196 FEDERAL REPORTER. �friend or his partv, can with impunity become a self-elected judge, juiy, and exeeutioiier in his own case, for the redress of his own injuries or the imagi- nary wrongs of his friends, his party, or his country. But, happily, that is not the law, and whenever such ideas of insanity are applied to a given case as the law, (as too often they have been,) crime escapes punislimeut, not through the legal insanity of the accused, but through the emotional insanity of courts and juries." �To the same general effect may be cited Rex v. Oxford, 9 C. & P, 525 ; Bur- row's Case, 1 Lewin, 238; Rex v. Goode, 7 Ad. & El. 536; 67 Hans. Par. Deb. 728; Bowler's Case, Hadfleld's Case, Id. 480; 27 How. St. Tr. 1282; Rex v. BaHon, 3 Cox, C. C. 275; Rex v. Oaford^ 5 0. & P. 168; Rex v. Uv.m'mon, 1 C. & K. 129; Rex v. Btolles, 3 C. & K. 185; Rex v. Layton, i Cox, C. C. 149; Rex V. Vaughan, 1 Cox, C. C. 80; i7. S. v. Shults, 6 McL. 121; Com. v. Rogers, 7 Metc. 500; 7 Bost. Law Rep. 449; State v. Richards, 39 Conn. 591; Free- man v. People, 4 Denio, 9; Flanagan v. People, 52 N. Y. 467; People v. Spragm, 2 Parker, C. R. 43; State v. Spencer, 1 Zabriskie, 196; Com. v. Mos- 1er, 4 Barr, 264; Com. v. Farkin, 3 Penn. L. J. 480; Brotvn v, Com. 78 Pa. St. 122; State v. Gardiner, Wright, (Ohio,)392; Vance v. Com. 2 Virg. C. 132; MoAllister v. State, 17 Ala. 434; Dooe v. State, 3 Heisk. 348; Stuart v. People, 1 Baxter, 178. �Management of the Trial. On Judge Cox's management of the trial almost unqualified commendation can be bestowed. In a very intpliigent letter froiu Wasliington, in the Independent oi Pebruary 9, occurs the fol- lowing: �" Was there ever before in a tribunal of enlightened people such concen- tratedand accumulated disgrace and real cause for shame? A vituperative criminal, whose impudence and indecency could be equalled only by his fluency and keeuness of perception and repartee; a hissing, jeering, and applauding audience; perpetually wrangling counsel; all three antagonistic forces often talking and fighting at once; with a judge who, to all appearance, was utterly inadequate to manage or control either, — such was the trial of au unpreoe- (lented criminal, for an unpardonable crime, which for 10 weeks disgraced this country and made a shameful spectacle for the whole world. Who that day after day listened to loud and vehgeful shouts of the prisoner, to the bick- ering and quarrelling of the lawyers, could believe that this trial could ever mount to a elimax that could, at last, simply express dignity and law? Yet out of all this chaos, this disgrace, the supreme moment came. It came when the much-berated, long-suffering, too mild, yet noble judge uttered his final charge, and when, 30 minutes later, the intelligent jury returned, to give out from its united conscience the verdict: 'Guilty as iudicted. ihus say vve all.' �"Then, not till then, was justice vindicated. �" The charge of Judge Cox was a surprise to all, save the few who knew the real measure of the man. It was a surprise to the prisoner, who, after the long weeks of leniency, forgiveness, and indulgence, which he had abused, under this judge's rulings, fully expected a charge that would move the jury towards his favor. It was a surprise to the spectators, who, witnessing his indulgence, had almost invariably concluded that ' Judge Cox favored Gui- teau ;' but it was not a surprise to any one who knew Judge Cox. �"And, as so much misunderstanding, misjudgment, and harsh judgment have inevitably spread through the land coneerning this g sntleman, 1 will say a few words for Mm, in simple justice. Into every just judgment of an indi- ��� �
