, I hardly I refer to the subtle quickness of apprehen¬ Ink that I need say much more upon the sion, ready wit, biting sarcasm, great power of uject. But I know how it will be urged, self control, extreme cunning and extraordinary fc ill be said that sane people contemplate shrewdness of the insane, as well as the wonder¬ ful mastery they have occasionally been seen to ne, go and purchase revolvers, or pre- exercise over their acknowledged delusions while a; themselves with the weapons with under the scorching an; lysis of the ablest and most accomplished advocates of the day. rhh to commit crime, and that Fanny l ie went and purchased a revolver, and You have all read enough of history to rt, Fanny Hyde is a sane being and was remember the case in which an insane per¬ m at the time this shooting took place, son baffled the great Lord Erskine. A ltough this revolver was purchased man, insane, by the name of Wood, had :as before and laid away in the bureau procured the indictment of Conrow, in lirer; given as a present to her husband; London, for false imprisonment. The case uladed as a present to her husband ; in- came on and was tried, and upon the trial, n.ed as a New Year’s present, but be- he being the principal witness, it was dis¬ aie she hadn’t the means, having to pay covered he was insane upon a particular ei, it was postponed for a few days. You subject, and he was defeated in the trial. dhear the changes ring upon the revol- He procured a second indictment and the ■ei She bought the revolver, she went case was tried, and for one whole day he ’.i the brother and bought the revolver. baffled court and Lord Erskine to discover rV>, gentlemen, if the insane never pro- the slightest evidence of his insanity. He icd themselves with the weapons with knew what they wanted and what they -hh they commit the homicide, there were trying to do, and he had will enough ievr would be any one placed upon trial to baffle them ; and yet there was no doubt oriuch an offense and we would know about his insanity. And yet we hear peo¬ loling about these cases. But the fact is ple talking about this subject as flippantly he do provide themselves with these as though they had made it the study of nsuments. Amelia Norman provided their lives. They think there can be no leiilf with the weapon of death ; Gunn, such thing as insanity unless they see a ;rii in California, did ; Sickles did ; person rushing along the street like a rav¬ -le ge W. Cole did ; Daniel MacFarland ing maniac. That is the evidence to them -iid the poor unfortunate negro that I of insanity. They forget the structure of iai alluded to, (defended by Seward.) the human mind, that nobody yet has been iid Eratus F. Pierce did; Mercer did ; able to discover, but only that it is made ha 'ence did ; Griffin did ; Mary Harris, up of many chords. One may be out of Qoi hopelessly insane in the asylum at order and the others not. Balfour Brown, Wa, lington, did ; all these provided them- an eminent authority, and a recent author seh|s with the weapons of death in ad- upon this subject, says : Nothing is more common than to find per¬ va®, and yet we are to be told, in this sons who are undoubtedly insane managing '•as that this person is sane, because she, their own affairs with much practical ability. we< s before, made her husband a present And yet this idea would be scouted or pistol, and was w’th her brother when °f hooted by some. it t: 3 purchased. Let me call your atten- “ Oh, ” says the counsel, “ is not the idea ad¬ tioi to this subject, it may be new to vanced that the majority of people are insane ? ” son. No, there is no such doctrine advanced 118 by any person of sense. No person of half of a girl who has been scourge sense or intelligence advances the idea that persecuted to madness. We stand l the majority of people are insane. But we denounce the crime that has brougl do maintain the doctrine that it is not nec¬ to this position. “ Thou shalt not c* essary for a man to be a raving maniac in adultery,” we read in the Seventh order to bring him within the pale of legal mandment, and in the Tenth, “ Thoi irresponsibility. Lord Eldon relates a case not covet thy neighbor’s wife,” j where he had repeated conversations with through the Old and New Testame: a person who was his own client. A com¬ penalty of death is denounced agai: mission of lunacy had been applied for and adulterer. I am sure you will exci he was employed in the case, and so con¬ if I read an extract relating to this f | vinced was he of the sanity of this man from one that has passed away. I r that he went to Lord Thurlow and induced the great War Secretary, who ga him to supersede the commission, and this mighty energies and intellect to the i insane person, calling upon him imme¬ ervation of this gigantic republic, w diately afterwards to thank him for his ef¬ the finest feelings and appreciation forts in his behalf, convinced Lord Eldon male virtues. In defense of a perso i] that the worst thing he could have done trial for his life, defended upon the s was to have had the commission supersed¬ insanity without a particle of me die ed, because he was convinced of the insan¬ timony, he uses this eloquent langoe ity of the man. It is a matter of history The pride and glory of the family is 1 of brothers and sisters. Sprung from t a that Tasso wrote some of his most impas¬ love, with the same blood coursing i f sioned and elegant verses during par¬ veins, their hearts are bound together b < oxysms of insanity. Lucretius wrote his which death cannot sever; for, wide asi le may be the graves of a household, v« immortal poem, De Rerum Natura, while may be their life here on earth, wh< 1 laboring under mental aberration. Alex¬ rough ocean is passed, sooner or later t f' ander Cruden compiled his concordance of rejoice on the heavenly coast — a falj heaven. But when the adulterer puts •« the Bible while insane, and some of the wife asunder from her husband, her chi is ablest articles in Aiken’s biography were off from all kindred fellowship. The a) written by a patient in an insane asylum. ionship and protection of a brother of I ■ blood can never be her’s. No sister of t, s The most sublime inventions have sprung blood can ever share her sorrow or r; from the brain of those laboring under Alone, thenceforth, she must journey ro mental diseases. Exquisite statuary has life, bowed down with a mother’s slum i does the evil stop here. It reaches n to stood up at their bidding, the canvas has aged and venerable parents of the 'ifc breathed life at the touch of the insane. husband and of the ruined wife, and cU And yet the doctrine is to be enforced in around to the circle of relatives and fri« Is t cluster around every hearth. SuchaiJ» this case that the prisoner is to be hung suits of the adulterer’s crime on the h ie- because before she committed the act she the home, not as it is painted by t! !> didn’t act like a raving maniac. It is not fancy, but home as it is known and re«M by the law'—as it exists in the house! i1 strange that the prosecution deny all these as it belongs to the family of ev< n doctrines and all these authorities, medical They show that the adulterer is the fotf*1 social relation, the destroyer of every and judicial, deny the experience of all the affection, the fatal enemy of the family ad great men that have lived, because, before desolator of the home. The crime b ?! it is that twice it is forbidden in the Ten maledictions, and calls down the curses of .'umandments, and why it is that Jehovah diself, from the tabernacle in the midst of God upon his head. Again she will shrink iicongregation, declared that “the man who down tremblingly in the corner of her cell, omitteth adultery with another man’s wife, v he who committeth adultery with his where, chained to the barren rock of the lehbor’s wife, shall surely be put to death.” past, the one perpetual memory, with beak hlod’s own ordinance he was to be stoned to and talon more relentless than the vul¬ le b, so that every family in Israel, every man, -vcian, and child might have a hand in the ture’s, preys ceaselessly upon her vitals. 'U shment of the common enemy of the family, The name she calls may not be Watson, ijhe Levitical law, the adulteress was subject but it is the name of him who has caused o ie same punishment. But the Redeemer of ai kind, when on earth, is supposed to have neither more nor less ruin. Oh! gentle¬ heated the punishment of the adulteress by men, no man can conceive of the misery Miring him who was without sin to cast at that exists in the world to-day, following te the first stone. No such condition, how- vi was imposed in favor of the adulterer, on the track of the libertine. Wherever ’be was no mitigation of his crime, and we you go you will find desolation and sorrow nv the Savior’s judgment of the sin when and misery in his track. And so will it leleclared that “he who looketh at a woman o 1st after her committeth adultery in his ever be; and when man and all his race les.” shall have disappeared from this planet, ho can portray the one-millionth part ask every particle of air still flowing o’er •f he evil, misery, and woe existing in the unpeopled earth, and it will record hi world to-day which has been caused the misery caused by the libertine — >y ibertines? Go to your asylums; go, blighted intellects, blasted hopes, ruined -s ly eloquent associate told you in his homes, and dishonored graves. Interrogate P|iing, to the gilded palaces of hell, every wave that breaks uninterrupted on 'e >ld their fallen inmates, and learn the ten thousand desolate shores, and it will aie of their ruin—and the same story of give evidence of the last gurgle of the ;h( blighting influences of the libertine’s waters which closed over the heads of their uh will be told. unfortunate dying victims. y to the lower dens of degradation, Now gentlemen, I will occupy your mi behold their miserable inmates, once attention but a short time longer while I l>ui> “ created a little lower than the speak more directly to the evidence and Is,” now lost to every womanly in- the facts of the case. The evidence in d] t, living in filth, associating with the this case, outside of the medical testi¬ dhfc, whose every word is blasphemy, mony, can be very briefly stated. As I mwhose very touch is death—and then said to you, the prosecution start out with o' will see the handiwork of the liber- the proposition that this is murder in the txn first degree or nothing, and that we accept 7 to our asylums for the insane, those that proposition. We say that it is mur¬ ’w: l tombs of the living dead, and see der in the first degree or nothing; and me ifferent phases of insanity; go through we say further, that you are to decide ike female portion of it, ascertain the this case upon the evidence, and we don’t ms of their malady. See that female, ask you to decide it upon the ground of eiK beautiful and fair, with her scorched sympathy as was intimated by the counsel lips her wild and sunken eyes, pressed in his opening. All that we ask in this igkist the door of her cell, and listen to case is that you will apply the rules of law the id story of her misery and woe. Anon as the Court will give them to you to the ■he ireaks out into some broken strain evidence that has been given by the wit¬ ha was familiar in her childhood before nesses, giving that evidence its just and the bertine had breathed upon her. Then proper weight, and then, if alter you have she ill pray fervently to be permitted to done that you say that you have no doubt go him, (her destroyer;) and then, as if in your mind that the prisoner at the bar stnjk with a serpent’s tooth, she cries out is guilty, ought to be hung, say so by 120 your verdict. But do not, I beg of you, one of those persons is put upon th « upon any insidious insinuation of the to corroborate him upon that point. Ai District Attorney, that notwithstanding you are asked now—understand—j i your verdict of guilty, she may not be asked to find that there is no dout ijk hung, she has an appeal to the Governor, any point that is essential to coi ito and she can go there for executive clem¬ this crime, that there is no doub bo ency, and she may not be hung, your ver¬ her perfect sanity, there is no dout be dict may not result in her death and there¬ the fact that she shot him, and tin he fore you need not be so afraid or so care¬ is no doubt about the fact that s i ful about finding a verdict of guilty. tended to shoot him before she di< he That was, as I understand, the intimation him. All these points, every eleme tt of the District Attorney. Whether there goes to make up this crime, you are ft are mitigating circumstances he didn’t is made out by the evidence be Dd condescend to tell you. I don’t know reasonable doubt. I ask you, can; i s what he considers or what he will consider that that fact is proven beyond a r.b mitigating circumstances in this case. Don’t it come to you in a quesinal That he will tell you I presume when he shape. I didn’t pursue the exam itii comes to address you. of Mr. Pixley, to any great extei; y But we accept the issue tendered by the know his relations, his natural flic> prosecution, that this is a case of murder But not a single man is put uj. li in the first degree, that she is guilty of stand to corroborate him. I say i murder in the first degree or nothing, that the duty of the prosecution to t t your verdict must be either guilty or not other witnesses upon the stand; tk kn guilty. Having gone over the medical who were there at the time, precis p * portion of this case, so far as the author¬ were there. Mr. Pixley was then itni ities are concerned, medical and judicial, and they had the opportunity to Ibm I desire to come directly to the testimony. him and if there had been anyboi th( There are one or two points in the testi¬ who could corroborate him he hoc mony for the prosecution that I desire had been put upon the stand, the in the first place to allude to, the first had been anybody there who diffe 1 *i is the testimony of Mr. Pixley. Mr. Pix- him upon that fact, he should lube ley says that after he went out where Mr. put upon the stand. This person life Watson was lying, at the foot of the stairs, not to be taken upon any unt-aid while he was there the first man that came When they come in and demar bio afterwards was Dexter, then Mr. Potts they must show a clear right, witl it« came, and he saw the brother comedown, shadow of doubt resting upon *b step over the body aud waved his hand you demand blood you must notu&s back toward the accused, .and said, “ Fan¬ conclusions, you must not imanet'1 ny, I told you not to do it.” Now when this may be so, or that may be so. utjl that remark was made the hall was full, have got to find, beyond all re ontl there were parties there standing as he doubt, every material fact before ou a says within three feet of him, and not one take the life of a human being. So* of those persons is put upon the stand, or say that his testimony upon that >oin'. did they hear any such remark. She says entirely unsatisfactory. But wl: of t she was up stairs ; was not down there suppose he did hear that