Q. Do you not remember cases in your experience where madmen have told you they were mad?

A. They frequently do it in this way: Ar individual knows that he is regarded as insane, and if taken to task for any improper act, a shrewd man will excuse himself on the ground that he is an insane man, and ther fore not responsible.

A. Long-continued constipation frequently precedes insanity. Constipation is not very frequent among the actual insane.

Q. If this same person that I have described to you, had been suffering from constipation for four weeks, would that be considered additional ground for believing in his insanity?

A. I think it would. I think some weight might be given to that circumstance.

Q. If the same person that I have mentioned should, although in the possession of Q. If the same person, during his trial a sound horse, make no effort to escape, but and during his confinement, never spoke should abandon his horse, wander off into the until spoken to, at a time when all his comwoods, and come back to a house surrounded panions were peevish and clamorous; if he with soldiers, and where he might expect to never expressed a want when all the rest be arrested, would that not be additional expressed many; remained in the same spirits ground for the suspicion that he was insane? when the rest were depressed; retained the A. I should regard every act of a man who same expression of indifference when the had committed a crime, indicating that he rest were nervous and anxious, and continued was indifferent to the consequences, as a immovable, except a certain wildness in his ground for suspecting that he was insane. eyes, would it not be considered additional ground for believing in his insanity? A. I think it would.

Q. If the same person should return to this Louse I have spoken of, with a piece of his drawers for his hat, at a time when he saw the soldiers in its possession, would not that be additional proof of insanity?

A. I can hardly see what bearing that would have upon the question of insanity. Q. I understood you to say before that madmen seldom disguise themselves. The disguise in question consisted of a piece of drawers being used for a hat. I ask whether that disguise may properly be presumed to be the disguise of a sane man or an insane man? A. It would depend upon circumstances. It is a common peculiarity of insane men, that they dress themselves in a fantastic manner; for example, make head-dresses out of pieces of old garments. They do it, however, apparently from a childish fancy for something that is fantastic and attracts attention; and I do not recollect a case of an insane person dressing himself in a garment or garments of that kind for the sake of disguising himself.

Q. If this same person, after his arrest, should express a strong desire to be hanged, and express great indifference of life, would that be additional ground for suspicion of insanity?

A. I think it would.

Q. Would it be further ground for suspicion if he seemed totally indifferent to the conduct of his trial, laughed when he was identified, and betrayed a stolidity of manner. different from his associates?

A. I think it would.

Q Please state to the Court what physical sickness generally accompanies insanity, if any there is.

Q. If this same person, after committing the crime, should, on being questioned as to the cause, say he remembered nothing distinctly, but only a struggle with persons whom he had no desire whatever to kill, would not that be additional ground for suspicion of insanity?

A. I think it would.

Q. What are the qualities of mind and person needed by a keeper to secure control over a madinan?

A. Self-control.

Q. Are not madmen easily managed by persons of strong will and resolute character? A. Yes, sir; they are.

Q. Are there not instances on record of madmen who toward others were wild, while toward their keepers, or certain persons whom they held to be superiors, they were docile and obedient, in the manner of dogs toward their masters?

A. I think the servile obedience which a dog exhibits to his master is rarely exhib ited by the insane. It is true, that the insane are comparatively mild and obedient to certain persons, when they are more or less turbulent and violent toward other persons.

Q. Would it not be possible for such a keeper, exercising supreme control over a madman, to direct him to the commission of a crime, and secure that commission?

A. I should say that would be very difficult, unless it was done in the course of a few minutes after the plan was laid and the direction given. I should say, generally, it would be very difficult.

man?

Q. Is not the influence of some persons A. I believe that disease, either functional over madmen so great that their will seems or organic, of the brain always accompanies to take the place of the will of the madinsanity. No other physical disease necessarily, or perhaps usually, accompanies it. A. There is a great difference in the QIs long-continued constipation one of control that different individuals have over the physical conditions that accompany in- insane persons, but I think it an error that Banity? that control reaches the extent you have

described, or the extent, I may add, that is popularly supposed.

Q. Do you or not recognize a distinction between mania and delusion?

A. A certain distinction, inasmuch as delusion may accompany any form and every form of insanity, and mania is the name given to a particular form, which may or may not be accompanied by delusion.

Q. Are not instances of insane delusion more frequent during civil war than any other kind of insanity?

A. My impression is, that cases in which delusions are entertained are not as frequent. Insanity is of a more general character-so far as my experience goes, has been during the war, among soldiers-than it usually is. Q. Does or does not constant dwelling on the same subject lead to an insane delusion? A. It frequently does, I think.

given just a categorical one to all the questions that have been asked me, I believe; I am, personally, and as an expert, very much opposed to giving an opinion in respect to hypothetical cases, for the simple and best of reasons, as I conceive that I have none, and I could give no definite opinion upon the facts implied in the questions submitted to me. Every case of insanity is a case of itself, and has to be studied with all the light that can be thrown upon it, and it is impossible for me to give an opinion upon a hypothetical case.

DR. JAMES C. HALL.

For the Defense.-June 13.

This morning I spent three-quarters of an hour in an examination of the prisoner, Lewis Payne. I first examined him with Q. If a body of men, for instance, who regard to his physical condition. His eye owned slaves, were constantly hearing speeches appeared to be perfectly natural, except that and sermons vindicating the divine right of it appeared to have very little intellectual slavery, burned men at the stake for attempt- expression; but it was capable of showing a ing to abolish slavery, and finally took up great deal of passion and feeling. I discov arms to defend slavery, when no man was ered a remarkable want of symmetry in the really attacking it, would not that be evi- two sides of his head. The left side is much dence that some of these men were actually deluded?

A. I think it would; but it does not follow that the delusion is what I technically denominate an insane delusion, arising from disease of the brain, and for which a man is not responsible.

more developed than the right. His pulse I counted twice carefully; I found it to be a hundred and eight, which is about thirty strokes above a natural healthy pulse. In other respects his health seemed to be good, with the exception of another habit, which, I believe, the Court is informed of-namely, constipation. His general muscular development is perfectly healthy.

Q. If one of those same men who owned slaves, and believed in the divine origin of slavery, and had fought in its defense, and I questioned him first to test his memory. I believed that he had also fought in defense found that it acted very slowly. He appeared of his home and friends, should attempt, on to answer my questions willingly, but his mind his own motion, to kill the leaders of the appeared to be very inert, and it took some people, who he believed were killing his time before he would give me an answer to friends, would not that conduct be esteemed a very simple question, though he did not a fanatical delusion? seem to be at all reluctant in giving me the Assistant Judge Advocate BURNETT. Un-information I was seeking for. His intelless Mr. Doster can give us some idea when lect appears to be of a very low order; and this species of examination will be brought yet I could not discover that there was any to a close, we must here interpose objection. sign of insanity. His mind is naturally dull It certainly has nothing whatever to do with and feeble, and, I presume, has not been cultithe case. He is imagining facts that do not vated by education. exist, and he is examining upon a basis that I asked him certain questions which I he has not laid, and it is certainly irrelevant thought would draw out his moral nature and foreign to the issue. Will Mr. Doster state and feelings, and the conclusion to which I if he is nearly through with his examination? came was, that he would perform acts, and Mr. DOSTER. The course of examination think himself justified in so doing, which a that I propose is not a great deal longer. I man of better moral nature and of a better mentioned the other day that it was impos- mind would condemn. sible for me to secure the attendance of wit- Q. Did you or not state the case to him of nesses from Florida. Regularly, I ought not a person committing the crime with which he to have called Dr. Nichols before these wit- is charged, and ask his opinion in reference nesses had been here and had been exam- to the moral right to commit it? ined. I have been unwilling to detain Dr. A. I did. I mentioned it as a supposed Nichols here, and have endeavored to go over case, and he said he thought a person in perthe whole ground with him, so that I need forming such an act as I described would be not call him twice, as I would have to do if I justified. "I wish you would give me some were to call these witnesses from Florida first. reason," I said, "why you think he would WITNESS. If I may be allowed, I would be justified; why you think an act which like to give an explanatory answer. I have I think wrong, and which everybody else

thinks wrong, could be justified." His an- tor, that, from the whole examination you swer amounted to this, that he thought in have made, you regard the prisoner, Payne, as war a person was entitled to take life. That sufficiently sane to be a responsible being for was the reason he assigned why he thought his acts? such an act could be justified.

I can

A. I have not altogether made up my mind I should say that, from the whole exam- on that. I do not think that the single examination, there was reasonable ground for ation which I have made would suffice to suspicion of insanity. It seems to me that decide the question. I think there is enough no man could, if he were perfectly sane, ex- to allow us a suspicion that he may not be a hibit the utter insensibility that he does and perfectly sane and responsible man. did in my presence. I do not think there was give no positive opinion on that point. His any attempt at deception. He answered the intellect is very feeble and inert. questions, so far as his mind would permit Q. The extent, then, to which you go, is him, plainly and clearly, without any attempt that there is ground for suspicions? You do at deceiving me or misleading me. I can not not express any such opinion? give a positive opinion that he is laboring A. I do not express a positive opinion that under either moral or mental insanity. To he is either morally or mentally insane, but decide on a case of this kind, one ought to see that there is sufficient ground, both from his the person at various times and under various physical condition and his mental developcircumstances. I never saw this man before.ment, for a suspicion of insanity.

Cross-examined by the JUDGE ADVOCATE. Q. Do you rest that suspicion largely on his

I can not discover any positive signs of mental insanity, but of a very feeble, inert mind; a deficiency of mind rather than a derangement of it; a very low order of intellect. His memory appears to be very slow in acting.

Q Did he or not seem to have a distinct recollection of his crime, and also of the Lives and course of reasoning

course of reasoning, and the conclusion he drew from the case which you supposed?

A. Yes, sir; I should think that was the result either of insanity or very badly cultivated mind, and very bad morals.

Q. Might it not be wholly the result of very bad morals?

A. It might entirely. I attach some immo-portance to his physical condition. It is generally known that persons who are insane, habitually, with few exceptions, have an unusual frequency of pulse. His pulse is thirty odd strokes above the normal standard.

Mr. DOSTER. I object to that question. WITNESS. I did not refer to it as the crime committed by himself. I asked him what he would think of a man who had committed a crime such as he was charged with, and he said he thought he would be right in doing it. I carefully avoided applying the act or crime to himself, personally; I merely spoke of it as a supposititious case. I did not think it would be right for me to receive any confession from him, and I rather avoided extorting it. I by no means regard atrocious crime as per se evidence of insanity.

Q. He was aware of the purpose for which you had your interview with him, was he not? A. I introduced myself by telling him that I was a physician, and that the Court had directed me to examine into his condition, and I referred to some matters connected with his health.

Q. Did he seem to be under any excitement?

A. Not the least. He was perfectly calm, Do you regard insensibility under crime and at times smiled. He did not seem to be or indifference to the results of crime as indi- playing a part at all. He appeared to answer cating insanity? the questions honestly and truthfully, so far A. Where a man commits crime habitually as I could judge; but his memory is very and without any adequate motive or provo-slow, and it is very difficult to get from him cation, I should be disposed then to suspect an answer to a very simple question. I asked insanity. If there is an absence of motive him in regard to his birth and his residence. and an absence of provocation, and if it is He could not remember the maiden name of done habitually, these are the conditions. A his mother. He said her first name was Carosingle act I should be very reluctant to form line, but he could not remember her maiden an opinion upon.

