Rensselaer Republican, Volume 14, Number 11, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 1 December 1881 — FROM WASHINGTON. [ARTICLE]

FROM WASHINGTON.

Guitea’s Trial Dragging its Weary Length Along— Proceedings in Detail. HINTH DAY. The attendance at the Criminal Court ■ thisutooruing was sensibly diminished on Recount of the rain storn. While Guiteau was taking hia.breakfastat the City Hall, he expressed dissatisfaction at the-release of Jones upon ball. When the court opened, Mr. Scoville made a formal request for the papers taken ft om Guitea at the time of bis lirrest, stating that they were material evidence for the defense, and, since the prosecution had not needed them, he could see no reason why they should be withheld. The District Attorney offered to furnish copies of the papers, but Scoville insisted upon his rights in the matter, and asked for the original. JPendlDg the discussion, Guiteau insisted Upon being heard, and said: “I can throw light upon this. At the time of my arrest, I had forty or fifty editorial slips showing the political situation in May and June last. These slips show the action and one of the forces that impelled me on to the President. They are very important as showing the gist of the whole matter. There were forty or fifty slips denouncing President Garfield. It was by living on such ideas as these that I was finally impelled to fire on the Presi- ' dent with my inspiration.*/ C6lonei CorkhiU interposed again haying: “If li will enable you to get through to day I will send for them at once.”

During the momentary lull in the proceedings, Guiteau‘desired to make a personal explanation, saying he had used the expression yesterday that “Julius” was too suggestive of the negro race, and for that reason he had dropped it from his name. His prejudiee' was begotten twenty years ago; he meant no disrespect to any person or kny race, particularly not to the colored race, for they were more highly thought of than the white race nowadays. Scoville continued by reading Guiteau’s letters. He read a letter written by Guiteau to his father, in which he spoke ofo having gotten into some trouble, aud in which he asked for money. (Guiteau explained the letter, saying: “Otae of my -clients, a miserable little whelp, had me arrested on account of a little difference of between us. As soon a." the District Attorney’s attention was called to the matter F.was released, I never ought to have been arrested, but it got into the papers and did me a good deal of harm. 1 had heeu in the theology business for sotue time, aud, as. usual, \yas out of motley. That’s ail there was in that.” * « As the reading of the letter was concluded, Guiteau again interrupted, saying: “I never ‘got much from my father. He got down ou me because I left the Oneida Community. We ccuid never after that agree on that miserable, stinking Community business. I’m mad every time I think of it. It kept me out of fellowship with toy father up to the lipie of his death.” Mr. Scoville, resuming, alluded to Guiteau’s career as a politician, and drew (he conclusion that his iutellect was deficient. The view aroused the prisoner at once, and he hegau a series of interruptions, protesting against Scovillela conclusions as false. When reference was made to his running around from one committee room to another, seek-, ing to W employed as a campaign speaker,«gpd bis failure to obtain recognition was mentioned, Guiteau shouted angrily: “ ’Twasn’t because 1 had no ability, but I was not ! kno.wn. I had idess, but not reputation. They wanted big .guns, like General Grant anj| Senator Conkiing, men who would draw.'* Then, in direct contradictiQn of his counsel’s declaration to the jury yesterday, that Guiteau was man who never made a joke in bis life, he looked up with an amused smile, aud added, f, I presume I’d draw now.” This provoked general laughter, which was promply suppressed by the Judge, who struggled to disguise a smile upon his own features. Scoville continued upon the same line and criticised Guiteau’s speech entitled “Garfield vs. Hancock.” It was, he said, a mere-jumble of ideas collated from newspapers and from speeches of others. No one but a crazy mau would have imagined, a 3 Guiteau did, that his speech possessed any merit.