rema:. i when her brother was, but there is not you tell me what it proves ? whaft a single witness, although he says that this lishes in this case. Suppose at k hall was full and other parties came there, brother did say this, what does i pro* because I had him specify the names of Does it prove her guilty ? Window the persons who first arrived there ; they prove ? Talk about hanging l,a* came there where he was, and not a single upon a loose remark made undersell® usances as lie testifies to, with persons and seeks to swear the blood of that un¬ ;lby him hearing nothing of the kind; fortunate prisoner away. Such a being as lsiot worthy, such a point as that, of that is so utterly beneath the contempt of y iscussion at all. all honest men that it is not necessary to I ive alluded to the testimony of Cap- speak of him or allude to bim. He is be¬ uWoglom, and to that of Sergeant neath contempt. To say that what he tes¬ ire, and I will not allude to their testi- tified to is evidence, would be an insult to >1 further. But I will allude to the common intelligence and common decency. t lony of Langan. This girl was in I say that he is a miserable wretch and so is e inds of the police,—she was in their any other man, who under the circum¬ stly on a charge of murder. She is stances would attempt to manufacture or aged from the station house—for what to get evidence in that way. But why irlse, heaven only knows, I don’t— wasn’t it told before ? It wasn’t considered aged from the Eastern District to Head important by him before, was it ? Oh, no. laj'ers, I don’t know what it was for, He didn’t tell it to the coroner, he didn’t cliiile on her way down, this miserable iutimate to the coroner that she had made ei worse than a spy, attempts, accord- statements, although Captain Woglom was g o his testimony, to pump facts out of examined there as to the statements that gil, unprotected, in the hands of the she had made subsequently. They were qmder a charge of murder, and tells considered important. But what he heard ■ubiat he never said anything about it was not considered important. It was not its, that he was present when the coro- considered a fact of sufficient moment by •r’,inquest was had in court, took the him to even mention to bis superior officer •isier from the station house to the —nothing was said to his superior officer tu room, where the inquest was held, upon the subject. When I heard that id ack again and yet he says nothing to testimony, and heard the fact that he e oroner and nothing to his superior hadn’t told the officer or the coroner— tic: as to the conversation that he had never had spoken of it until recently—it el ,vith her. He don’t mention it to occurred to me what my associate said in his ty idy until a week or so ago. Would opening, and it was true ; I thought I could )U|aang a cat upon such testimony as see the gleam, the glitter of some of the at Would you give it the weight of a gold that had been paid to Charley Spencer atir supposing it amounted to any- in this case; I thought I could see the ir ? Take it, ivhat is it ? Birt would tools that were in the background looming mjlelieve a word he said? I say this up and creeping out in this miserable testi¬ is«able officer is a disgrace to the force mony of Officer Langan. id ight to be turned off. I say, that any I have attempted to describe to you as 'liman having in his custody a prisoner best I could the character of the murderer. ad such circumstances as he had this But I ask you as you were asked by my asso¬ ■isier, who attempts by trick to get ciate in the opening, is the prisoner at the utaents, and then comes into a court of bar the material out of which murderers st:3 and presents them for the purpose are made ? What is her history in brief ? 1 higing, don’t deserve the name of man, She came to this country at the age of five a i.sgrace to the force and a disgrace to years. And right here I wish to call your ie pmmunity. Think of it. He made attention to a little fact and I wish you to ■> i|jte of it, but lie comes in here after bear it in mind. You will recollect that lisjing lapse of time and undertakes to when she was upon the stand, undergoing i run that stand—the miserable wretch that terrible ordeal—you of course could iat aught to take advantage of a person not have the slightest suspicion of that i b unfortunate position at that time— ordeal, taking a girl like her under a ie iserable wretch goes upon the stand charge of this kind and putting her upon 9 the stand before an audience, subjected and Brooklyn, and every place s' to the scrutinizing examination of counsel— been, with iheir detectives and 1 let me call your attention to the question hirelings, to see if they coidd r that he asked her, if she had never had up something that they could i intercourse with a man where she boarded, against the unfortunate prisoner c by the name of Roberts. He was particu¬ her relation with the deceased, an tl lar as to how her room was located, what have been unable to put a single i rooms they slept in, particular to inquire upon the stand, although they hai o whether she knew that he always slept in of their minions howling around he I that room or not, and the question were they dared not face the music. 1, asked in such a way as to insinuate in the opened the door; we went into the q he had other eh:ldren under his charge; usual, but if it had been done for a she went there under him ; it was h:s d a‘y ous and a p oper purpose it would under the 1 >w to protect her; it was his bsen entirely excusable—it would duty by every princ pie of righ1 to pro'ect shown a generous heart. B it it w; her, watch over her, see that she was not done for any su h purpose as that. wronged, and when he saw any indisc re- There, gentlemen,is th? prisoner, tion upon her put it would hive been his (showing l.keness) was taken som< duty as a man to h ive warn d her of the ago. There is the little girl Jackson danger. But instead of that, with this you saw upon the stand, and there: helpless child in his employ and under his position of a man,the employer, forty care, fifteen years of age, he, a married of age, inducing two of his little sho man, upwards of forty years of age, with to go and have th hr likeness token¬ children her own age, he accomplished her ing their hands upon his shoulder 1 ruin. And yon hear men say, well, why position you wo ild think they were j didn’t she leave ? Why did she submit ? and d mghters—two little shop girl) Great God ! talk about a contest between for the purpose of warding off sus: a child and a man forty years of age! he sends one of them home to hi: When he had accomplished her ruin und -r family. Do you doubt the story < I these circumstances, he held her in his girl ? Do you doubt that the d i grasp as within a vice, and she had to do accomplished her ruin ? Do yon ) his bidding. Having a stern father and that he pursued her as she testified ' I mother, being of that age, fearing expo¬ as Captain Woglom says she stated a sure and utter ruin, she could not get day after day ; that she tried to ge id away from him. How did he pursue her ? him, and could not get rid of him ? FI Take the testimony of Newton. Newton in heaven’s name, gentlemen, if she'M says that his conduct was such towards her isfied with this intercourse, if tl ' that he was called upon, deeming it to be agreeable to her, why is she here u] 11 his duty, to speak to him upon the subject, stand in this great trial ? Didn’t and he did speak to him upon the subject. to break it off ? Wasn’t she anxk tl We were not permitted to tell what he he should desist his persecution o»hi said to him, but he did speak to him upon But some will say why didn’t she OT the subject. Mrs. Lowne—you have heard How could she leave and where cod* her testimony about his calling there at go ? He held her in his grasp as on| the house during the day time, when the in a vice ! She could not! Wh;0M husband was absent. He called there fre¬ she do ? And up at New Britain vaal quently during the day, in the forenoon had persecuted her to such an ext t th and in the afternoon, and would stay a she became desperate, and accuseriru ■ considerable time. You heard the testi¬ his infidelity, he then begging for mony of Weaver as to finding him there, of his family, not to be exposed, ftij as to seeing him go there. You have heard little mercy he had for others ! Iljwfl the testimony of Amos, who also spoke to only the mercy for others teat k ash Watson about his impropriety with the for himself, this trial would ha b*| girls. You have heard the testimony of avoided. If he had then ceased li Maples, who saw them c >me out of the cutions this trial would have been oidJ room, and you have heard the tes imonv of But be still renews bis persecutioij AW Winifred and Eliza. Jackson, two little pledging himself before marriage ri ^ girls that were examined here and em¬ should lie the end, that he would ployed in the stine shop, about his bring¬ lest her further, he renews his ing oysters and cakes and candies into the tions ; he follows her ; as some -tues* shop aud treating them ; something un¬ say she could not move anyvln'. 125 u. not go in nor she could not go out, should be continued any longer upon this ane was not at her heels, following her poor unfortunate victim. Isn’t it enough rid, following her about. to make one’s heart bleed. Those who V'll, gentl men, is there any doubt have children—thank God I have children o: the effect that this horrible misfor- —I know that you have children—some of ahad upon her. You have seen her you, little girls; oh, when you go home, t, the little girl sitiing therp, but from tell those little girls the story of Fanny 3 .nxiety of this trial not her natural Hyde ; call them about you and tell them Ic but you see her round, fresh, rosy the story, tell them how she has behaved e s. That was Fanny Hyde when she herself since she came to this country, up ,s er age, when she rvas innocent and to the time that the deceased accomplished a she was pure as she was when she her ruin ; tell them how industrious she r with Watson. was, tell them about her going to Sunday LA at her now, a wreck, a wreck pro- School, tell them about the exhibitions in cl by the persecutions that have been which she has taken part, tell them what a’d upon her, followed from pillar to her Sunday School teachers say of her, s the color of her cheeks gone, there w hat her employers say of her, tell them 3 s reduced to a mere wreck, reduced the whole story and when you have told i skeleton ; not willing to leave her them that, they will have a good opinion e he had ruined her peace, destroyed of Fanny Hyde, they will say that she is a r lind and destroyed her health, he still good girl, that she did right to go to Sun¬ res her, and when she comes out that day School and to night school, and to be y i her then condition, he makes this industrious. Tell them that when she irit because she would not yield to his was fifteen years of age, when she was sis—makes this indecent assault upon pure and innocent and virtuous, that she r.: “Vengeance is mine, saith the Al- was employed by a man forty years of age, gly, I will repay,”—and then it was and tell them that that man, after five or treason, memory, judgment and all six months, instead of protecting her, ac¬ svi: of volition ceased, and without its complished her ruin, mined her ; and then icnce that feeble arm became the go on and tell them her subsequent story, iithough sure avenger of the wrongs her trials and her misery, bet'er th; n I c; n ttia l been heaped upon the head of tell it to you, and tell them then what oc¬ □ f Hyde. curred on this morning, and tell them that Lr i have the testimony as to her char- she shot him dead in his tracks ; ask them el? What more could we do ? What what should be done with her. Oh, gentle¬ s re d< me that she deserves this great men, think of the story of her life 1 think dlament, this great affliction? What of what she has suffered, the intense agony ilihe done since she came to this that she has endured. What must have n ry ? She attended Sunday School, been her thoughts, what a world of confu¬ s1 tended night school; with her feeble sion of thought must have rushed upon i she added all that has been in her her mind when—a fact that is not disputed w to the wealth of this country. She —she was sleeping side by side with the ■ bored day and night, and when she innocent girl, the daughter of this girl’s slot laboring she was at school. That destroyer. What must have been her i lien her life. Her life has been an thoughts then, when she reflected on rrious one, all through. She has what she once was and what that pure girl c'd with her hands and she has im- was, and who it was that had brought 1 her intellect all that she con'd ; about her ruin. What must have been her : uglit moral instruction in the Sun- thoughts ? Why, that was enough to drive i'ffhool and at church; and I a«k you, her to madness. Refer to the testimony a lias she done that this great affliction of Mrs. Hyde, her mother-in-law7, who sits 12f> Upon a question of life or death will i by her side to-day. She went there to be say that he is entitled to no weight at. attended when she was suffering physically that you will throw it aside as unworth 4 from causes produced by the ill treatment consideration, when if the testimon j of her destroyer ; and when she thought worthy of consideration and to be belie l that she had a brief respite, the summons then this girl is entirely irrespons:: comes for her to return—you have heard and was entirely irresponsible at the 11 it described by Mrs. Hyde, how in the she committed that act? Upon what the i agony of her soul she exclaimed, ‘ ‘ I feel will you say that his testimony is not t * as though there was a curse hanging over regarded ? A man who has made it ii me.” Yes, there was a curse, it was the business to study the effect of just ii curse of her destroyer, it was hanging over condition upon the mind comes upon < her, it will follow her to the grave, but stand ; a man of his standing and chi!is God, in his mercy, I trust; will not hold her ter, and tells you upon the solemnit >: accountable. See her wild look, as de¬ an oath that he does not believe she v t scribed by Mr. Potts. What was it upon responsible being at the time that it her mind ; what was it that was causing this committed this act. Then I place i* unnatural look ; what was it that was the stand a man who has had a larges causing this unnatural expression of the perience in another specialty, that is r eye and color of the face ; what was it that ticularly the diseases of the mind and it was preying upon the mind of this girl brain ; ten years at the head of the Bleu this morning; what was it ? What was iugdale asylum, a year at the heara she thinking about when she sat at the another asylum on Blackwell’s Island, ic stove there ? What do you think was rush¬ since that time has been pursuing the s Ij ing through her mind ? Was that the act and the investigation of these diseia of a person coolly and deliberately contem¬ He has made it a specialty for a {»i plating murder ? Would they give vent many year's, stands high in his profess n, to their feelings in that way, in contem¬ stands high as a citizen—character a ft plating murder for revenge ? Oh, no. She reproach-—he comes and hears the Id exclaims, “ Oh, I wish I was dead.’’ Had mony. He hears the testimony himli God, in His mercy, taken her before she as it comes from the lips of the witne ■*, met her destroyer, gentle memories would and he is asked his opinion. What « have clustered about her grave. Her life he say ? He is asked a question—1 i‘ is blighted, she is here a wreck, but little asked to state a condition in whicl be left. You are to deal with the wreck—you would expect to find the developmei ol are to say whether tire remainder of it is this form of insanity. He states it: to be destroyed, or you will give an oppor¬ I should suppose that a person exhibit;« tunity for her to repair, so far as in her predisposition to insanity, those whose genl power, this great misfortune that has be¬ health is marred by any cause, those whin fallen her. naturally nervous and excitable, those hi have been subjected to airy great trial of eii You have heard the testimony of Dr. feelings in anyway, to cause them to < ell Byrne, who stands high in his profession, much upon the subject, to regret it, and 1* awake nights and dream ol it, and then UipP1 whose character is above reproach, who plication of a great and sudden exeitin m has had great experience in the diseases some strong emotion—I should suppose sti» with which the prisoner was afflicted ; he person, under such circumstances, would* very likely to lose their reason. tells you the effect of that disease upon Question. And add to that at the time oftto the mind, and he tells you, upon the facts exciting cause painful dysmenorrhoea. as told to him in this case, and I leave it would greatly increase the probability o>d A. I think it would. to you to say whether he fairly understood Q. You have heard some of the testiino hi them or not, that she was not responsible the case, and from what yon have heard id when she committed the act, she could not the examination you made, do you thiutw prisoner in this case answers the deseripud be. Is his testimony worth nothing ? A. Very fully. 127 :ow, doctor, from the evidence you have a verdict of guilty in this case as for as d 1 this case and the examination you have any physical endurance is concerned. She e.aking all into consideration, the whole or'.of the case, what in your opinion do you has suffered all the pangs that it is possible di condition of her mind was at the pre- for the mind to suffer now. Li e of this homicide ? A. I have no doubt Gentlemen, I have but a few more words B si; was insane. i. responsib e ? A. Irresponsible. I be- to say to you. But I must return you my ■ e act was from the result of a sudden thanks before I resume my seat for your ill', the occasion of which she did not fore- kind indulgence in listening to me so long ad which she was not able to restrain; I jvshe had no knowledge of wrhat she was in this case. I can assure you that I feel 2; the time the shock occurred. deeply in this case. I feel from the bottom ’ll is the testimony. Coming from of my soul that this girl has been guilty a source as this, and in the face of of no crime either by the laws of God or stimony, sworn by these witnesses man. I feel that she sits here to-day as iderstand the question, and in the innocent of any crime or any intent to all the authorities, in face of all commit crime as any man in that jury ttimonyin this ease, you are asked box; and feeling as I have felt in this ia;in your souls that the prisoner at case, and seeing her helpless condition, I tr has been guilty of the crime of have felt it my duty to give my whole time ih. I will not insult your intelli- and my whole attention to the defense of .cflor an instant by contemplating such this case, and I have been much assisted, ’St;. I know that it cannot be; that ably assisted, by those who have helped iu< a case as this there can be but one me in the case; and I can assure you, gen¬ cl lion arrived at. The prosecution tlemen, that what we have done has been ’fxpect a conviction in this case. I done with the desire to protect this girl, ’tielieve that they have the faintest and not for money; that we are working u convicting this girl; but they do without fees; we are not lawyers talking 'e hat there may be a disagreement, with retainers in our pockets. But were t le may have to go back to her cell this to take ten times as long as it h«s we mand there remain at the pleasure of would never abandon that girl, but stick pisecntion. Oh! gentlemen, I trust to her until the jury would say by their t lat will not be brought about. I verdict that she might go free. I believe it hat her sufferings will end so far as her to be innocent; I believe that she has 1 large is concerned; that her suffer- committed no act that renders her account¬ 1 11 end with the ending of this trial, able by any law of God or man. I don’t u; and believe that she will be allowed care what view of the case you may take ; e m to her family, and repair as far take the view of the prosecution. You bean the great misfortune that has be- have got to take her story us to the occur¬ 3iher. Oh! don’t permit the hand of rence. Take her view of it; take the tes¬ ridon to oppress her any longer; lift timony, and she stands acquitted. But, I 0 her, take it from her. In the ad- ask you, if there was no other testimony lifation of the law by man how often in this case, no medical authorities referred 13 rules of right perverted. How to, no judicial authorities referred to, if I n s it that the accused should be the simply called your attention to the testi¬ ocit, and how often is it that the mony of Dr. Byrne and Dr. Correy, would ir are called upon to endure the pun- you not acquit her? n t due to others. This poor thing “Have yon heard. Dr. Correy, the evidence en now in jail since the 26th of in this case? what is your opinion as to the condition of her mind at the time of this hom¬ y; she has been confined in a felon’s icide?” Oh! gentlemen, she has suffered a And he says under oath: ad deaths in feeling. The punish- “I believe before my God that she was ’ould be but slight that would follow irresponsible.” 128 Are you going to hang her after such two of such insignificant things as f testimony as that ? Will you say that is all the result that has been produt I there is no doubt in this ease—will you the employment of outside couns] ■say that this is clear, plain, free of doubt. the employment of private detectivjj Oh, no. You cannot do it and you will all the machinery that could be brg not do it. Not g doubt ? why ! the de¬ to bear, and the lavish expenditu j fense is perfect. There cannot be any money. You have seen it creep I question as to what the verdict must be these words. I regretted to see thi u upon such evidence as this. Physicians thought it would have been much J giving their opinions under the sanction for him to have remained away. I« of an oath, that they believe that she was think it is good taste that he sat j utterly irresponsible, and giving you the side the District Attorney. I didn’t i reasons why she was irresponsible at the it looked well that he should come n time of the commission of that act—oh, from Connecticut here to seek till under such circumstances I know that it blood of this girl, and I felt like mi will be your pleasure to hasten to set her to him that this was not his place. H at liberty, after the case shall have been should he come here, why should hew committed to your charge. here to urge on this prosecution, t<| If I have said anything in this case that this girl’s life blood, to send her 'I seemed to you wrong, excuse it, ascribe it ignominious death upon the sea 1< to my interest and feeling in the case. I That is what he meant. That sugg i have done the best I could. I know that meant blood, it meant nothing elsn I have manifested much feeling, but it is that has been the meaning of thes> >i the feeling of my heart. I have made side parties from the start. It has e some criticisms in reference to the con¬ vengeance. But they cannot tak('e duct of the case upon the pirt of the geance through this jury, thauk to prosecution, as to those criticisms 1 say There is a barrier that stands be« now I adhere to every one of them, and their desires, justice and right, a t upon them I am ready and willing to take right and justice will here bevindical. the j ldgment of this jury. I have seen a There are a great many things tha u good many things in this case since it has occurred in this case that I have see commenced that I would rather not have have seen much more than you havt et seen, and I have heard a great many things connected with this case, and I knowm in this case that I would much have pre¬ more than you know as to the effort! ferred not to have heard. I heard a re¬ have been made to drag this girl to ; i mark, when Mrs. Meagher, for whom this nominous death upon the scaffold, it unfortunate prisoner worked and who was cannot be done. Yonder brothei m in the habit of visiting her house, playing come, the whole crowd may com t with the children—fond of children she whole gang of paid hirelings tba n says—when she was upon the stand and I been employed may come, the Sp« had asked her in regard to her character, may come, and his minions may con b you heard what she said. She spoke as all here sits a barrier between their din the witnesses have spoken in regard to her justice and right; and you will v character, she gave her a good character, them, “no; by no power shall yo bs “she was a good girl, industrious girl, the blood of that innocent girl.” W1 fond of children.” I heard the question should these outside parties, why on suggested to the District Attorney, from men come a hundred miles voluntaiy the brother of the deceased—“Ask her seek the blood of this unfortunat gr why she left.” He asked the question, Oh ! gentlemen, it is too much, it t< you heard the answer. Taking that fact much ; it is too much. Can you bine and the miserable detective, and one or for having feeling in this case ? 0, ■ 129 a We have a feeling inspired of eter- meet them no more in this life, they may forget itice. How much more is this poor her mortal agonies in the busy throng of the world, but there comes a day when he who .1 of man’s cruel wrong to suffer. Is murdered her peace and they who seek to c enough? Is it not enough that murder her life will meet their victim before ove her mad, and caused her to ex- the Great Judge, in the court above the sun; where misfortune is not a crime, and where rin the agony of her soul, “I am earthly distinctions fade away; where the poor a upon a wheel of fire, that mine own are rich and. the merciful are blest; where the 3 o scald like molten lead,” and must weak are strong and the oppressor’s rod is broken, and in that awful presence they will be cier now come, with his paid minions called to answer why, at their hands, Fanny i back ground, and seek to drag this Hyde was scourged to madness and to death. ” \rembling victim to an awful and ig~ Ob, gentlemen, I beg of you as you love bus death upon the scaffold ? Is your families, as you love your children, rfc satisfied with the ruin already by your hope of salvation hereafter, by i it ? Are you not prepared to ex- your expectation of mercy, I ask you to r spare her, Watson, spare her, for let this prisoner go free, let her return to sie of the name you bear. Enough her home. Oh, lift the great load that i name has she suffered already. now oppresses her ; say to her, you are in¬ y the love of God and for the sake of His nocent, God bless you, God bless you, ii, spare her broken life; don’t seek to p upon the fallen and undone. She may Fanny Hyde. 130 SUMMING UP OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY. Mr. BRITTON said : If it please the the officer wTho preceded him. It is Court, and you, gentlemen of the jury. It have caused a smile upon the counter :« affords me great pleasure to be able to of some of the gentlemen in this m congratulate you ou this bright and sunny room, who remember his action d nj morning, that we are all about to arrive at his nine years of official career, to aa the conclusion of this trial,—a tidal in heard him arraign me on charges like t se. more than one respect extraordinary in But, gentlemen, if it were true that I a* its character, extraordinary in the nature guilty of acts that make me amenab u of the defense, under the circumstances these charges, I certainly was not f Ity interposed, and quite as extraordinary in of them without distinguished precec is. the more peculiar features of the manage¬ The counsel himself, when he read t< 01 ment of the case by the defense. And, in the opening of the District Attorn of another particular, I might add, unusually Washington City, in order to shov os extraordinary. This trial has continued for what District Attorneys might do, »■ live long days. During that period no nished you a comment on that remarl nd one can say that this juiy have not given I submit to you when you heard ul this case all the attention, all the candor, opening of that District Attorney .a and all the care in its consideration read to you, whether it occurred tc on which could possibly be given to any to contrast that opening with the opmg case, more or less important. And what¬ made by the District Attorney in this se. ever verdict may ultimately be rendered, While it may have been—probably1 — it will become no man to say that there much more able, perhaps it occurrt tc was any want of attention, care or consid¬ you that it breathed a spirit which on eration on the part of this jury. Before did not discover in the opening re. proceeding to a discussion of what I deem But why, why go to Washington • a to be the merits of this case especially in precedent ? Here in our own neig or controversy, tin re are some things which hood a precedent may be found, anone have occurred during the trial, collateral not remote. to such merits, which, it seems to me, re¬ Gentlemen, a case of homicide or al quire some passing nctiee from me. murder was pending before a distiiigined It has been considered proper, on the judge—a judge whose character and po¬ part of the counsel for the defense, to tation for judicial ability, high lionouid make some criticisms on the conduct of integrity is surpassed by none io liii the case by the District Attorney, and he State, a judge whom some of you, g tle- has thought proper to make these criticisms men, may perhaps personally know, bl in a manner and in a style which may be, case was,—as all criminal cases are,— ps- under the circumstances, satisfactory to euted by a District Att omey. At the osf him. It has been charged that the Dis¬ of that case the jury did not agree in hit trict Attorney has exhibited an improper verdict. That trial was pressed wi » and undue zeal in the prosecution of the zeal compared to which the fires oltlu case. It has been charged that the Dis¬ zeal in this would pale into insignifioioa trict Attorney has quarrelled with the But in that the court