GUITEAU'S TRIAL. 



387 



" Truth " as his own literary production and ideas ; 

 that, failing in this, he returned to the practice of law 

 and collected money for clients, which he retained ; 

 that he associated himself with the Young Men's 

 Christian Association, had his letters addressed hi 

 their care, and used his relations with them as a pass- 

 port to secure confidence, which he grossly abused ; 

 that he fraudulently obtained money by burnishing 

 an oroide watch and passing it on for gold, and 

 boasted of it ; that he declared that he would secure 

 notoriety by good or evil, even if he had to kill some 

 prominent man and imitate Wilkes Booth ; that as 

 far back as 1872 he took part in the Greeley cam- 

 paign, declaring that he expected by so doing to se- 

 cure the Chilian mission ; that in order to procure a 

 divorce from his wife, who had labored for him and 

 sent money to him for his support, although he was 

 at the time a lawyer and officer of the court, he yet 

 deliberately, in accordance with his own statement, 

 committed adultery with a prostitute, and appeared as 

 a witness against himself in the divorce proceedings 

 by which a decree of divorce was granted against 

 him; that during his married life, while a member 

 of the church and professing religion and engaging in 

 the public exercises of the church with which ne was 

 connected, he got his wife to borrow money from the 

 pastor, and afterward was accused of immoral con- 

 duct and vicious and dishonest practices, and in ad- 

 dition to having a loathsome disease he admitted the 

 truth of the accusation ; that he went again into poli- 

 tics, because neither the law nor theology would pay ; 

 that he used each and all the schemes he undertook, 

 which have been presented as evidences of his in- 

 sanity, for the purpose of dishonestly obtaining 

 money ; that during the political campaign of 1880 

 ha wrote a speech which was delivered but once ; that 

 on this speech and his so-called services in the cam- 

 paign he claimed and asked for an important foreign 

 appointment, and for that purpose came to Washing- 

 ton ; that immediately before coming to Washington 

 he was getting a precarious subsistence in New York 

 by soliciting life insurance ; that in order to get to 

 Washington he borrowed ten dollars, and arrived in 

 Washington without funds; that he stopped at the 

 Ebbett House one day, and left without paying his 

 bill ; that he went from one boarding-house to an 

 other in Washington, leaving the board-bills unpaid 

 in each, and falsely representing that he was expect- 

 ing money and would soon pay ; that he borrowed 

 fifteen dollars from a friend, stating that he wanted 

 money to pay a board-bill, but really used it to pur- 

 chase a pistol with which to shoot the President of 

 the United States; that he boarded at a respectable 

 house in the city of Washington for more than five 

 weeks, leaving it only two days before the shooting, 

 and only then because the landlady demanded pay- 

 ment for board, which he promised to pay in a few 

 days, but which was never paid ; that during this 

 time he was on friendly relations with his fellow- 

 boarders, conversing with them daily at the table 

 upon religious and general topics, attending church, 

 reporting and discussing sermons with the pastor, as 

 well as the revision of the New Testament, and the 

 situation as represented by the senatorial contest at 

 Albany, and exhibiting nothing unusual in his man- 

 ners, conduct, or conversation ; that while stopping at 

 this house he followed the President on at least two 

 occasions for the purpose of shooting him, once watch- 

 hog him from Latayette Park, but seeing him ride out 

 with several friends desisted from shooting him ; that 

 once he followed him to the depot, but seeing a sick 

 wife leaning on his arm refrained from shooting on 

 that occasion, and that during all this time he never 

 mentioned the subject of inspiration, or that he had 

 any extraordinary relation with the Deity, or had any 

 divine commission to perform ; that he went to the 

 Kiggs House the day before the shooting, and left that 

 board-bill unpaid ; that, failing to secure the offices 

 he sought, and disappointed in the expectations which 

 he had frequently said he confidently entertained, he 



followed the President from place to place, seeking 

 the opportunity to shoot him; aud finally, learning 

 that the President was to go to Long Branch on a 

 certain day, he went to the railway-station to waylay 

 him, and there, stealthily approaching him from be- 

 hind, treacherously murdered him by shooting him 

 in the back ; that, arrested and charged with this 

 crime, he justified it as a patriotic act and claimed 

 that it was a political necessity, and that the Presi- 

 dent was guilty of the blackest ingratitude by going 

 back on the men who made him ; that by removing 

 the President he took but the life of one man, which 

 cemented the Republican party and prevented an- 

 other war which might have cost thousands of lives, 

 as our last war did, and that the prominent men con- 

 nected with the Republican party whom he supposed 

 would be benefited by his crime would protect him 

 from the consequences of his act ; that when he learned 

 that these men had expressed their abhorrence of his 

 crime he appeared to be "struck dumb" and in 

 " great mental agony," and after collecting himself 

 he repeatedly used the words, " Most astounding ! " 

 and exclaimed : u What does it mean \ I would have 

 staked my life that they would defend me," and again 

 repeated the words " Most astounding," and tliat 

 shortly thereafter he, for the first time, used the 

 words or expressed the idea of " inspiration " hi re- 

 ferring to his crime ; and that only since that time 

 has he claimed "inspiration" as a defense for the 

 murder. Assuming all these propositions to be true, 

 I will ask you to state whether in your opinion the 

 person was sane or insane at the time of shooting 

 President Garfield ? 



The reply of the witness was that, in his 

 opinion, the prisoner was sane. When asked 

 on cross-examination what had changed his 

 opinion as to the sanity or insanity of the 

 prisoner, Dr. Worcester replied: "Mainly his 

 own testimony, and my interview with him in 

 the jail, supported by the evidence which I 

 heard." On the following day, Dr. Theodore 

 Damon, of Auburn, New York, was examined, 

 and, in response to the hypothetical question 

 and other inquiries, expressed the opinion that 

 the prisoner was sane. On the 23d Mr. Charles 

 H. Reed, of Chicago, joined the counsel for the 

 defense, in spite of some criticism on the part 

 of the prosecution, Judge Cox stating that he 

 saw no impropriety in his doing so, notwith- 

 standing the fact that he had been a witness in 

 the case. The same day two more expert 

 witnesses Dr. S. H. Taicott, of Middletown, 

 New York, and Dr. Henry P. Stearns, of Hart- 

 ford, Connecticut were examined, and con- 

 firmed the view that the prisoner was sane. 

 The same line of evidence was continued on 

 the 24th, by Dr. Jamin Strong, of Cleveland, 

 Ohio; Dr. Abrara M. Shaw, of Middletown, 

 Connecticut ; and Dr. Orpheus Evarts, of Col- 

 lege Hill, Ohio. An adjournment was taken 

 to December 27th, and on that day Dr. A. E. 

 Macdonald, of New York, was examined. His 

 opinion was that the prisoner was sane, and 

 had been playing a part in support of the theory 

 of insanity. 



The prisoner had for some days indulged in 

 constant interruptions, not only contradicting 

 witnesses and criticising counsel, but denounc- 

 ing both with opprobrious epithets. On the 

 28th of December, during the further examina- 

 tion of experts, Drs. Randolph Barksdale, of 