Guiteau became more and more restless, and in the most excited man* ner yet shown by him, shouted to 8coville: M I obiect to your theory en that score, and when you try to make out I’m a fool I’m' down on you. I want you to tell ihe truth, but you needn’t try to make me out a fool. I ay Deity inspired my act, and he will ake care of it, I want the truth,' anjj that’s ajil there is about it. Colonel Corkhill arose to protest against the interruptions of the prisoner, when Guiteau waved his hand to him patronizingly, and said: “’Tis not necessary to make any remarks, Colonel; just let the matter drop.” Mr. Scoville was willing to agree to any measures the, District Attorney might suggest to restrain the prisoner. Mr. Davidge desired tosuggtst a way to prevent these outbreaks. He attributed them entirely to Scoville’s course in commenting upon the evidence already submitted, aud his attjmpt to argue from it a mental infirmity on the ’part of the prisoner. 'Guiteau listened intently, and striking his clenched hand upon the w)le in front of him, exclaimed, “I a£iee with that all through, and desire to thank the prosecution and every one of them for spirit they have shown. I think Colonel Corkhill made a flue opening. There was ril any bitterness at all in his speech, agd I commend him for it” . Guiteau continued to interject his observations upon Scoville’s theory that he fGuiteau)’was deficient in intellect, and protested he would not allow his counsel to malm him out a fooL .After a few minutes Guiteau agbskfed, and promised the Court he would keepqi^iet. » -A«be request of the District Atto.r

ney witnesses for the defense were excluded from the court room with the exception of Mrs. Scoville, the proeecutfeo, at tile request of Mr. Scoville, making an exception in her case. The first witness for the defense, H. N. Burton, was then examined. The Rev. H. N. Burton was formerly a Congregational minister at Kalamazoo, Michigan, who heard Goiteau’s lecture in 1677 on “The Second Coming of Christ.” Die lecture was peculiar. He did not think Guitaeu at that time sufficiently insane to be irresponsible —probably less deranged than badly arranged. Mr. Burton was not crossexamined by the proeecutiou. Hiram H. Davis, of Erie, Pa., a former reeident of Ann Arbor, Mich., was next called. He testified that he knew Mrs. Maynard, Guiteau’s aunt. She wes always considered peculiar, and oftentimes crazy. She had a constant terror of the poor house, although she was a wealthy woman. Her daughter was called "Foolish Abide Maynard,” and was, in fact, a foot She attended church constantly, and was crazed on religious matters, and wore the same Lon net year after year. Mr. Wilcox, an old gentlemen of Stevenson county, the next witness. He testified that he knew Luther W. Guiteau, father of the defendant, very well. He was peculiar but apparently sincere. He always insisted that he would never die, aud believed in the Oneida Community. He was at one time a Presbyterian, then a Methodist. Witness had seen the prisoner, but knew nothing of him. No cross-examina-tion,

TENTH DAY. The Criminal Court was crowded in every part this morning, mostly by ladies, for the mo9t part representing the fashionable circles of Washington society. Immediately upon the opening of the court Scoville stated that Guiteau desired to make a statement. No objection being made, Guiteau read from manuscript substantially as follows: I propose to have all the facts bearing on this ease go the court and to the jury, and to do this 1 have been forced to interrupt the counsel and witnesses who were mistaken as to the supposed facts. I meant no discourtesy to them or any one. Any fa6t in my career bearing on the question who fired that shot, the Deity or myself, is of vital importance in this case, and I propose that it go to the jury. Hence tny personal, political aud theological record may be developed. I am glad that your Honor and the opposing counsel are.disposed to give a historical review of ray life, Aid I ask the press and public to do - likewise. All I want ii absolute justice, and ' I shall not permit any “crooked” work. I have no idea that my counsel wanted “crooked” work. They are often mistaken on supposed facts, and I shall have to correct them. Last Spring certain newspapers m New York aud Washington were bitterly debouncing the President for'breakiug up the Republican party by improper api»ointments. I would like those newspapers to reprint those editorials now and see how they would look and, sound. In attempting to remove the President, I only did what the papers said ought to be done. Since July 2d, they have h en Deifying the President aud denouncing me fordoing the very thing they said ought to.he done. I want those newspapers and the doctors who actually killed the President to share wit): me the odium of his death. 1 never would have shot him of my own volition, notwithstanding those newspapers, if I had not been commissioned by Deity to do the deed. But this fact does dot relieve newspapers from the supposed disgrace ol the President’s removal. If he had been properly treated lie would have been alive to-day. It has been published that I am iu fear of death. It is false. I have always been a religious man and an active worker for God. Some people think I am a murderer, but tbe Lord d es not, for He inspired the act, as in the case of Abraham, aud a Score of other cases in the Bible. Tbe assault made upon me Saturday last by a “crank” has been condemned by the press. The eyes of the civilized world are watching this case, aud it behooves this court and Metropolitan police to protect me at all hazards. I hereby warn all “cranks,” of high or low degree, to keep away from me uudtr penalty of instant death. He would have been shot dead Saturday but for the rearing of the horses in the van as the officer was shooting. The horses shook the van so that he lost his aim, and though the van pursued him, he temporarily escaped. I waste my arguments on “crank.” All they can see in this case is a policeman’s revolver. Again 1 say, if they value their lives, they must keep away from me. I desire the court and jury to dispose of this case on the facts and the law, and leave all the responsibility about it to the verdict.