and the U riel court. Well, gentlemen, the time has not Attorney differed some as to the 1;. ** yet arrived in the County of Kings when sometimes happens, and as has hapjoel the present District Attorney of this on this trial. After the trial, applied^ county feels it incumbent upon him to was made in that case, as is usual imoli defend himself against such charges from cases, for the bailing of the prison- 1 131 n, state to you what occurred, or I have here mentioned, referring to the t') controversy between the District death of D. S. Yoorhees, who was shot by ni and the judge, before whom such one Chambers in cold blood in South chon was made, was. Suffice it for Brooklyn. With reference to that occur¬ o ay that, as a result of these pro- rence the District Attorney said : n i, that District Attorney, who has Does any one believe that if Edward Perry aid me the precedent to which I had met with his deserts—if he had been promptly convicted and sentenced, this would r prred, thought proper to address a have occurred? No, sir. I believe it is nication through the public prints, the result of the drunken jubilee which followed 1 will read to you : Judge Gilbert’s decision to admit Perry to bail. The thieves and murderers have become abso¬ District Attorney’s Office, lutely maddened by their successes. King’s County, Brooklyn, February 12, 1870. Well, gentlemen, it is a peculiar com¬ ■ iver Thieves, Cut-’hroats and Murderers ment to make on that—that when this Nt York and Brooklyn : Chambers was tried for this last-mentioned llmI have the honor to acknowledge offense, and that man came into this court¬ co it of the numerous communications tljaddressed to me, by the members of room prosecuted by this same District pc/erful fraternity in reference to Edward Attorney for a murder, which he says was . ] q., and in answer thereto respectfully committed because Perry was held to bail, a iu that that gentleman has been admit- ) fc’l. The delay in informing you of the that it did not take long for the jury to ciumstance was caused entirely by my decide, with the acquiescence of the Dis¬ an: of the fact before the official announce- trict Attorney, that that man was insane ; th morning. But you, whose sources of in¬ fill are so much better than mine, that you and he was sent to the Lunatic Asylum. awe of the result in Cherry street two days This was one of the cases cited by the w: readily and kindly excuse the one iio, on my part, and in view of the satis¬ learned counsel on the other side yester¬ fy inclusion will probably be good enough day, if I remember rightly. During this ■eg the intentions so warmly expressed to controversy in regard to bail in that case, If the communications already referred tried by such a court, and where the jury ee: it all the more necessary to call your impanneled by such a Court had disagreed, Iio; to this subject, as the immunity here- certain affidavits were made, and among i jcasionally enjoyed by you in your avthy business has been recently in- them an affidavit of the distinguished Dis¬ rill such an extent as to render murder trict Attorney, wherein he detailed certain oo yn entirely safe hereafter, and no risk private conversations which he alleged had ;v( attaches to the felonious taking of n e. Having accomplished all that you occurred between him and the Judge who \ id having strong and reliable assur- heard the case and presided on the trial. o; inflection hereafter, in whatever you And when his Honor, Judge Gilbert, came do -;ou will at once perceive, Messrs. River ref Cut-throats and Murderers, that no to write an opinion on this question of uti necessity at present exists for the de- holding to bail, he makes use of this lan¬ do of my insignificant life. And this : si may I be permitted to indulge in the guage reported in this Book of Reports : th you will simply permit me to live a In regard to the statements contained in the ti 3 longer, at least until I again offend affidavit of S. D. Morris relative to what oc¬ ttepting to bring any of your distin- curred between the presiding justice and him¬ ednembers to justice? Besides, gentle- self immediately after the first trial, I forbear as our business is done out of court and to comment. This statement may be fitly re¬ in ourt, we will not necessarily conflict served for investigation elsewhere. lte, and as your business is done out of Now, gentlemen, I take it, that if the byre mine begins in court, we will not sa ^y quarrel as before, present District Attorney had done the av he honor to subscribe myself, things which I have detailed to you here, S D. Morris. and the counsel who had arraigned him >w gentlemen, accompanying this let- before you in this trial, had been the indi¬ fei,certain declarations made by that vidual defending Edward Perry on this nc Attorney who arraigns me here, occasion, you would have heard his clarion or tree days after the communication voice throughout this court-house and into 132 the street in comments upon the “zeal,” should give the prisoner here her jm 1 the “improper ardor,” and the “improper in that regard. When I asked the « interference ” on the part of the District tion I believed I had testimony i J Attorney, outside of his legi'imate duties case which I should introduce, tend in the case ; and you -would have heard contradict the evidence for whicl j him denounce the impropriety of any Dis¬ would be the foundation. Believing M trict Attorney undertaking before the pub¬ I asked the question. The test:« lic to drag through the mire of such a through some delay in some respeih letter, and through the mire he himself not arrived—it was from abroad—so g created, such a judge as rendered that de¬ did not know it in its length and bi 11 cision, Judge Jasper W. Gilbert, to whom After this question had been aske a I have refern d. on the adjournment, when I had oj:j| But, geutlemen, it is unusual for coun¬ nity to inquire fully into the partial ■$ sel in the trial of a case of this importance that evidence, I found that, in my o] it —and I beg your pardon and the pardon in justice to all parties concerne -t of the Court for referring to this thing to prison ei as well as the people—tl t the extent I have, I feel impelled to do it testimony was not such as I ought i from what I considered an unwarrantable troduce. It was true there was a f i< and gross attack in language and manner tion to a certain extent; but I ft! tl made upon me by counsel on the other this prisoner, under the circumstai s side—it is unseemly that counsel should this case, ought not to be arraigned t be wrangling personally through a trial of prosecuting officer of this county f a this nature over the remains of a man acts outside of those developed in e m lying low in his grave by the hand of vio¬ tion with this trial legitimately, a t lence, and on the trial of a woman who is offense charged upon her, unless tl e' charged with his deliberate murder. But, dence was clear, conclusive and overek gentlemen, no remarks that have been ing. Feeling in that way, I introdnd made shall swerve me from what I deem to evidence on the subject. be my just duty in the case. I had intend¬ Now, gentlemen, this prisoner is eitk ed, as I think it was due to you and my¬ and I say it cheerfully, to all the ad^ tl self, to refer to one circumstance which of that fact. She is to be tried bef< jj has occurred in this trial, on my behalf, in and before this Court on the tesjo my summing up, which I should have done relating to this case ; and if it wen-os whether or not any of these remarks had ble—which, I believe, it cannot btii been made, and which I shall not be de¬ could by any possibility have inflm terred from doing by what has been said your minds adversely to her, I beg jl on this occasion. Your attention has been to divest your minds of it at once! called to the fact that I asked a question just to her. But, gentlemen, that b* of this prisoner while on the stand as to said in justice to this prisoner. il| her conduct while in New Britain, Conn. ; been charged on me by the couidf and that I did not follow it up with any the other s de, that in asking this qW testimony tending to show that the ques¬ I was seeking to take an unfair adw tion which I asked her was pertinent to of this woman. Is there a man) 1 any evidence subsequently to be intro¬ senses—is there a man who knows 'on| duced. Now, gentlemen, it was not neces¬ to put two ideas together and draw cfl sary, in one sense, to make a criticism upon elusion from them who does not knf ti that by offensive imputations upon motives. an act of that- kind not followed up»iu It was fair and just, if the counsel thought prejudice the case of the people idB proper, to make a criticism upon that cir¬ the case of the prisoner? Doesrv® cumstance to this jury ; and it was equally suppose, that I was not aware whel a fair and just that I, as I intended to do, not introduce this evidence for tliete** X3-3 iave stated, that if it -were not fol- and on arriving there you would inquire xnp by such evidence that it would as to what were those facts, you would in¬ bject of comment to this jury, and quire, whether you had mistaken the char¬ , ley would justly feel tint it was a acter of this brother, and you would en¬ jin which ought not to prejudice the deavor to inquire whether he had been oil' ? Such a proposition is unworthy struck down murderously, iu cold blood, : nn who charged it. Now, gentlemen, or whether he had done something or l av.said all I propose to say to you, so other to merit that fate. Well, gentlemen, a . am concerned, connected with my on making these inquiries you still feel, ndfet of this case. as this brother fepls, that this charge is jnot content with charging upon the unfounded. And suppose that intelligence 11 Attorney improper motives and be conveyed to his afflicted wife, and it is n r conduct in the prosecution of the a source of consolation to her in her widow¬ , n could not keep from abasing and hood and distress, and she, knowing him l yig the afflicted and innocent family, to have been a kind and loving husband, > is lost irs head. The only brother, still believed him to be a noble specimen 10 lilt that lie had some interest in the of a man, where is the hand, whatever the lsdof the death of a brother whom he fact might be, that would tear down that othougbt proper to come into this fabric or confidence ? Well, the person ir! room, and at my request to seat alleged to have committed this offence is :sf by my side, in order that I might, to be tried. Are you now to lose all net be, ask him occasional questions re- interest in the case ? You know that on n. to the facts as they were developed that trial your brother’s reputation is to be tl trial. Is not that all, gentlemen ? assailed. You believe him to be innocent. as lything else done by him as the sub¬ Are you to lie supinely by, stay at your 's- ' criticism before this Court ? The place of residence, and let the matter rest n 1 upon that tells you that this family there ? and if you do take sufficient in¬ ■ ‘lifter blood,” and he reiterates it iu terest in the matter to be present at the m and manner calculated to impress trial of the case, and you are invited by i th the inhumanity and brutality of the District Attorney, who is practically is dieted family. Gentlemen, suppose here, so far as the case requires it, to de¬ your case. Suppose you lived here fend the reputation of the deceased, and -3: oklyn and had an only and dearly be- you happen to suggest a question, wliat vet brother, whom you believed—what- would you think, then, among strangers, you ever leave the box to hold that that for the theory in this case, it is a rw b doctrine was good ? Apply this principle say that this testimony of this door hi to every-day life. Because, a person pos¬ any bearing upon the facts in t **• 139 fc gentlemen, I am not alone in my say he is a very respectable gentleman, and did on as to this. It has been found by not mean to certify to anything untrue ; but really this confirms the opinion I have already •hence in courts that this testimony is entertained that hardly any weight is to be 3:y and absolutely unsafe. Did you given to the evidence of what is called scientific witnesses. They come with a bias on their near of a case among the numerous minds to support the cause in which they are e; which have occurred lately, where embarked ; and it appears to me that Sir Fred¬ ajty is set up, some successful and erick Madden, if he had not been a witness in a cause, and he had been asked on a different icmsuccessful, that there were not a occasion what he thought of his handwriting, rof witnesses on each side, testifying would have given a totally different answer.” hqual confidence, and men eminent in Judge McLean (of the U. S. Supreme Court) bears witness to the remarkable conflict that is ibrofession, standing high in the med- generally displayed in the opinions of scientific 1 )i'kl, testifying to the insanity of the witnesses. The opinions of experts who have u d, and men equally high testifying been examined are in conflict, and, so far as my experience goes, this has been uniformly the tl) sanity. There are occasionally case where experts have been examined. In es where there is no question; but that case eight doctors deposed for the plaintiff ei there has been any such it has al- and eleven for the defendant. Other instances might be adduced. Thus, in the famous Free¬ vsjeen the case. An eminent writer in man trial, nine physicians and experts in insan¬ tw ook which I have before me, on this ity deposed one way, and seven quite as posi¬ tively the other. In the Andrews trial, Dr. >j« indulges in these remarks : Jarvis swore positively to his belief that the Ve ave already adverted several times to the prisoner was afflicted at the time of the killing wi; disfavor with which expert testimony with momentary insanity, maniacal paroxysm, oo.dupon by those who are best entitled to or transitory mania, while Dr. Choate swore as Lge f its value. It would not be difficult to distinctly the other way, on the ground there iti)y instances of a similar tenor. Though was no such disease known to science. In the vy ranch of science has been advanced with Huntington trial the doctors disagreed ; and in d rapid strides, it is not, perhaps, too The People vs. Lake there were experts on both ch;> say that from the time of Lord Mani- sides. See also the Schoepp murder trial, lately ' a 1 Folkes vs. Chadd, to the present tune, held in Pennsylvania, and the opinions con¬ ■re j’s been a steady decrease in the credit to tained in a pamphlet of the different medical awjded to the testimony of scientific wit¬ societies as to the expert testimony on the hes We have before quoted the very forci- strength of which the prisoner was convicted. re irks with which the Scotch judge dis- Indeed, upon this point the authorities are sselsuch evidence. Similar remarks have agreed. Very little weight is to be attached to uiom the judges and law writers in this expert testimony, often none at all, and very at: and in England. Lord Denman, (one often it is worse than useless for the court to thmost eminent judges of England), says: listen to it. 1 TLf be that medical men may be more in Let me add to this the late case tried in > liyit of observing cases of this kind than i' rsons, and there may be cases in which Baltimore, known as the “Wharton trial,” ilic; testimony may be essential, but I can- There was no question of opinion except a8je with the notion that moral insanity upon abstract chemical science, the result ■ b better judged of by medical men than vi'S: Mr. Justice Grier (one of the most of chemical analysis, concerning which vie, judges of the United {States Supreme there ought to be no difference, it was a urtjsays: “Experience has shown that question whether, upon a post mortem ex¬ I'osi opinions of persons claiming to be ex- 'ts iy be obtained to any amount; and it amination of the body, poison was found ppens that not only days, but even therein. Ten eminent physicians and ex¬ vks, re consumed in cross-examinations to 1 th ikill or knowledge of the witnesses and perts testified there was a trace of poison ’ cc|ectness of their opinions, wasting the in the body, and ten eminent physicians ie o he court and wearying its patience, and and experts testified there was plenty of pie ig instead ot elucidating the questions oivi; in the issue.” Chief Justice Chap- poison there. I will read further from the :n\ ' Massachusetts, said: “I think the same work : lnioi of experts are not so highly regarded Experience has shown that matter of opinion, wa| formerly, for while they often afford even on the most rigidly scientific subjects, is at a m deteimining facts, it often happens so chameleon-like, if we may so speak, in its t ex rts may be found to testify to anything, character, that it is exceedingly likely to take its "ev< absurd. ’ In the Tracy Peerage case, color, in the matter of legal evidence, from that ra tnpbell said : “ I do not mean to throw of the side that has made the first overtures. lel itmn on Sir Frederick Madden. I dare The remarkable fact relating to this matter is 140 that the opinions of honest and conscientious insane. I will not occupy your timi men are often thus swayed and affected. commenting on that question. I will ] Gentlemen, the prosecution has pro¬ its character and credibility to you. duced no expert testimony in this case. this is the first step, and it is an impo: From what I have read to you, you can see step, because the authorities say how easy it would have been to produce a where this predisposition finds its out! conflict of testimony upon the main ques¬ that is the first thing that should be lo tion raised here. We did not introduce it, for. But the authorities say that wit first and last, because we had no idea of this predisposition this particular kii this defense—that the defense of insanity insanity don’t often occur. Now, the was to be relied upon. True, the counsel of the prisoner should indicate it. said to you, with his usual fairness, that tell you that at fifteen years of age inasmuch as we read the definition of mur¬ young creature was seduced by the der to you which contains the clause in it of a mau—a man forty odd years of i that there should be a sound mind, and by his wiles, by the influence of his i therefore we knew the defense was to be tion, by something, I know not u set up. Well, we commented likewise seduced this young girl, and that tha i upon the clause that killing was necessary the first act that led to this insanity to constitute murder, but it never entered that to be received as a fact in this i< our minds that the defense would set up If you believe that these two peopl 1 that Mr. Watson was not killed. Second¬ live together at some time adulteroir- ly, and more, we did not introduce this concede, if you please, that at the a ' testimony, because of the character of it, nearly sixteen years the intimacy * to which I have just called your attention. menced, does that prove that the wilt i But, gentlemen, it all resolves itself into inclinations of this man seduced this} u this question : you are the judges of this girl ? because on that circumstanc tl testimony, and you are the judges on all defense in this case wholly stands. T in the testimony here. Just so far as these it in any aspect you please, insanit ( experts give you sound and substantial this other defense, which I shall coi I reasons for the belief in them, just so far presently, it is based on the idea th: tl it will recommend itself to your judgment; man is alone at fault, and she the iui ei and I leave it to you to say whether the victim, and to him alone is the pi is! testimony given by these physicians, to ment. Let us take a common-sense ei which I have referred, and upon which Is there a particle of testimony i lb they base their opinions, is such that re¬ case except her own ? She was put po; commends itself to your sound belief. the stand and examined on that si eel Now, the other ground on which it is She says that at something upwards fil claimed that this prisoner is insane is the teen years of age she went to wo fo fact that she was a subject of insanity, that this man ; that she was employed her there were certain indications, which the about six months when she was se>oed counsel specified, prior to the time of this What occurred during those six mon$m killing, which would lead your minds, and human tongue can tell. The only tigii* ought to lead your minds, to that conclu¬ which could tell it, from the nature th sion ; and you will pardon me if I refer to case, was her’s. She alone cou W] that testimony which is really all the legit- what arts were resorted to and what aid mate testimony for you to consider ia this ishments were held out, what induwenti case. The first point that they suggest to were extended to her to yield her vi is h you is an hereditary predisposition in the this man. He cannot tell you. Heesii family, and in proof of that they have in¬ the cold, silent grave. He cannot troduced certain evidence, tending to show you, on his part, for his lips are si it u that the grandfather of this prisoner was death, whether the act was his or h s<<* 141 icier it was, as is general in these cases, sun and is used to buffeting the wind and n :ual act. storm. Is it to be assumed that this man B; conceding even that this is true, who lies in his grave is this libertine des- ithis girl was seduced by this man, is scribed to you so pathetically and grandly toe claimed as a proposition of law or by counsel on the other side ? But assum¬ hcnan experience, or is it to be accept- ing this without proof, what is the fact ? a fact without proof that when a girl This young girl and this man enter into if sixteen years of age loses her virtue that relation. To further illustrate the sii a fact from which counsel can argue “wiles” of this man, I omitted to state ,a ty ? Often and often are girls mar- another branch of evidence. The wit¬ d it that age. I appeal to your own nesses were made to state that he brought sedation ; I appeal to the information confectionery and various things which 1 lave obtained around in the social would please young girls in this factory, cl how many young girls to-day are in and it was to be inferred from that that ' ouses of prostitution in New York, this man was that libertine. Well, only 1 ounger than was this girl. How one question disposed of all of that. nyoung girls to-day under sixteen are Q. How often were these things brought? A. About once a week or two. Q. A lunch or icng their wares about the stores and refreshment of which every one in the factory nfthe offices in New York, who are as partook, male and female ? A. Certainly. d to dispose of their persons as they The counsel could not avoid conceding c their wares. Is it an accepted fact that if from an innocent motive it afforded t ccause a girl is sixteen or thereabout no ground for censure. Is there any evi¬ ,t le is not guitly in any sense if she dence before you showing that it was not csier virtue ? Take this young girl in an innocent motive ? Is there anything thlar. She commences work at eight criminal in that ? Is there anything indi¬ rof age. She continues continuously cating the libertine in it ? But a little fa ories up to the time of this occur- more—the party has his likeness taken ! oi Seven or eight years she mingles The counsel gave me an admonition during nicously with women and girls older his summing up that I was not good herself. She is described as a girl of at stage effects. He is correct. I concede isil precocity and intelligence, by their it, and therefore I never have attempted a finesses—the smartest girl, some of them. But I cannot say that of him. He jaployers say, they ever saw, extra has had the experience of nine years. fffjent; and although the counsel tried No man I ever knew can excel him in that. iit it by confining it to mere work, When he brought in the photograph of rmesses would not understand it in those two little girls it was a part of that t ay, but would have it in general in- stage effect to which he referred, and it igice. Now the difference between a ended in the effect that this man sent it in girl in your parlor and mine at fif- home three days after it was taken. Under n; sixteen years of age, who is kept what circumstances it was taken, whether le the paternal roof, with father and at the solicitation of the two girls, he th • watching over her, who has scarce- being there in the factory with them, ni gled in society, knows but little of or at whose instance, it does not appear. vrld, and the girl who has worked in Nothing appears in proof to show that it ul c factory among all kinds of people was taken from a wrong motive. The next n ghtto fifteen years of age, in knowl- fact relied on to establish this proposition te, f human nature and precocity is the is that he was her employer, and had ie 3 is the difference in the plant which special control over her in that way. Mr. w in the shade, not exposed to the Bachman carried on that business. Mr. igl'ating rays of the sun and to the air, Watson had an interest in it. Mr. Watson 1 tit plant which has grown out in the worked by the day continually in it. He 142 was at work there at the time of the homi¬ among thousands of women in oux* cide, and the witnesses testify that he took munity, is not caused by libert a charge as foreman of the men, as this de¬ Well, that is disposed of. The next til fendant took charge of the women. They 4 4 great misfortune and grief. ” Wha i» were, so far as that factory was concerned, misfortune and grief; and w'hat a tb on an equality. Mr. Bachman discharged evidences of misfortune and grief? ig her wrhen she was to be discharged, and may be grief; there may be misfc u; Mr. Bachman employed her when she was but where are the evidences of grief Li to be employed. His name was the only us see. The first evidence is \vh: tin one up in the business, although Watson “young girl ” said while at Washing a.- was regularly employed, and had some “I feel as if there was a great curse b ^ interest in the business. over me. ” Well, the next fact relied upon to prove Gentlemen, there was no great us insanity is a change of temperament, a 4 4 hanging over” her. It was upo be change of habit, a change in dress. Why, What was it? When amid the tli der gentlemen, she did not dress quite as neat¬ of Sinai it was handed down frorGe ly as she had done ; she got more careless Almighty, “Thou shalt not commiini in her whole demeanor, and latterly she tery,” those who committed it sulcta got thinner. She formerly weighed one themselves to that curse. Could 3 4 hundred and twenty-five pounds. Now she otherwise, when she walked abroad nde is down to less than one hundred. Is it that injunction from the Almighty tii| anything strange that a girl from the age upon her, ten months with a husbar ani of fifteen or sixteen years, for the next at the same time cohabiting with thi; the two or three years gets thinner? It some¬ man—could she do otherwise, if she id; times happens without disease. It often conscience within her, than to say, • her happens as they grow up they are thinner. is a great curse” not over, but ipoi But this is not all: she had a disease me?” When she walked out into to peculiar to women ; the counsel asserts could she expect the flowex-s won! loci caused by this man, caused by this liber¬ so bright or the grass as green, or t :th tine. Where is the evidence of that? songs of the birds would strike as They don’t tell us what that disease was upon her ear with this great momgiui particularly, perhaps from motives of deli¬ resting upon her? There was a cons ‘not cacy. But we can surmise what it was. This was the first proof we have thi But if your surmise and mine is the same, case of its sway. But it was not inpiu is there anything in the fact that these It is not necessaiy to resort to the issn people were living together in that way theory to explain the effect of conshli« that would produce this disease. Does not Now what next? She made a dec! itia that disease exist in the community among at the stove, on the morning of theoni the virtuous? I appeal to your own gen¬ cide. She said 4 ‘she wished she was ‘«d.' eral information whether it is not com¬ In addition to the crime I have alre yre mon amongst women. Shall it be said that ferred to, there was another cause if h< because a woman who has a husband for making that remai'k. She was n( oni] ten months and then goes to Washington resting under the incubus of crim b( to be treated for this disease peculiar to she was contemplating another, andiiha the female sex, that that man with whom very bosom was the pistol with whii six she was living in this way other than her intended to perform the act. 44 B ter, husband caused that disease? Is that the as the Counsel said, “ might she filled way cases of this kind are to be tried, and than to have canned out that crime.: i is it an assumption that people are insane It is a little surprising that all th ? ii* upon this state of facts? This disease, dications of insanity relied upon, exc 'tin( distressing and wearing as it is, no doubt, this one which I mentioned, occur d <* 143 orning of the homicide. It is a lit- crime was committed would it not be bet¬ s -prising that they all occurred after ter to find the prisoner guilty and sustain ■ ] stol came out of that drawer and was the law for the benefit of society, and, in¬ ;cL in her bosom, but not so surprising asmuch as human laws cannot be perfect, t]: contemplation of the act she was inasmuch as they cannot cover every case tat time conceiving. She looked that might arise,—God Almighty alone can vi in the eye;” she looked “pale;” make laws to cover all cases—depend upon t ; is a sing-ular comment upon the the interposition of the Executive to whom uof the doctor’s testimony. He says the law has wisely given the power of re¬ sva hardly possible that wildness of the prieve, pardon or commutation? I do not ■: d that paleness of the face could pre- mean to say—and I hope I may not while iei contemplated murder. That may I live to occupy the position I now hold yi.r experience. If it is. you will agree say that if there is in the minds of the h die doctor in that