Criminal Statutes

1. Compiled Statutes of the State of Nebraska, 1881. With Amendments 1882 to 1907, Comprising All Laws of a General Nature in Force July 5, 1907 (Lincoln, NE: State Journal Co., 1907), 1969.

Figure 1: Compiled Statutes of the State of Nebraska, 1881. With Amendments 1882 to 1907, Comprising All Laws of a General Nature in Force July 5, 1907 (Lincoln, NE: State Journal Co., 1907), 1969.

2. Frank F. Brightly, Esq., Brightly’s Purdon’s Digest: A Digest of the Statute Law of the State of Pennsylvania from the Year 1700 to 1894, Vol. 1, 12th ed. (Philadelphia: Kay and Brother, 1894), 539.

Figure 2: Frank F. Brightly, Esq., Brightly’s Purdon’s Digest: A Digest of the Statute Law of the State of Pennsylvania from the Year 1700 to 1894, Vol. 1, 12th ed. (Philadelphia: Kay and Brother, 1894), 539.

3. David Irwin, Geo. N. Lester, and W. B. Hill, The Code of the State of Georgia, 4th ed. (Atlanta: Jas. P. Harrison & Co., 1882), 1145.

Figure 3: David Irwin, Geo. N. Lester, and W. B. Hill, The Code of the State of Georgia, 4th ed. (Atlanta: Jas. P. Harrison & Co., 1882), 1145.

4. Revised Statutes of the State of Nebraska 1913 (Lincoln, NE: State Journal Co., 1913), 2356.

Figure 4: Revised Statutes of the State of Nebraska 1913 (Lincoln, NE: State Journal Co., 1913), 2356.

Legal Records

1. “Cicero H. Thompson v. State of Nebraska” in Reports of the Cases in the Supreme Court of Nebraska, September Term, 1900–January Term, 1901, Vol. 61 (Lincoln, NE: State Journal Company, Law Publishers, 1901), 210–15.

CICERO H. THOMPSON V. STATE OF NEBRASKA.

FILED JANUARY 23, 1901. NO. 11,493

1. 1. Instruction: DEFENSE OF DOMICILE. An instruction charging that: “An assault on the house can be lawfully resisted to the extent of killing the assailant or assailants only in case the assault is made with the intent of taking the life of the inmate or of doing him great bodily harm, and that such resistance was necessary to prevent such crime or in case the inmate acting honestly had reason to believe that it was necessary to prevent the commission of such crime,” is erroneous.

2. 2. Defense of Domicile. A man may defend his domicile, even to the extent of taking life, if it be actually or apparently necessary to do so in order to prevent the commission of a felony therein. Whether this is the precise limit of the domiciliary right is not determined.

3. 3. Theory: EVIDENCE. The submission to the jury of a theory which has no basis in the evidence, is error.

4. 4. Extortion: UNNATURAL SIN: THREAT OF EXPOSURE: ROBBERY. Evidence that money or goods were obtained from a man by taxing him with the practice of an abominable wickedness and threatening to expose him, may be sufficient to establish the crime of robbery.

5. 5. Self-Defense: BREAKING AND ENTRY: FELONIOUUS INTENT. The occupant of a dwelling may lawfully kill, as a necessary measure of defense, a person who attempts to break and enter with the intention of extorting money by charging him with the commission of an infamous offense against nature and threatening to expose him to public reprobation and contempt.

6. 6. Instruction: ERROR NOT CURED BY ANOTHER STATING LAW CORRECTLY. An instruction which misstates the law is not cured by giving another which states it correctly. The jury should not be required to choose between conflicting instructions.

7. 7. Plea in Abatement: PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION. A plea in abatement, grounded on the facts that defendant had two preliminary examinations and that on the first he was held for a lower grade of crime than upon the one which is the basis of the information filed against him, is demurrable.

ERROR from the district court for Cherry County. Tried below before HARRINGTON, J. Reversed.

Frank M. Wolcott and Moses P. Kinkaid, for plaintiff in error:

The witness Milliman swore that the witness and the deceased were entering the defendant’s domicile with intent to extort money from the defendant by putting him in fear of the loss of his reputation.

“If any person shall forcibly, and by violence, or by putting in fear, take from the person of another any money or personal property, of any value whatever, with the intent to rob or steal, every person so offending shall be deemed guilty of robbery.” Criminal Code, sec. 13.

The foregoing statute is declaratory of the common law. Coke, 2 Institutes, 308; Bishop, Statutory Crimes, pp. 5–8, 82, 86, 88, 131–144.

Robbery, by common law, is larceny from the person accompanied by violence or putting in fear. Anderson, Black, Bouvier, Dictionaries; Wharton, Lexicon; Russel, Crimes. But both these circumstances need not occur. Rawle, Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, p. 935, art. Robbery; Williams v. State, 51 Nebr., 711.

Blackmail is robbery under the statute. It is defined: “A certain rate of money, corn, cattle, or other thing, anciently paid, in the north of England and south of Scotland, to certain men, who were allied to robbers, to be by the protected from pillage.” Webster, Dictionary. In the United States: “Extortion of money from a person by threats of accusation or exposure.” Bartlett, Synonyms.

The deceased, Arthur London, was breaking a mansion house in the night season to extort money by threat of accusation and exposure. The defendant slew him to defend himself form a felony. The act was justifiable homicide.

Constantine J. Smyth, Attorney General, and Willis D. Oldham, Deputy, contra.

SULLIVAN, J.

In the district court for Cherry County, Cicero H. Thompson was found guilty of murder in the second degree and sentenced to imprisonment in the penitentiary for fifteen years. The conviction apparently was the result of erroneous rulings, and must, therefore, be set aside. We cannot consider in detail all the specifications of error discussed by counsel. They are altogether too numerous to be given separate treatment. For the most part they depend upon a few principles which, if recognized and properly applied, will prevent on another trial a repetition of the errors of which the defendant complains.

On the night of the tragedy Thompson was alone in his cottage in the city of Valentine. About 2 o’clock A.M., Arthur London, the deceased, with a companion named Milliman, rapped for admittance. Receiving no response from within they broke open the door and were about to enter, when they encountered the defendant, who commenced shooting at them. Five shots were fired. Milliman fell in the storm-shed and London lay mortally wounded just outside the threshold. Two theories of the case were submitted to the jury. The theory of the defense was that all the shots were fired by Thompson in the belief that his home was being broken and entered by robbers. The state’s hypothesis was that the defendant recognized London when he first sought to gain admittance and knew that his purpose was to obtain money by threatening to publish a report to the effect that the defendant was addicted to the practice of an abominable vice. It was contended by the county attorney that the fatal shot was fired after London had retreated and while he lay helpless on the ground. There is no sufficient basis in the evidence for the theory that Thompson did the killing to protect himself from blackmail. There is nothing in the record from which it may be inferred that he knew, or hard reason to believe, that the deceased intended on the night in question, or at any other time, to extort money from him by any species of intimidation. If it be true that London and Thompson had been accustomed to wallow together in the ooze and slime of a detestable sensualism, it does not by any means follow, as a natural or probable conclusion, that either would use his knowledge of the other’s baseness as a means of obtaining money. The jury might, perhaps, have been justified in finding that the defendant recognized London before he shot him, but there was no sufficient evidence from which to conclude that the motive for the shooting was to prevent blackmail.

Some of the instructions touching the right of the accused to defend his habitation are erroneous. In the seventeenth paragraph of the charge it is said: “An assault on the house can be lawfully resisted to the extent of killing the assailant or assailants only in case the assault is made with the intent either of taking the life of the inmate or of doing him great bodily harm, and that such resistance was necessary to prevent such crime or in case the inmate acting honestly had reason to believe from the acts, facts and circumstances and in fact did believe that it was necessary to prevent the commission of such crime.” The same thought is expressed in the eighteenth paragraph. The doctrine of these instructions is not, we believe, sustained by any adjudged case, although there are dicta in the opinions of courts and expression in the textbooks on criminal law that seem to give countenance to it. The true rule undoubtedly is that a man may defend his domicile, even to the extent of taking life, if it be actually or apparently necessary to do so in order to prevent the commission of any felony therein. Semayne’s Case, 3 Coke, 91; Foster’s Crown Cases, 273; State v. Patterson, 45 Vt., 308, 12 Am. Rep., 200; Wright v. Commonwealth, 85 Ky., 123; State v. Taylor, 143 Mo., 150. Whether this is the precise limit of the domiciliary right it is not here necessary to determine; but if it is the limit, then popular sentiment is not in accord with the law.

Another phase of the case seems to have been entirely overlooked at the trial. The right of the accused to resist an aggression having for its object the obtaining of money by threats of injury to his reputation was ignored. There is no good reason why the law should differentiate between a threat to inflict physical injury and a threat to cause mental suffering. One may diminish the value of existence quiet as much as the other. Of this fact the criminal law has but a dim perception; it is seen, but not seen clearly. If the mental anguish is acute and in its very nature calculated to lower the tide of life, the law takes cognizance of it. It appears from the authorities, ancient and modern, that the extortion of money by threatening to smirch a fair reputation is so atrocious a wrong that it is generally regarded as robbery, especially if the vice or crime imputed is an unnatural one. This being so it would seem that if London and Milliman came to the defendant’s house with the intention, as claimed by the state, of obtaining money by taxing him with the commission of an infamous offense against nature and threatening to expose him to public reprobation and contempt, he might lawfully kill them as a necessary measure of defense, even though divining their purpose, or having actual notice of it. Under these circumstances the breaking and entry would be felonious because done with intent to rob. Evidence that money or goods were obtained from a man by putting him in fear of an injury to his property or reputation may, it is said, be sufficient to establish the crime of robbery. 1 Wharton, Criminal Law, sec. 852; Desty, American Criminal Law, sec. 142d; 3 Greenleaf, Evidence, sec. 233, 234; Long v. State, 12 Ga., 293; Britt v. State, 7 Humph. [Tenn.], 45. “As to the fear of injury to the reputation,” says Greenleaf (sec. 234), “it has been repeatedly held that to obtain money by threatening to accuse the party of an unnatural crime, whether the consequences apprehended by the victim were a criminal prosecution, the loss of his place, or the loss of his character and position in society, is robbery.” The instructions precluded the jury from considering this aspect of the case, and thereby deprived the defendant of a valuable right.

The seventh paragraph of the court’s charge is a defective definition of murder in the second degree. The attorney general does not defend the instruction, but contends that it furnishes no ground for reversal, because the elements of the crime were correctly stated in another instruction. This question is not a new one. It has been frequently decided by this court, and the rule is a just one and founded in good sense, that the jury should not be required to choose between conflicting instructions. First Nat. Bank v. Lowrey, 36 Nebr., 290; Carson v. Stevens, 40 Nebr., 112; Richardson v. Halstead, 44 Nebr., 606; Barr v. State, 45 Nebr., 458; Metz v. State, 46 Nebr., 547.

The demurrer to the plea in abatement was properly sustained. The fact that the defendant had two preliminary examinations, and that he was held only for manslaughter on the first, did not entitle him to immunity from prosecution for murder. The decision of the county judge furnished the basis for prosecuting the prisoner for one crime; the decision of the justice of the peace gave the right to put him on trial for another crime. There has never been any doubt about the power of the grand jury to return two indictments against a party grounded on the same criminal act; and no reason is suggested why an examining magistrate may not exercise, under the new procedure, the jurisdiction which the grand jury exercised under the old. Bartley v. State, 53 Nebr., 310; Roby v. State, 61 Nebr., 218.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

2. Maryland Vice Commission, Report, Vol. 1, 423–28. Enoch Pratt Library, Baltimore, Maryland.

Perversion in Schools

One Maryland school, comprising 56 boys, was investigated; 49 of these were found to be engaged in some form of sexual perversion, the most common of which was pederasty. Some time later it was discovered that the principal of the school was practicing perversion with the boys. He had had relations with about twelve of them; and with three other boys whom he had adopted in his family he had established very extensive relations. Sometimes he practiced perversion on the boys at other times they practice it on him. Several forms were practiced; here again pederasty was the most common.

The investigator talked with a number of boys at this school, most of whom were quite open and frank about the practice; it was so common that they had ceased to regard it as a novelty or anything to be particularly ashamed of. One student said that a small boy had received about 13 other boys in the course of an afternoon and evening. One of those engaged in the practice had had sex relations with a colored girl in the neighborhood and from her had contracted syphilis. He later infected two other boys in the school.

An investigator was placed in a school comprising a large number of boys, varying in ages from 12 to 20. He remained there for about one week and during that time he found 20 boys who practiced perversion. This practice is quite openly talked about, and the boys have developed a special set of names to distinguish various phases of the practice. The boys who act as passive agents are usually the younger set and are paid in various things, such as pieces of tobacco, cigarettes, pie-crust and so on. These fellows are designated by the name of “punk,” and are spoken of as this or that boy’s “punk.” The practices are done in the rooms of the boys, in the toilets, and in any secluded place. Being seen does not constitute any special disgrace. Three teachers in this institution were found to be engaged in the practice with the boys. The investigator did not himself observe anything of the sort in connection with these men, but it was told him by a number of the students, and several smaller boys were pointed out as being used by the men.

At still another school, where there are about 140 boys, we found that the practice obtained; but as a thorough investigation was not allowed we cannot speak as to its extensiveness. One of the teachers in the institution was suspected.

A man who was principal of a school in one of the towns of Maryland was asked to resign because it was thought very probable that he was engaged in perversion with some of the students. He afterwards obtained a position in another school.

Several years ago a professor in a school for boys was asked to resign because of this practice. We have also notes on another school man of considerable prominence, both here and abroad, who is a pervert.

The community is familiar with the recent exposure of an official in the public schools of Baltimore.

We have several notes of men in Baltimore, aged from 55 to 65, who have relations with boys; two of these men are very well known and have business prominence.

There is a fairly well-known man who is a pervert and whose house is used as a rendezvous for men of this type. He has had several love-affairs with men, and one of them with whom the investigator talked, “raved” over him.

We have one authentic instance of a man’s keeping another man; that is, supplying him with all the money which he needs in return for perverted relations.

Homo-sexuality among Women

It has not been possible to investigate this carefully, but with very little effort we have discovered several striking examples. Two well-known women who are engaged in various affairs about the city are perverts. A set of three others, one in a very responsible position, and one in a minor position, all have perverted relations among themselves.

There are numerous younger women who are guilty of this practice. Of these, one usually simulates the man, and as a rule is of a masculine type and is not infrequently called a man’s name.

Newspaper Articles

1. “A Female Man,” Oshkosh Northwestern, October 30, 1883. Transcription of article follows.

Figure 5: “A Female Man,” Oshkosh Northwestern, Oct. 30, 1883.

A Female Man. A Woman Disguised as a Man Marries a Young Girl at Waupun – Explosion of the Secret by the Arrival of the Masquerader’s Husband – The Strangest Case on Record.

By Telephone.

