MRS. BLOOD IS DISCHARGED
Adjudged Insane and Can Not be Tried for the Murder of Her Husband. When the Doctors Testify to This the County Attorney Wisely Drops the Case Against Her. The trial of Mrs. Alice A. Blood for the murder of her husband, George A. Blood, last November, a full account of which appeared in the county press at that time, came up for hearing before Judge Hutchinson at Orange City last Wednesday afternoon. Two days were occupied in opening the case and selecting the jury, when, on motion of the state's attorney, the frail woman was discharged on the ground of insanity. The Sioux County Herald issued an extra containing a full account of the proceedings, from which we excerpt the leading features: About 3 o'clock in the afternoon of Wednesday, just after the Herald had announced the verdict in the Mosher case, strong attendants were seen bearing a muffled figure up the stairs in the rear of the court room. They brought their burden into the presence of the court - as the law demands - it was the wasted form of Alice A. Blood, charged with the murder of her husband at Hull Nov. 16, 1898. A mattress had been placed directly in front of the judge's desk and upon it the prisoner was placed. There she remains during the progress of the issues that have already been joined between the state and the accused. Once in a while Mrs. Jones, who has come from Vermont to attend the trial of her daughter, tenderly lifts the slight figure to a sitting position and places her in a big rocker that stands by the side of the couch, but the most of the time Mrs. Blood is either asleep or in a state of indifferent unconsciousness. The writer has watched her face for hours in the court room and not seen a variation of expression or the movement of a muscle. Mrs. Blood, by her attorneys, G. T. Hatley and C. A. Irwin, pleaded not guilty. The court assigned John E. Orr to assist District Attorney P. D. Van Oosterhout in the prosecution. The work of securing a jury was at once entered upon. District Attorney Van Oosterhout went very minutely into the business and social relations of each man in the box. The prospective juror was asked his age and residence, if he were married and attended church, had he ever been interested in any case in which insanity was the issue, did he know Doctors DeBey, Plumb, Coad, McBride or Owens? These doctors have been summond by the defense as expert witnesses. The juror was also asked if the fact that the accused was a woman would bias him in rendering a just verdict, if he had any conscientious scruples against rendering a verdict of capital punishment, or life imprisonment, where the evidence would justify it; if he knew the witnesses for the defense; if he traded at Hull; if he read the newspaper account of the killing; if he had talked about the killing; and, finally, if he had a fixed opinion such as would require evidence to remove. If so, a challenge for cause resulted and was usually granted. The district attorney has a bland and almost cordial way of attacking the prejudices of a would-be juror. There isn't the least suspicion of the browbeating tactics that used to be considered essential to the successful lawyer, but the truth is usually arrived at without diminishing good nature in any quarter. Mr. Hatley had few questions to ask. After a witness had been passed by the state for cause, counsel for the defense asked: "Have you any conscientious scruples as to the defense of self defense, to the defense of insanity, or the law of reasonable doubt? If accepted as a juror could you, and would you, give that little woman as fair a trial as you would ask for your own mother, or for yourself, if you were in her place?" Provided the answers to these interrogatories were satisfactory the juror was usually accepted. Friday a little tilt took place between the counsel for the defense and the judge. The state asked the court for an order from the court giving Dr. Mead, Dr. Cram and Dr. Huizenga permission to examine Mrs. Blood in presence of the family physician, Dr. Owens. Mr. Irwin strenuously objected on account of Mrs. Blood's condition, contending that the state had had three months in which to examine her. Mr. Irwin interposed very strongly and wished to be heard. Judge Hutchinson began: "Let the record show that permission is given these physicians to see Mrs. Blood," when Mr. Irwin said: "We don't consent to it." The Court - "But the court consents." Mr. Irwin - "But the court can't consent, the constitution forbids it." The Court - "The court has consented, and will take care of the constitution. Adjourn court, Mr. Sheriff." Friday afternoon the jury was complete and the twelve men good and true, stood up and took the oath to justly try Alice A. Blood for the murder of her husband. The jury, as it stood, was as follows: P. Schnee, of Floyd; P. Austin, of Sioux; W. J. Meyer, of Floyd; Wm. Wiersma, of Welcome; John Carter, of Reading; John Hoefler, of Floyd; John Brink, of Nassau; M. Johnson, of Center; L. Noethe, of Nassau; J. H. Schilmoeller, of East Orange; Jonas Klein, of Rock; C. Tillema, of Floyd. The defense moved that witnesses be excluded from the court room until after they had testified, expecting to keep out the experts. The state resisted the motion and the court overruled it. Exception of defense. The court room at this time was packed to suffocation. People were jammed and wedged in the aisles and the attorneys found it impossible to move about or do business, while the air was insufferable. Judge Hutchinson finally called Chairman Dealy of the board of supervisors to him and explained that business of any kind was impossible and that he was going to order the sheriff to provide the town hall. Chairman Dealy agreed with the necessity, and a recess was taken to 5 o'clock. IN THE TOWN HALL At 5:15 p.m., in the town hall, Judge Hutchinson recommenced court and called for the opening statement of the state. County Attorney P. D. Van Oosterhout arose and said: "Gentlemen of the jury: At the beginning of this case I wish to read to you the indictment upon which it is brought. Upon this indictment we are here to try Alice A. Blood for the murder of her husband George Blood. The case is an important one. There have been, I am glad to say, few murder trials in Sioux county and I feel myself inadequate for this duty, but I am here to perform it. After all it is as much your case as it is mine and, the people of Sioux county, whose servants you and I are, expect us to do our whole duty. The offense charged is murder in the first degree, punishable by capital punishment or life imprisonment. In the first case it is incumbent on the state to show premeditation, which malice aforethought. Murder in the second degree is punishable by imprisonment, as in manslaughter. I think that we will be able to show you beyond any doubt that Mrs. Blood, on November 16th, 1898, did kill her husband deliberately, without excuse, and with malace aforethought. But, gentlemen of the jury, I suppose the defense in this case will be self defense and insanity. I am satisfied, however, you will not find that Mrs. Blood was compelled to shoot her husband to save her own life. Insanity is a large and difficult question and is, after all, a question of being sick. You must give it careful attention, and it will be for you to determine whether they have shown a case of insanity. The law of insanity is that responsibility is annuled when a person does not know the consequence of his own act, or does not know what he or she was doing. The burden is on the defendant to prove to you that she was insane. We may pity the criminal but we must detest the crime. I believe you will do this and look this matter fairly in the face. I believe that you will find that on November 16th, last, this woman took a revolver in her hand and, without a moment's warning, launched into eternity her husband, the father of her children."Mr. Van Oosterhout spoke about ten minutes, rapidly and with great earnestness. C. A. Irwin is well known to the bar and the people of Sioux county. He made the opening statement for the defense. Mr. Irwin said: "Gentlemen of the jury: I beg you to note that the defendant, on trial for her life, only wishes justice at your hands. The state has an interest in this case because it must punish crime. I protest in the name of that justice which the county attorney invokes against his arguing this cause, in his opening statement. The defense in this case does not ask for sympathy. It will show that for 22 years Alice A. Blood was a martyr to the damnable cruelty of her husband, whose favorite epithet was an oath and whose ordinary caress was a kick. She was patient and enduring, but had the misfortune to belong to a family of mental and nervous diseases. We expect, gentlemen of the jury, to show that on both sides of the family, as attested by nearly twenty examples that Mrs. Blood inherited a mental disease, appearing prominently about two years ago, and which on November 16th, last, had overthrown her reason. We shall show that defendant was the victim of excessive cruelty so persistent that the mind gave way under the strain. The husband often called her a G-d b-h, threw swill and sour milk at her, who gave him naught in return but kindness. She might not use a good buggy and when Blood found her doing so he horse-whipped her. The human mind may be compared to a beam of steel. Its strength depends upon its character and the pressure put upon it. A sound mind in a sound body will stand more pressure than a diseased mind or a diseased body. Between the ages of 40 and 50 women undergo peculiar physiological changes which