Scoville then referred to his previous demands for certain printed newspaper' slips which were taken from Guiteau at the time of his arrest. A colloquy ensued between the counsel, in wbich considerable feeling was shown upon both sides. Scbville protested against the course of the District Attorney in the matter, and the latter contemptuously retorted from hi 3 seat, “Oh, stuff, stuff"; all stuff.” The controversy was finally settled, and Scoville called John A. Logan from the defense. The witness did not respond, however. Guiteau, V’ko seemed greatly excited, here broke in again, and Shouted: “There is another matter I want to speak about right now. I understood that my divorced wifeeis to be brought here as a witness against me. If that’s so, there will be trouble. She was a poor, unfortunate thing, and I never should have married her. But if she comes in hereto testify against me and do me any harm, I’ll rip up her whole record. She was seduced in Philadelphi, and had a child before I married her.”

With great difficulty, Scoville, after some minutes expostulation, succeeded in quieting Guiteau. Two other witnesses were called but failed to respond. Joseph B. Smith, of Freeport, 111., testified as to bis acquaintance with the Gniteau family. E. O. Fos3 testified as to the scene at the depot on the morning of the shooting. were several sharp passages between Scoville and counsel for prosecution during the questioning of this witness. ' , Charles H. Reed, of Chicago, detailed several incidents in Guiteau’s career as a lawyer at Chicago. Witness was prosecuting attorney for twelve years, and met Guiteau frequently, but his relations with him were never intimate. He had loaned him money, which was still due. He always regarded him as a very earnest, smoere man, but un-

[ balanced. He never saw any indication of violence, and always deemed him a harmless man until recently. Charles H. Reed, of Chicago, continued his testimony. The witness saw Guiteau here several times last Spring. Frequent references were made during the conversations to the office Guiteau was expecting to have. Witness told Guiteau that he had no show for the Paris Consulship, and he would help him get a clerkship or some minor position, where there was little responsibility attached, but Guiteau became very indignant, and said: “You watch the papers the next three or four days, and you will see the announcement of my appointment to the Paris Consqlsbip.” Witness visited Gviteau a few days since in tbe Jail and asked him why he killed President Garfield. The prisoner was lying down on his couch. He arose excitedly and began a rambling sort of speech, saying, “I didn’t do it; the Lord did it I was only the Lord’s instrument in removing the President’* At times the prisoner would show great excitement, striking his flatsagainst the wall with considerable violence; then he would relapse into a perfectly quiet state, speaking almost in a whisper. Witness received the impression that Guiteau was of unsound mind. Being pressed for a more direct answer, he replied: “I had not a doubt of it.”

Upon cross-examination witness stated that the last time he saw Guiteau was on the Tuesday evening before the assassination of the President. Guiteau took exception to the date, and insisted that he did not see the witness for a month previous to July 1. The witness was sure of the oorreetuess of his statement, as he went directly to Saratoga and heard there of the killing of the President. Guiteau shouted out: “I say it was tbe Ist of May. I don’t forgot anything. You see, that’s what’s the matter with my brain. When anything gets In there it sticks.” Witness resumed, when Guiteau broke in again, directly contradicting him. He was cautioned to keep quiet, and retorted: “We want facts, Judge, to go before the jury, and nothing else. I claim that my act was inspired by the Diety. I stake my case on that ' position, and I’ll take my chances on q<he result.” The prisoner continued to interrupt, making rambling and irrelevant remarks, until* Judge Cox quite sharply Threatened to gag him if he did not keep quiet,- | f Guiteau continued to interpose objections, however, but in a less objectionable manner, and gradually subsided altogether. < ’ *. Recess. . Dr. of Salem, Mass., some time connected with the insane asylum, lias been summoned for the defense in the Guiteau trial. JONES INDICTED. The Grand Jury has iudicted Win. Jones for an assault with intent to kill Guiteau.