regard. Now is jury any doubt known to the law they should tat all? It is true, ingenious theories not give the prisoner the benefit of it. Ev¬ y >e suggested; it is true, declamation ery prisoner is entitled to that. But the y e had by the hour upon the rela- question is whether, in a clear case, where naf these parties. But where are the that reasonable doubt of the prisoner’s guilt is I shall have occasion when we come does not] exist, and where nevertheless the ir ther branch of this subject to again punishment of guilt would shock the moral •n that. But, gentlemen, I submit to sense of the jury and the community, ; men of plain common sense whether would it not be better to leave it where the s efense of insanity in any aspect, law has placed it. But, gentlemen, I think etjer made from the testimony of ex- I will show you this is not such a case. rtpr from any testimony, is not a The true foundation of punishment is be¬ in: But, gentlemen, that is not the cause it is right. The theory of the law 1 i fense in this case. This defense is is that a man should be punished because prised for the purpose of ringing the it is right, not because of any particular tnjis on what is claimed to be the good to community, although that is a on; of this young girl on the part of consequence which is supposed to follow s fin. Now I am not prepared to say punishment. But the principle that lies it ere are not cases where a jury are down deep at the bottom of human pun¬ stifled in their own consciences in ishment is because it is right. It is the paling from the strict letter of the law same principle that the Divine Ruler acts 1 riding a person harmless for an upon in punishing His subjects ; but as n which comes strictly within the human laws cannot be made to nicely dis¬ tu . It may be a question of grave criminate and to do exact and divine jus¬ asi nation, as I have suggested once tice, there is this humane provision to roi during the trial of this case, whether which I have referred. It has happened th;e cases where the moral sense of in the jurisprudence of this country, as in n appealed to, in the judicial judg- other intelligent communities, that cases mt»f the juror, it would not be better have occurred where it would shock the le e it to the tribunal where the law moral sense of the jury and of the com¬ ir e it and to say that the letter of the munity to execute a man, although the ' 1: the benefit of society should be man had strictly placed himself within the idi ted, and that the Executive may letter of the law. Many such cases have ter se. I do not make that remark been read to you through the progress of rm he motive which has been assigned this trial. It has been resorted to largely, m< I made that remark with the same resorted to by Courts, by counsel, and by gg' ion that I make now. If you are juries, that under cover of the plea of in¬ tisi d beyond reasonable doubt that this sanity that moral sense should speak out 144 in a verdict of acquittal. Now I recognize it, and the jest of his associates. Yot ti the fact and I cannot shut my eyes, if I believe this man was insane. No 11 would, to the fact. It is not to be denied the community believes that either ( > that these cases have occurred; and with Sickles were insane ; but you do 1 e the limitations or qualifications which I that to have hanged these men wont i have already expressed to you. I don’t been an outrage on natural justice, id deny their propriety. Is this such a ca e? disgrace to the civilization of the ag ai I shall refer, after the lengthy argument adverse to the moral sense of evert g that has been made to you in which many thinking man. Those verdicts wer * of these cases have been cited, ouly to two dered under the guise of law ; but n or three of them, simply to illustrate the not law. Take another case. He a principle for which I contend. There are Pierce, who had a sister whom he at e cases, conspicuous and prominent, of he had grown up with her from chile >o which the case of Sickles may perhaps be had accompanied her everywhere h taken as the leading one, one which per¬ were sole companions, entwining bi haps the moral sense of the community hearts with brotherly and sisterly affi in approved; and such a case as that of Cole. in bonds as strong as life itself. Unc f But I did not say, gentlemen of the jury, promise of marriage the seducer can ai as I was represented to have said, when I disrupted those tendiils. Whei tl cited this case, that the verdict was an out¬ ruined brother asked for satisfac n rage on public justice. I said the charge marriage, the destroyer treated hiiri of the Court when that jury came in, as to scorn, spurned him with a scoff, am ai the principles of law, on the excitement “I’ll see you damned first.” Ft tl of the moment, was an outrage on the brutal remark his life was the forfeit B principles of legal justice, but not the ver¬ you don’t believe that brother was i ai dict of the jury; and I say now it was the I do not. Nobody does ; nobody.« only instance on record, so far as I can unless it be the demented doctoiwl discover, where that doctrine was held by testified to it. But the moral see the Courts as to the preponderance of proof community was satisfied. Now, w it on the question of insanity. the principle that pervades these sa But what principle lies at the bottom of Can you point to me a case anywle these cases ? A wronged husband ! In the the books, any one among all this i at one case, a man had confided to his friend, ous array of cases which the counst 10 who had visited .this home as a friend, the after hour read to you, to prove tha he cherished wife of his bosom; and that was such a thing as insanity ? and tl man, under the guise of friendship and the an-ay of cases, think of it, was the o: shield of hospitality, stole into that home of them where the person w'lio beca ti and debauched her under circumstances of avenger was a guilty party ? Tell e peculiar atrocity. In the other case, a there was. It was the innocent par man was at the front fighting the battles of was the outrage perpetrated on him hi his country, standing in the face of the foe ■was avenged. Do you thiuk insanity ou in defense of your liberties and mine, and have been found if the guilty worn lit in support of the government tinder which shot the man instead of the husbai ? we live; into his home, while away, crept think not. You would say to he) “ the reptile, in the guise of his own family takes two to commit adultery ;” ano'bt protector, and debauched his wife. You God’s command, “Thou slialt not cudi don’t believe that Cole was insane when he adultery,” was implanted in the brst slew the destroyer of his wife, of his honor, every man and woman, it was equallym and the destroyer of his peace, who made ing on both sexes. To the worn: ?( him the object of the finger of scorn and would say, “ You, being a jiarticipit i jeering all through life if he submitted to the offense, are not to inflict the pedty 145 i the case of the brother. It was but the ordinary case of adultery between j sition in which he was placed before man and woman. If you sustain the de¬ immunity ; it was the outrage upon fense in this case it will be a precedent u, it was the shock to his feel- that, wherever an adultery is committed it s, and the thought that all down shall be right for the woman, under all oifh life he was a marked man, to these circumstances, years after, if need )i it could be said, “ You are the man be, to take her paramour’s life. The os sister was seduced, and you sub- principle being conceded that a man may iti to it.” The husband and the kill another while in actual intercourse >tlr were innocent. Take the case of with his wife, then, if the principle of ss Harris, at Washington, where she this defense is true, his wife may kill the k he weapon in her own hands. She paramour in the act or at any time afterward. •i mocent. Her victim had promised That is the principle contended for. Now, a ry her ; she was desperately in love will it impress itself upon your moral h im: she sought him out under the sense, or the moral sense of any com¬ ir of a great outrage, because of his munity, that a person may kill another mining her. She killed him ; but whom he or she may have received in an it e was insane you don’t believe. It embrace, in the very act ? I submit to (r1 she is now in the Asylum for the you, there is no such appeal to your moral but she is there probably as the sense. Gentlemen, when that proposition ibf killing the man to whom she was wras made to you it did not occur to you, nood. Every impulse of her heart had nor did it occur to this community, as it uelmt toward him, and every circum- does when an innocent party has been the .116 showed that it was more probably avenger. This principle was first asserted rult of that act than the cause of it. in the case of Laura D. Fair, and this de¬ dot follow in these cases where subse- fense was stolen body and soul from that ■n y people have been sent to a lunatic case. It had its birth on the far distant hr., that they were insane before the shores of the Pacific. It met its death t- eople have been made insane by the there at the hands of an intelligent jury— v't of murder. At common law, where the fate it deserved—in a verdict of guilty. uaifound another in the act of inter¬ Its spirit takes its flight from there, and im with his wife, the law said he would now, for the first time it rears here its unjustified if he killed him on the spot, polluting form. Now this case, stripped lowed upon that as a sufficient reason ; of all the appeals that have been so for¬ d iwent no further. That is the prin¬ cibly made to you—to your feelings and ce ping at the bottom of those cases, your sympathies, all of which can be made inch I have expressed to you here ; the more readily because there is a growing- w a; because of the outrage upon him feeling in the community against capital : 1: wounded honor, because his domes- punishment—and, I hope, the time will ■ pice was destroyed, because he was a come, when it has grown and blossomed to ai'kl man in all future times. In these maturity—that it is not wise for men to tteilays the sense of the community is, hang other men ; that this had better be it ids principle ought to be extended, left with God to kill. We feel reluctance 1 at it shall not be confined to the to convict in a capital case ; it is an act iua time when this offense is committed, which we feel all through life afterwards de oral sense of the community in might possibly have been unjustifiable. lesejrses is that the innocent shall be held There is another thing. There is a reluc¬ amiss if, in some extreme cases, they tance to inflicting this penalty upon women. ive jaken the law into their own hands. No man born and bred a gentleman, no mv,1 this such a case ? Let us look at the man born with the instincts of a man in ets. Let us see if this case is anything his bosom does not inherently feel a sym- 146 pathy with women. It is one of the evi¬ fied here, a month before she w& m dences of civilization. It is one of the de¬ ried, that “this girl is only unti velopments of the intelligence of the age ; guise of morality, that there is an as ^ and if it were not so, society would fall tion of innocence on her part; and hit back to a state of barbarism and chaos. she is reciting from the Holy Book (}| No better evidence could be adduced of and listening to the utterances c he the decline of the social fabric and a ten¬ teachers, she is in the continuance o la dency toward barbarism than the fact that terv ; do you know that she has be fc this noble and manly sentiment had ceased a year voluntarily submitting to tla to animate us. And it is peculiar, beyond braces of a married man ? ” Would is all others, to the American people. It is a witnesses, when called upon in a cc ti subject of common remark that there is justice to testify, have said that her m more deference to women among the edu¬ acter was excellent ? I think not. iic cated American people than any other on of it. She had become seventeen at the face of the earth—a most conclusive of age, or thereabouts ; she attende th evidence of their advancement in civiliza¬ Sabbath School all the time, and h i tion. Here is where the Prosecution in genuity enough, design enough and ^ this case has the most to contend against. tion enough to impose upon them . i These are grounds on which impassioned human being suspecting. I liana appeals have been made to you; and to “voluntarily.” Why not? If it w; n these instincts, which, as men, are in your voluntarily, what was it ? She d breasts. But are wre to decide questions father, she had a step-mother; sh v in that way ? Are we to assume a state of living with them ; she had a Sunday! M facts, and then apply these noble prin¬ teacher, in whom she could natural! iff ciples to them in a court of justice. Do confidence, if virtuous ; she had ass ii those facts exist ? That is the question. scholars who went, to school witl bf Let us see what the facts are. some older than herself. Did sboi This girl, something over fifteen years plain to anybody about it ? If this ‘ re of age, goes to work in this factory. grief” was pressing upon her, :fl Precocious, intelligent beyond her years, “great grief” that caused insanit * experienced more than others of her weighing down on her mind, teariji age, she remains there for six months. her- flesh by piece-meal, reducing he to Assuming the fact to be that she skeleton, is it not a little strange tb » is seduced—she has intercourse with a spoke of it to no human being ? T man of family, known by her to be counsel appreciated that. He undto so. What occurred before this inter¬ to say she had not any confidante. 11 course nobody can tell—at least nobody confidante ! Look at the circumstjo does. The remarks on the disparity of “Voluntarily,” then, I say. Thei'» age are already before you in another not an hour, there was not a mi a branch of the case. She continues this when she might not have madehersefi intimacy for a considerable period of time from that connection ; there was mW —a year or more—and then she marries. when she might not have avoided it B All that time—and it is brought up here as this is not all. Three months aft. tl one of the main features of this defense— she resumed and continued this int:»« she was attending Sunday School; she this “innocent girl,” who ought,!'1" took part in the exercises of the school; of her innocence, to be dismissed fro! tl she attended regularly; was an excellent court-room with the benedictions j I scholar, high in moral character, and jury, kept up this intimacy while si * never known to act out of the wray. Sup¬ deceiving the man to whom she waO pose it had been whispered in the ears of married. She was about to take th n those Sabbath School teachers who testi¬ to one of the most holy relations of bi 147 m. nature is capable, if it is genuine ; eclat—and what does she testify to ? The a that time while he was courting her, only coercion he exercised was that of ex¬ kliose endearments which always at- posure. A married man with five children! 1 lat peculiar relation were practiced With business in the community, a reputa¬ v n them—this “artless,” this “inno- tion there, with a daughter fifteen or six¬ t girl was deceiving this man. She teen years of age, and yet this “girl,” as rid this young man, and one month she is called, tells you that she was induced riiot to exceed two, she renewed this to renew this intimacy through fear of ex¬ impy. She made him promise on the posure, within one month after she had dy lible that he would not renew it; and taken this young man and sworn before ir>ne month after she renewed it. Was the altar of God, in the presence of His : t s promise understood to be mutual? minister, under circumstances as sacred as abas it that induced her thus to re- a human being could be placed, that she lis intimacy ? Was that the time would live in honor of him ! Well, the erne threatened her with exposure ? best commentary I can make on that is poire ! Think of it! Here is a hus- another part of her testimony where she 1 o defend her; here is her father tells you, gentlemen of the jury, that when onshe left because he so much as sug- she told her husband of it, why, Watson te< to her that this seemed to be the begged like a dog that she would not ex¬ ■, it she indignantly tells him that she pose him, for fear of the effect on his i tie care of herself. Was not that a family, as she says, when her husband orijle opportunity for her to rid herself threatened to take legal proceedings against u bis appalling thraldom ? Was not him. Is not that a commentary on the i < opportunity for her to divest her- claim that this woman was coerced by E c this great and secret grief ? Was threats of exposure ? Did not she know re, curse hanging over her or upon what you know, and what every person ? She did not think there was. She knows, that he had every thing to tiujy spurned her father, and three lose in comparison to her? He had five ii terward she left his house. Well, children growing up, and a wife, and yet vs her husband. Deceased renewed you are asked to believe this was a thral¬ itimacy ; she renewed it. Now we dom of this man over her. e • rived at the point where the cont¬ What is the next fact developed here ? ent especially reaches them; now She goes to New Britain. Was she com¬ iltery in the broadest sense in which pelled to go there ? She was an expert ai be stated. She is deceiving her work-woman; her own father was in the ibal—if he was deceived, which is not same business—her father whom she had fcai-she continues this adulterous in- left; she had worked at it from the age of ac; She says that he threatened her eight years, and was the smartest woman h iposure; and it is a singular fact that could be found in that line of busi¬ 11. only coercion of any kind which ness. What occasion was there for her to te ified to, with her lips open in her go to New Britain ? Counsel says she re¬ i i fense, here as she is under the ceived a letter, and then the agony was it eadful circumstances in which a upon her. Well, you would think that nai being can be placed, charged with letter was a great chain around her person ofLise the penalty of which is death, with some hideous monster at the other It eiry inducement that could possibly end of it dragging her along against her fel: 1 upon on the mind of the prisoner will. It don’t appear what it was. But ra£i3 tier own statement in the most can you conceive of a letter that would nae way, with counsel nine years coerce this woman to go to New Britain if tistned to stage effect, and entirely she did not desire to go ? She goes there. ipvnt to bring it m with immense While there she visits him and his family. 148 There is a position where one would think process of accomplishing this resul yj she could rid herself of this thraldom if the intimacy still goes on. WatsoD to¬ she desired to, if ever there was to be such wards visits the house. The exposu M a position. There was the wife of the been made to her husband, and sh oi- man, there were his five children, all at tinues to work at the factory or f tl home, of the man wThom this intimacy had factory. Watson continues to call ten so debauched that it drew him from his as before, when her husband was ier- family, his house and fireside; there was and when he was not there, a wt m this wife, now widow, who came upon the visitor. The husband knew all abot H stand here—this matronly woman, with all What did he suppose Watson was 1% the feminine instincts,—imagine the feel¬ for ? There is no getting away frc tit ings of this prisoner, this partner in this conclusion that her husband conmiu criminal intimacy, when she went to that this matter; there is no getting aw a; -an house; imagine her feelings if she was the conclusion that he gave his «i human. She goes through it, and tells to this relation between this man aD thi- you even of the proposition made to get woman. rid of the wife on Sunday evening, in order Well, now, what else ? This accc tin that this intercourse might be renewed. is to be tried on evidence. What ev net She does not tell you that she objected to has been adduced different from \\ t ] it; she don’t say whether she in any way have stated ? Where is the proof i kin objected to it, nor whether the proposition coercion ? Where is the influenc that was carried out. Do you suppose it oc¬ kept her at the factory ? Where tl curred to her that the influence she was thraldom that kept her to work fo: fat- exerting over this man enticed him from son ? Where is the influence wine pre¬ his family ? She was “ fond of children;” vented her telling anybody of it ■ tepi she “caressed children.” She probably her husband ? Where is it ? Livin nth caressed his children. No emotion de- two men, receiving the embraces «two veloped itself there. At length she ex¬ men ! She had experience enough SL posed this fact to her husband, she tells knows the world. This innocent wi ai I you, and Watson begged she would not Now, come down to the day of the mil expose him. Well, she returned to Brook¬ cide. No human being saw an;um lyn with her husband, and it was two or ■wrong down to that day. But shtdl| three months before Watson came back. you lie had threatened her, abuse her, Then the intimacy was renewed again, and accused her of being with other me haj she then tells you she was induced to do it called her opprobrious names ; one the by threats. These probably are the same witnesses says he had threatened dis¬ threats to which she has already referred— charge her the day before. They d not threats of exposure. These are the only get along harmoniously. This rt tint threats. At any rate it should have oc¬ terminated as it always does. Wli thi curred to her then—Watson’s sensibilities Creator said, Thou shalt not commhdnl on the subject of exposure. Why he be¬ tery, He affixed to it a penalty; ** sought her and her husband not to hold that people cannot live together tk; his family up to disgrace. Did it occur harmoniously and happily. Ther is i then to her to say—“ Watson, I can ex¬ gnawing conscience, and if there no pose you, if you attempt to renew this in¬ that there is some other principle t’t in timacy. Bemember the time when you terferes. What was it here ? ^t-'01 begged I would not expose you; I can began to be jealous. He thoug sh1 hold you now ?” Nothing. This offended went with other men. He might hay)«a woman, thoroughly in this thraldom, who wrong. Yon are bound to assume ill cannot get away from the influence of this was wrong. It existed ; it is incidpt b man and his coercion, she don’t see this the relation. He was a man fifty y130 149 he was a young woman with a hus- day, was there not reason enough for them 1. She was getting tired of him. It without assigning insanity ? She was e sculiarity of this relation that, not there contemplating this murder. Let us CHARGE OF THE COURT TO THE JURY. n men of the Jury : transgresses or offends, jeopardizes his or y the part of counsel much eloquent her own life. The circumstances and fea¬ •rient, great forensic ability and pro- tures which have been developed in this ■r legal knowledge have accompanied case are peculiar, and distinguish it from Lai of this case from its commence- many others of much celebrity. The per¬ nfco its close. Counsel in all things son killed was a man in the prime of man¬ ,'elone their duty most faithfully, both hood, in the full vigor of life, engaged in te part of the defense and on the active business, mingliug with the busy rtf the prosecution. And yet with the world, having a home and a family. The ia icense that accompanies trials of this accrrsed has all her life, and that not a cUnd necessarily accompanies them, very long one, from a period of about dhas come into this case and much eight years of age, contributed by her own len said on both sides that is not labor to her own support. In the year ftjiate as bearing upon it, and should 1868 or thereabouts, she entered the employ¬ t ider any circumstances enter into ment of the deceased, and so remained ■ cisideration of the jury charged with with some interruptions and intervals until itision. It is the duty of the Court, January, 1872, and during this period the re re, after the arguments of the coun¬ outward relations subsisting between them t's been finally closed, at the final •was that of “ master and servant.” Isay nit of the trial to call back the minds “outward relations,” because it is claimed li jurors to a calm, dispassionate, rea- on her behalf, that another and a more ; it; and just construction of the case intimate, a hidden, a secret, a criminal >n Inch they are to decide, and parti¬ relation also subsisted between them dur¬ al in this the case on trial, when the ing almost the entire period. Under oir is charged with the crime of wil- these circumstances, and on the 22d of n rder. Jurors in such cases are, to last January, iu this county, the life of ae stent, the custodians of the fate Watson, the deceased, was taken, and the thi accused person. It is a question accused stands at the bar of this Court h tat person of life or death, and the charged with being his murderess. 'sir is with the twelve jurors who Just turned her eighteenth year, at a pe¬ sum to try the issue and render riod in life when in her sex we always hope vemct according to the evidence. to find innocence and simpl.city, those 1 re're, because of this high responsi¬ traits which always grace girlhood and ble listing somewhat on the Court, and budding womanhood, on the very thresh¬ ayirpon the jurors in criminal cases, old of her life she is placed on trial as a. s t duty of the Court to say to the jury criminal, under a most grave and serious ‘Q; case is about to be committed to charge ; and it is in these respects I say ulnds, to discharge their minds from that this case presents characteristics con derations foreign to the case, and to which are not ordinarily found even in er i ictly and closely into its particular cases of great celebrity. I do not propose rite; in this case, gentlemen, to go over the facts lowhat is this case ? The accused is or to compare the evidence, or to recapitu¬ ced ipon trial, charged with the crime late or comment upon it, save so far as murder—the highest crime known may be necessary to apply to it some fea¬ he |;w. The fiat of the Deity is “ thou tures of law governing the case to which it d ; kiU,” and it is likewise the law in your attention will be directed by myself. crv zed communities; and whoever The duty of reviewing the testimony has 156 beeD so ably and fully discharged by coun¬ act, until explained away by the j sel that it is not the duty of the Court to who committed the act. If this intei allude any further to the evidence than formed immediately before the conur may seem necessary to make the charge of the act, or even at the very time itself the better understood. It is your stinking of the blow, or the pulling i great prerogative and your duty, if you so trigger, it is of as much force as if choose, in the jury room, to take up every existed for a much longer period. part of this testimony piecemeal, and to The prosecution, when they resti dissect and analyze it, and compare it, case, claimed they had made out t and to such consideration at your hands essential elements of the offense the Court intends to leave it. With re¬ accused. spect to the law it is the duty of the Court And the Court says now, as it sail hti to say to you that all persons are held in¬ the prosecution rested, in responsi nocent until proven guilty. It is conceded motion on the part of the defens t that all guilty should escape rather than that there was at that time sufficient ev one innocent person should sutler. Such is to send the question of the prisoner the humanity of the law. In this case the or innocence to the jury. When th prosecution has a certain duty to perform. cution rested the defense was enttrei ? It must establish the killing of Watson by and here is introduced the chief el violence as alleged in the indictment. It the engrossing topic, the subject of must show that the accused committed the est interest, around which the op act which occasioned his death, and it forces have gathered and struggle must adduce from the facts and circum¬ contested the question of guilt o u» stances gathered from the case that she in¬ cence. The prisoner is entitled to; tended to kill him ; the intent to kill must as many defenses as may seem adviifl be established to make out the offense in herself or her counsel; and onhei;lfl the highest degree—that is, the offense of more than one defense is, as I und M wilful murder. it, presented to the Court. First And it must appear, either by ordinary has a right to claim that the offens a presumption or by positive proof, that the full extent has not been alequatei; prisoner charged with this crime was a re¬ lished by sufficient proof, and tostj sponsible being at the time of its commis¬ she chooses, on that ground. If, in sion. All these are elements to be made honest judgment, guided by coiii out before the party charged with the and governed by reason, a sufficie crime can be called upon to enter a has not been made out by the prosd defense. then you need not resort to any tei As to the intent, it is an emotion of the on the part of the defense for her I jorary or partial insanity. Insanity tions. " I say you must be satisfied in all in- from causes -which have been fully things that the evidence makes out a case id in the testimony, which are relied of wilful, intentional, premeditated mur¬ b the defense, and which have been der—being murder in the first degree— utively commented on by the counsel against this accused to convict her of that i sanity having direct and immediate crime. Manslaughter in the third degree r< ce to and connection with the act is defined by statute to be the uninten¬ jKs involved in the offense charged. tional killing of a human being where it is $ :ot claimed that there is general done with a dangerous weapon. Where a f in the case ; nor is it necessary to the quality of the crime is in doubt, I call bill that. It is claimed that with your attention, as is usual in such cases, rese to that particular act, which is to the provision of the statute, and say to rgjl is a crime, this accused is irre¬ you that it may be your province, in case ts: le by reason of a temporary de- the sanity of the prisoner is established O'/ient of her reason. The statute beyond a doubt, to hold that when she did b n correctly quoted that no person kill Watson, she did it without intent to beield l’esponsible for an offense com- encompass his death, and that her offense ■c n an insane condition ; and very in such an event is defined by the statute ly i that the law, because a person de- as manslaughter in the third degree. It cdif reasonjis already,God'knows, suf- is a matter entirely and strictly within nt punished, without beingsubjected control of the jury, subject to the facts e isitations of human punishment. and the law in all things. Of course, if •e now, gentlemen, on the sixth tliis shot was necessarily discharged this trial. I count fifteen wit¬ by her, according to her judgment 's s sworn on the part of the people, at the time, in defense of her own tWiity-seven on the part of the defense: person, the law says it is a case of w ile case is about to be committed justifiable homicide. If insanity at the ’ii: lands. You have sworn to deliver time of the offense be made out to your lie irdict between the prisoner and satisfaction, she must go free, and is enti¬ piple, and we all feel that with tled to an unqualified verdict of acquittal. > ei! help you will keep your oath. It If you have a reasonable doubt of her guilt ie ftty of the Court here to give a or sanity, she is entitled to the benefit of 1 i caution. The case has excited that doubt, and therefore to an acquittal. f pblic attention, and comment, both Good character is always an essential udyide, is visited upon it, and proba- element in ease of persons charged with p( all necessarily connected with it. crime, and sometimes their entire pre¬ oil part, you ought to see to it that vious history and cai’eer are adduced to :• mpathy on one side or passion or establish character, from which the jurors lii on the other, shall not influence may infer, where a doubt has been raised re lict. Public clamor for or against in their minds that a crime of this nature ’cosed must not, will not, shall not and extent was impossible to be contem¬ n( your deliberations in the jury plated by the person charged with it. a> or shall influence the Court, I Now, with respect to the term “ reasonable fs a|tny stage of the case. If in your doubt. ” It is the duty of the Court to say lQe there should be a verdict of to you, in that respect, that a reasonable itti it is your duty to say so; if of doubt is not a whim, a conjecture, or a y, i is your duty equally to say so, and supposition, but a reasonable and substan¬ be: discharge your obligations, leav- tial doubt, such as might be entertained the msequences upon those who have by intelligent men ; and it rests either on ked hem and where they are placed by the absence of some necessary link in the M>f the land. chain of evidence, or on some substantial My lull duty requires me to say a word majority of cases indicates insanity < « or two to you on the doctrine of insanity. ty. But by that, gentlemen, yon ] I hold a case here of considerable note, course understand adequate i i known as the trial of Samuel M. Andrews, whether real or whether it exists charged with the murder of Cornelius imagination. He says—“the insane 1 Holmes in the State of Massachusetts, in motive, or act from a false motive < a December, 1868. The defense in that case one which does not exist.” He tit | was temporary insanity, the killing seemed on to indicate how the act of an * to have been established beyond a doubt. person could be distinguished from a The two men had been friends for many of a sane person. He specifies the years and up to the very moment of the of¬ ing as indicative of insanity even it fense. The offense being established there impulsive insanity. In addition to ut appeared to be a lack of motive for one motive or false motive he specifies tl t| friend killing another. But it was dis¬ and place. He says: “ The iusane >t covered that the dead man had some time seek secrecy in the commission o: rii before made a wall in favor of the as those who are in posession of tkei aa person who subsequently took his life. ties. ” He says that ‘ ‘ subsequent < idt There, then, was a motive for his sudden of the prisoner where there is no < ice taking off which explained an otherwise ment and no attempts at conceahn t« straDge affair. The case went to trial and no flight, are indicative of insanity 1 was fully presented on the question of says: “The tenor of the previomiff temporary insanity. It was then shown the person charged with the offens »bi that the person accused descended from a that offense is contrary to the who tq race, several of whom had been insane; of that life in an indication of in litj and yet up to the latter moment when this and as he doubts the doctrine o nan crime was charged upon him, he himself transiloria and yet he gives these i iod had given no symptoms of aberration of cations that may exist in insanity.* mind. He was a man nearly fifty years of of a prisoner charged with crime. age; had lived a blameless life, and insani¬ Now, on the other hand, Dr. Jaisw ty io his case had never been supposed. tended in testifying as an experl "tl The two chief witnesses on the question of scientific investigation by learne me insanity were Dr. Choate, introduced by particularly in the Old World, have veki the prosecution, and Dr. Jarvis, introduced ed a phase not before believed ehf by the defense. There were a number of known as mania transitoria or tepfl^ others; but they were the chief witnesses. insanity.” He says: “ Of course They held opposing views, Dr. Choate had periods of incubation. It does not mmi grave doubt, indeed he did not believe in in a moment and then cease at t! <* the theory of temporary insanity; Dr. Jar¬ mission of the act;” and the insaty* vis, on the contrary, maintained that it be determined by some indicia iihe| was a well known feature developed by mediately previous conduct of tl F* scientific investigation in the state of the who is its subject or object. Th is ( human mind. Dr. Choate is asked to chief defense in the case and in make a general statement on the subject. to it I shall not detain you long. 1 He says he has never known a case of in¬ however, to give you instructio sanity originating and terminating in a may lead to an intelligent cone.'ion single act of violence and does not believe your minds, because some of tl such a case exists. He does, however, go men have had their doubts, and t h1 on to state that as to the material circum¬ to be expected that those who ® stances attending a case of homicide, mo¬ made the subject a study can h tive is the important consideration, and than those who have. I refer tosoeoff the fact whether there was a motive pres¬ indicia laid down by Dr. Jarvis ivlflfl ent or not; that motive alone in a large temporary insanity. He quotepwl 159 si many of them have been named reasonably well established. It is a de¬ :cnsel for the defense. Of mania fense that is entitled to the same considera¬ ■ina, he says: tion at your hands as any other defense. in form of mental disorder which sud- The defense of irresponsibility arising r pears iu persons previously sound or from insanity is neither to be viewed with a iosed to be insane in mind. It has a (ration and suddenly disappears. He suspicion, nor, on the other hand, treated ; is not a new doctrine, but has been with great favor. It is simply to be placed it q France and G rmany for many on a footing with other defenses. If it be I the managers of the insane and by rsm thece topics. It is recognized by reasonably made out when set up as an af¬ >res on the subject in Great Britain; is firmative defense, no doubts or hesitations t by the courts in Europe in the man- which others may entertain or give expres¬ ?tand disposition of persons committing vlh would otherwise have been consid¬ sion to should deter the jurors from being ers, and who otherwise would have governed by such conclusions. A learned limed to death on the scaffold. judge of this State—(I refer to Judge Ed¬ w'hat does he state as indicia, from monds) has laid down the following in one a .e juror, or court, or observer can of his writings, as the condition of a sane dto a conscientious conclusion as person. . He says : e ate of mind of the person charged It is ODe whose senses bear truthful evi¬ tl crime at the time of its commis- dence, whose understanding is capable of re¬ ceiving that evidence ; whose reason can draw- ? le says: proper conclusions from the truthful evidence incjan outbreak in a person accustomed thus received ; whose will can guide the ml, quiet life, a sudden outbreak of thoughts thus obtained ; wiiose moral sense can cration, calmness after the act, ab- tell the right and the wrong growing out oi c adequate motive, no subsequent re- that thought; and, an indispensable condition, 3, b consciousness or. recollection of one whoso acts can, at his own will and pleas¬ >ff<93e, some extraordinarily disturbing ure, he in conformity and harmony with the ac¬ ■ me functional disturbance, being tion of ail these qualities. All these unite in oress iuternal in its features, and he- making up sanity, says the learued Judge. rj redisposition. The absence of any one of these is insanity. w.jentlemen, these are two authori- And he arrived at these conclusions in lu will see that in many things considering a case known as the Kleim case. a£3e as to the indications which are The defense was insanity ; yet the man ■te to be found, and which, when was conscious and knew that what he did d, ould be relied on in determining was wrong. He had driven a woman and me ion of sanity or insanity by a per- children into a hut and fastened them in, chiged with crime. I do not feel and set fire to the hut, and whilst the fire d necessary to go farther in that was raging and they were struggling to ■ h : the case, although I shall state escape, he thrust the woman back. There i me other matters briefly. was no pretence but that the man knew hoi here a compilation of cases in all the time what he was doing ; and yet h e has been suddenly taken—of it was discovered or established in that lamjby the wife, of wife by the hus- case that during all that time, with all that - < parent by child—noted cases consciousness, he was not a responsible 'g ie past twenty years; some of being. Now, gentlemen, I do not illus¬ 1 ii France, some of them in Ger- trate this doctrine to you for the puipose y. a l in other parts of the Old World, of affecting your minds. You are to apply e n motive could be ascribed for the the law to this case in your own judgment. and 'here the person, because of the The Court will not seek to swerve your dty f the offense, would undoubtedly judgment either for or against the prisoner sa red death unless the doctors of or prosecution, except only where it seems nini had been listened to by the court to be the conscientious duty of the Court. jur .•out half-past ten, p. m., when the apprehend a design to commit a felony or do ■sling judge said: some great personal injury, and there shall be imminent danger of such design being accom¬ T: jurors have sent to the Court a plished, the killing is justifiable homicide. list with respect to instructions upon Now come to excusable homicide as atute of the State as to the offenses defined by statute: lirder in the first degree, manslaughter Such homicide is excusable when committed i third degree, and justifiable homi- by accident or misfortune in the heat of passion, i. Those provisions of the law have upon any sudden and sufficient provocation or ntated during the course of the trial upon any sudden combat, without any undue advantage being taken and without any dan¬ v ccurately; but of course it cannot gerous weapon being used, and when not done sected the jurors can retain in their in a cruel or unusual manner. ucl all that is said; therefore their re¬ I read further the statute: st vill be acceded to. I read to you Whenever it shall appear to the jury on the st;ute in its very words: trial of any person indicted for murder or man¬ slaughter that the alleged homicide was com¬ ie killing of a human being, without mitted under circumstances or in any case iPy of law, by poison, shooting, stab- whereby such homicide was justifiable or ex¬ g, ' in any other means or any other cusable, the jury shall render a general verdict ■•me is either murder in the first degree, of not guilty. !e in the second degree, manslaughter or itiae homicide, according to the facts and The Court also again read the statute "Minces of each case. defining the third degree of manslaughter. Hsilhng, unless it be manslaughter or I have now stated the provisions of the law ;itia|3 or excusable homicide, as hereinafter vide shall be murder in the first degree in on which you sought further instructions. "hying cases; firstly— If you have any further suggestions to ■ owhe statute defines the first degree make the Court will hear them with ntujsg: pleasure. leiperpetrated from premeditated design By request of a Juror the Court read iecthe death of the person killed, or of again the statute governing excusable u m being; second, Vhen perpetrated homicide. n t imminently dangerous to others, n;i depraved mind regardless of human A Juror requested to take the statutes dtlagh without any premeditated design to the jury room, with which the Court rct'ie death of any particular individual; comp.ied, marking the passages it had 1 sen perpetrated in committing the oirson in the first degree. read, aud to which counsel for the defense took exception. ■ 1: ble or excusable homicide is The jury then retired for the second 7 the statute in the following ! Is I time. k’ing of one human being by the act, The jury were again brought into Court "nit, or omission of another, in case at about twelve o’clock, and stated that k filing shall not be murder, is either there was no possibility of their agree¬ I Jl or excusable homicide or man- ’ -r Such homicide is justifiable when ment, when they were again sent out by ittaby a public officer, &c. the Court with a request that they should emsable and justifiable homicide endeavor to agree. Then they were, at he defined : about seven o’clock on the following n mmitted by any person in either of morning, the third time brought into .;g cases: When resisting any attempt Court, when, upon the foreman stating Me such person or commit any felony there was no possibility of an agreement, nmir her, or in or upon any dwelliug- iu Inch such person shall be : when they were discharged from the further II c'n bwful delense of such person, or consideration of the case. oner husband, wife, parent, child, The jury were understood to have stood • msress, or servant. from> the time they retired to the close, y °t will recollect these words were ten for acquittal and two for manslaughter jirf: y clnsel to you: in the third degree, the said two being a tjre shall be reasonable ground to Jurors Allen and Tapscott. r