render them particularly susceptible to mental diseases, and the books show that the great majority of cases of this kind occur within that period. Mrs. Blood was 43 years old and just at the age most susceptible to disease. About the age of 41, the health of this woman began to give way. She complained of headache, along with bodily disease, the cruelty of her husband was intensified, who had no more sympathy with her than he would have for a dying dog. Years ago, in that house where occurred the awful tragedy of November 16, another great grief came to the family. One day Oscar and one of the little babes were playing and the baby's dress caught fire and she burned to death. The inhuman husband often told this defendant that she had set a trap to kill her child. Again and again he said 'G-d-n it, somebody has got to die in this family and I don't propose to die alone.' This treatment, inhuman and cruel, went on until the wife became sick and a physician was called. He looked at the wasted form, prescribed a drug, and then called the husband aside and said, 'George, this is a case where kind words will do more good than anything else.' On November 15th she walked to and fro, with hands upon her head, crying to her daughter, 'I don't know what I'll do.' And on the fatal morning, after Blood got up, she went to the side of the bed, knelt down and asked God what her duty was. She thought she got an answer and the inspiration was - death. No one knows what happened - somehow the children were in the kitchen - and the deed was done. She was a religious woman, with a life above reproach, and enduring his kicks and scoffs and reproaches all the time until her mind gave way. Insanity is a symptom of a diseased mind. We shall show that Mrs. Blood's disease was paretic dementia - a form of insanity, not necessarily violent, but one where the patient feels herself irresistibly compelled to do some act."Mr. Irwin spoke at some length, elaborating the theory of the defense in great detail and with great earnestness and eloquence. He began at 5:30 on Friday, closing at 10:35 a.m. Saturday. The Court - "Proceed." Mr. Van Oosterhout - "Your honor, please, the record is now made up and I wish to call the court's attention to the statute which says that whenever there is a question of insanity, the court may order an investigation. This is the only question before the court, if we lay aside the brutal allegations of counsel touching the life of Blood, who is dead and in his grave, whose lips are sealed and who cannot answer the aspersions upon his character. I don't want to try a woman who is insane or on the verge of the grave. I think further proceedings ought to be stopped and a special jury called to try her sanity. If this woman was afflicted Nov. 16, last, with paretic dementia, she is worse today than ever. If this woman is insane is it not necessary that she be sent to an asylum? She has shown dangerous proclivities, has shot her husband, and should not be allowed to remain at large. It is a momentous question we are about to decide. If she is insane we ought to have a jury to determine if she can go on with this case." The county attorney read at length from the statute and reports the law bearing upon the question. "I move, then," said Mr. Van Oosterhout, "that further proceedings be suspended and a jury impaneled to pass upon the question of her sanity." The defense, by Mr. Irwin, objected and was about to submit argument when the court interposed that the motion was overruled. Recess of 10 minutes taken. Attorney John E. Orr, for the state, after brief examination of Doctors Mead, De Bey and Cram, then moved the court to dismiss in a neat address, recounting the difficulties under which the prosecution had labored. The court granted the motion. The decision to dismiss was reached after a report by the experts for the state, Dr. Mead, of the Yankton asylum, and Dr. Cram, of Sheldon, that the prisoner was afflicted with locomotor ataxia, which had extended to the brain and rendered her mentally irresponsible. Under such a situation, to proceed farther was useless, or worse than useless. The county attorney, whose conduct of the case thus far had been no less than masterly and had elicited the warmest praise from the eminent counsel opposed, did not wish to prolong the matter at the expense to the county of several hundred dollars per day, and, after the examination of one or two experts, dismissed. Thus ends a notable and unfortunate chapter in the annals of the district court of Sioux county. It is to be hoped that the irresponsible condition of Mrs. Blood will prompt her friends to take such measures as may prevent a repetition of last November's tragedy, which shocked even the enemies of the deceased man. |
||||
If you would like more information,
please contact Randy Lane