Show TRIAL I sum substance of saturdays SpeE speeches clies by W V to the herald washington jan davidge read and then elaborated on the prayers of the government which ask the judge to instruct the tile aury jury that if it the prisoner knew at the time of tile shouting shouting the difference between right an and wrong he be was at that time sane and responsible davidge with the pray or onn in his hand land said in low and d is tones ana and measured language and that they consisted first of the above definition of sanity second of the declaration that if the tile prisoner possessed the ability to BO distinguish between right and wrong no irresistible passion or im ims pulse no uncontrollable a ble desire no moral morat depray depravity ity would excuse b liia s act third a declaration that the standard a rd of insanity mu must abe b that of law fourth that no delusion or ity to distinguish between right and wrong being present would excuse the tile prisoner davidge thought the prayer of the defense bearing hearing on points contained in the prayers of the prosecution ou lit not to be entertained for a mo ment he lie said that the law drew the line of responsibility for crime somewhere it had bad not been fully defined until the judges of england of 1843 at the request of the house of lords laid down the legal lepi rule defining responsibility ibbil ity this rule was tho good afon old d rig right t ai and wrong test tho the rule of common sense there were infinite infinito degreeff degrees of intelli intelligence as ti think ink of the encee illustrious victim of the e p prisoner on oil one hand and this assassin assassin on the other the law drew no line between low degrees of intelligence on one hand and the highest on the tile other in respect of responsibility for crime this prisoner had a keen portrait as an imbecile until lie went upon the stand and tore himself to pieces at times the man might be peculiar and might be partial partially ll insane but if lie arose to the point of intelligence which enabled him win to know tho the difference between right and wrong and that what ho he was doin doing was wrong then he lie wa waa s responsible for it davidko then stated the Mag natum case five questions on the subject of insanity had boon been submitted to the judges of england three of the these so questions had a direct bearin on oil this case the first question was aa as to the responsibility of a person for an act when at the time of committing the act acthen lie k knew new lie helas was aati acting ng con contrary arary to the law but did the act complained of with a view under tho the influence of the tile insane delusion of redressing supposed injury or of producing reducing some supposed public bench benefit t the answer of all the judges exceptive except ine ina chief justice stole mole was they were of opinion that notwithstanding the party accused cu ed did lid the act with a view under th the e vain delusion of redressing some supposed injury or of producing some supposed sup sed public benefit lie the th eless M punishable according to the nature of the crime committed if lie knew know at the time of com committing mittin such crime that lie was acting contrary to law reed addressed the court in betly reply to judge davidge and confined his is argument to the consideration of two questions first definitions laid down dorn in the revised lle statutes of murder and manslaughter under which if the motion be not proven he lie contended that the crime would be manslaughter second to this case in connection with the pica plea of insanity colonel reed closed with a glow glowing peroration oration describing the liberty a and gr lar arrea reaching ching impartiality of the law here scoville engage engaged dina in a sarcastic colloquy wi ith the prosecution on the rights of the defense in this case |