QIf a man, engaged in arms as a rebel against the Government of his country, is found assassinating its Chief Magistrate and the members of its Cabinet, would you or not regard these circumstances as indicating sufficiently the presence of motive to save him from the imputation of insanity?

A. Yes, he might have a motive. I can readily conceive that a man might think he had a sufficient motive and a sufficient justification for it.

name.

But I have known sane persons who forgot their own names. The celebrated John Law, of this city, would go to the post-office and be unable to call for a letter in his own name.

JOHN B. HUBBARD.
For the Defense.-June 3.

By MR. DOSTER.

I am at times in charge of the prisoner, Lewis Payne, and have at times had conver

Q Do I or not understand you to say, Doc-sation with him.

Q. Please state the substance of that con- cognizant of the conduct of the prisoner in versation. his cell, and to the best of my knowledge he Assistant Judge Advocate BINGHAM. That has been constipated from the 29th of April I object to. until last evening; that was his first passage. The JUDGE ADVOCATE. Is this conversa- I never had any conversation with him on tion offered as a confession, or as evidence the subject of his death.

of insanity?

Mr. DOSTER. As evidence of insanity. I believe it is a settled principle of law that all declarations are admissible under the plea of insanity.

made on his own motion.

MRS. LUCY ANN GRANT.

For the Defense.—June 12.

By MR. DOSTER.

Mr. DOSTER. I am about to call two wit

Assistant Judge Advocate BINGHAM. There is no such principle of the law, that all declarations are admissible on the part of the ac-nesses, and to prevent any objections being cused for any purpose. I object to the intro-made, I will state that the reason for calling duction of the declarations of the prisoner, them is to show that the prisoner, Payne, three months before the alleged attempted assassination of Mr. Seward, saved the lives of two Union soldiers. It is the very essence of insanity that one violates the "even tenor" of his previous life; and, therefore, if I can show that three months before the alleged attempted assassination this person exercised a degree of honor and benevolence, which he afterward violated and turned into ferocity and malignity, it will give a high degree of probability to the plea, and his subsequent conduct can only be explained by his being under the control of fury and madness.

The JUDGE ADVOCATE. If the Court please, as a confession, of course, this declaration is not at all competent, but if it is relied upon as indicating an insane condition of mind, I think it would be better for the Court to consider it. We shall be careful, however, to exclude from its consideration these statements so far as the question of the guilt or innocence of the particular crime is concerned, and to admit them only so far as they may aid in solving the question of insanity raised by the counsel.

WITNESS. I was taking him out of the WITNESS. I live on the Waterloo Pike, court-room, about the third or fourth day of Warrenton, Virginia. I recollect having seen the trial, and he said he wished they would one of the prisoners before; that one with make haste and hang him; that he was tired the gray shirt, [pointing to the accused, of life, and would rather be hung than come Lewis Payne.] I saw him some time about back here in the court-room. And about a Christmas in the road in front of our house; week ago he spoke to me about his constipation; he said he had been constipated ever since he had been here. I have no personal knowledge of the truth of this.

Cross-examined by the JUDGE ADVOCATE.

he was in charge of three Union prisoners. It was at the time of General Torbett's raid; after he had passed through Warrenton, on his return to Washington. Some men-rebel soldiers, I suppose, from their uniform-were going to kill these prisoners, and I remember He told

I communicated this statement to Colo-seeing this man try to prevent it. nel Dodd or Colonel McCall, and I believe to them that he could not defend all, but if General Hartranft, and to no one else.

JOHN E. ROBERTS.
For the Defense.—June 3.
By MR. DOSTER.

I am on duty around the prison, but have no special charge of the prisoner, Lewis Payne, more than the others. I have had a little conversation with him. After the

coat and hat were taken off him, on the day that Major Seward was examined, I had to put his irons back on him, and he told me then that they were tracking him pretty close,

and that he wanted to die.

COLONEL W. H. H. McCALL.
For the Defense.-June 3.
By MR. DOSTER.

I have charge of the prisoner, Payne, in connection with Colonel Frederick and Colonel Dodd; we each have eight hours' duty

they killed or captured the one he had in charge, they would do it at the peril of their lives. They left the road then, and I do not know what became of them afterward, but I know one of the prisoners was killed, for a Confederate soldier wanted to bring him into my house, and I was scared nearly to death.

Cross-examined by the JUDGE ADVOCATE.

For the Defense.-June 12.
By MR. DOSTER.

I am the husband of Mrs. Grant, who

out of the twenty-four. My duty makes me has just left the stand. I was about three

hundred yards from my home, when the commenced; and I saw that that man, affray began in front of my house, on the [Payne,] whose name I understood was first of last January. I rushed home as Powell, saved the lives of two Union solquickly as I could, when the pistol firingdiers.

TESTIMONY IN REBUTTAL.

SURGEON-GENERAL J. K. BARNES.

For the Prosecution.-June 14.

In association with Dr. Hall and Surgeon Norris, I have made an examination this morning of the prisoner, Payne, and find no evidence of insanity-none whatever.

The evidences of sanity which struck me as present in his case are his narrative of himself, of the places he has been at, of his occupation, the coherence of his story, and, the most im portant evidence, his reiteration of his statements of yesterday and of his first examination this morning. That is considered a very severe test. It is called the Shakspearian test, and is one of the severest.

Cross-examined by MR. DOSTER.

I should consider the Shakspearian test a test for both moral and mental sanity.

I have not of late years had a large experience in cases of insanity; but some years ago I was in charge of the insane wards of a large hospital.

I was present when the prisoner answered Dr. Hall's question as to his moral responsibility for this crime, and heard him say that, under certain circumstances, he considered such a crime justifiable.

DR. JAMES C. HALL.

Cross-examined by MR. DOSTER.

Q. What are you prepared to state as to his moral insanity?

whether he believed in a God. He said he A. We asked him the question to-day did, and that he believed he was a just God. he had been a member of the Baptist Church. He also acknowledged to me that at one time I asked him the question, which I believe I repeated to the Court yesterday, whether he thought that private assassination, practiced After some little hesitation, he said that he upon an enemy in public war, was justifiable. believed it was.

Q. Is it or not esteemed an evidence of a fanatical delusion that a person believes to be right what everybody else believes to be wrong?

A. In some instances it would; but I can minds and morals are such that they would readily conceive that there are persons whose believe a crime similar to that which he has committed to be justifiable and proper, even a duty.

DR. BASIL NORRIS.

For the Prosecution.-June 14.

1 am a surgeon in the regular army. This morning, in association with the Surgeon-General of the army and Dr. Hall, I made an examination of the prisoner, Payne, and I arrived at the conclusion that he is not insane.

Recalled for the Prosecution.-June 14. This morning, in connection with Dr. Norris and Dr. Porter, we had an examination of His look is natural, and his speech perthe prisoner, Lewis Payne, and since the fectly natural, and his manner natural; that recess of the Commission, Dr. Barnes, the of a man sane. There is nothing in his Surgeon-General, joined us, and we examined appearance, or speech, or manner that indihim again. cates to me that he is a man of unsound mind.

I asked him very nearly the same questions In my opinion, there is nothing to indicate the I proposed to him yesterday, for the purpose presence either of moral or what may be called of seeing whether he would give me answers mental insanity. We asked him a number consistent with those which I then received, of questions. His reasoning faculties apand I found that they were very accurately peared to be good, and his judgment good, the same, and he answered to-day with rather to which I attach great importance. more promptness than yesterday.

I think I am now prepared to say that there is no evidence of mental insanity. Payne's mind is weak and uncultivated, but I can not discover any sufficient evidence of mental insanity.

We could not learn of any thing in his past life, so far as we have been able to gather his history, that would indicate insanity. We learned but very little of his past history; but so far as his life has been disclosed since he has been here, his con