136 Slide – American State Trials 1918 Volume X Leo Frank Document

104 X. AMERICAN STATE TRIALS.

speak for themselves. There is a power in their presence
and mode of testifying which drew from the cireuit attorney
the exclamation: ‘‘I believe every word they say!’? But
we can’t educate away disease and misfortune. His epileptic
disorder came upon him at seventeen, and his irresistible im-
pulses evinced themselves earlier. But, neither singly, nor
both together, have they been able to prevent the growth of
high aspirations, kindness of nature, gentleness of disposition,
integrity of soul and honesty of purpose.

““Why did not,’’ exclaims the circuit attorney, ‘‘why did
not his epileptic fits come upon him before the September
term of this court?’’? I can’t answer that. God knows; the
most expert of the earth in disease cannot teli—but one thing
ig certain, the fact is conclusive against feigned insanity. If
the insanity were feigned he would have had them on the
ears; at all convenient localities; they would have been seen
of men everywhere; they would have been public convulsions.
They were far otherwise. A watchful mother, imprisoned
with her child, sometimes an aged father; sometimes a few
female friends, who are not ashamed of sympathy for the
unfortunate, were the witnesses. The jailer even was not
notified. But I do not make battle against feigned insanity.
The argument would be an insult to the understanding. The
only trouble is to get the thing, supposed to be feigned, rec-
ognized as insanity.

The witnesses who saw Worrell on the Boonslick road are
brought to say whether they saw any indication of insanity in
the glimpses they had of him, and they answer no. This evi-
dence is worthless in any case of insanity which does not per-
eeptibly hurt the intellectual faculties. They did not hear
him say ‘‘any foolish thing;’’ they thought him ‘‘a perfect
gentleman,’’ and ‘‘well educated.’”? They had no oecasion to
hunt for insanity, and if they had—and insanity existed
without doubt, but in that form—not one of them would have
found it out.

It is said by the prosecution that insanity must be affirm-
atively and satisfactorily established by the defense, beyond
all reasonable doubt. I deny the proposition; it is not law,