Waupun, Oct. 30. – One of the most startling sensations that ever occurred in this vicinity and probably one of the most remarkable instances of the kind on record has thrown this city into an excitement that promises to more than a nine day’s wonder. It is no less than the discovery that a woman disguised as a man has been living her since last spring as the husband of a girl whom she, in the masculine name and attire she had adopted, married here a few months ago. The denouement came out by the arrival of the woman’s husband S. J. Hudson here two days ago to claim his wife who had deserted in Fond du Lac. The circumstances are as follows: Hudson and his wife and two children formerly lived in Fond du Lac. Mrs. Hudson helped support the family by peddling extracts, soap, etc., and in that business frequently visited other towns in the vicinity. Early last spring Mr. Hudson secured a business opening in Belvedere, Ill., and it was arranged that he should take the children and go on to Belvedere, and she should follow then in a few days. Hudson sent to Belvedere, but his wife never arrived and it was the last he ever heard of her until a few days ago. She disappeared suddenly from Fond du Lac after his departure and although he searched high and low and made every effort to get track of her, he could find no trace of her whereabouts. About that time, it now transpires, Mrs. Hudson appeared in this city in the attire of a man. She is short and stout and her form often attracted attention and caused frequent remarks that she must be a woman in disguise. She went by the name of Frank Dubois. She smoked, chewed tobacco, swore with perfect masculine indifference; but there was something about “Frank” that caused many suspicions. A paragraph hinting that Frank Dubois might easily be taken for a woman once appeared in a local paper. Immediately on “Frank’s” arrival he began keeping company with a young girl of unsophisticated nature named Gertrude Fuller who was living with her mother. Shortly afterward they were married, Rev. H. L. Morrison performing the ceremony. This circumstance somewhat allayed the previous suspicions of people that “Frank” was a woman, and as months wore on and the couple seemed to live happily together those who before had been suspicious began to believe that their suspicions had been ill-founded and the matter finally settled down to the general conclusion that everything was all right, and the couple passed in and out of society as man and wife.

Two days ago Mr. Hudson arrived in the city with his two children and looked about without letting his object be known. He discovered that Frank Dubois was none other than his own wife who had disappeared so suddenly from Fond du Lac under circumstances before mentioned. Last evening taking an officer with him, Mr. Hudson went to the house and demanded to see Mr. Dubois. It was then discovered that “Frank” had got wind of Hudson’s presence in town and had skipped out. The young wife, as the Fuller girl may be called to avoid confusion, declares positively that Frank is man. She was interviewed last night by your correspondent and stated positively that “Frank” was a man. Her mother stated positively the same thing, but how she should know so positively does not appear to be evident. She reiterated the statement to-day stating that Frank would be back this afternoon or evening and if the officer would come to the house she would prove it to him. The “young wife” took the train this morning for Brandon and Mr. Hudson left this afternoon for Fond du Lac with the children. The case is so mysterious as to be the great talk of the town. Everybody believes firmly that Frank Dubois is a woman and is Hudson’s wife, and yet how she could marry a girl and keep the wife ignorant of her true sex for six to eight months is what astonishes people and makes the case so sensational. Some think the young wife knows the secret and has kept it herself. Others think she has never discovered the sex of her feminine husband.

LATER – It is just reported that Mrs. Hudson alias Frank Dubois is in the city, having remained last night concealed at the house of a friend. Efforts will be made to interview her and unravel the mystery. A Fond du Lack livery stable keeper is reported to have given information that while Mrs. Hudson was living with husband in Fond du Lac she was in the habit of hiring a rig at his stable, with which, dressed in men’s clothes, she used to drive over to Waupun to court the Fuller girl.

2. “That Female Man,” Oshkosh Northwestern, October 31, 1883. Transcription of article follows.

Figure 6: “That Female Man,” Oshkosh Northwestern, Oct. 31, 1883.

That Female Man. Further News from the Scene of the Hudson-Dubois sensation – All the parties have skipped from Waupun – The girl’s mother interviewed at Brandon – She finally gives in that Frank Dubois is a woman – The Female husband and Wife last seen going towards Fond du Lac on foot.

By Telephone.

Waupun, Oct. 31. – Nothing new has transpired since yesterday’s news regarding the sensation caused by the discovery that Frank Dubois is a woman and the wife of S. J. Hudson of Belvedere, Ill. All the parties to the romance have flown and there is no one left here now to furnish any further circumstances in this case. Mr. Hudson, as telephoned yesterday, went to Fond du Lac and has not yet returned. It is supposed he has gone on home to Belvedere. Frank Dubois (?) has not been seen since Hudson arrived and let the cat out of the bag. The report that he (she) was in town concealed at the house of a friend can not be verified and was probably not true. “Mrs.” Dubois and her mother went to Brandon yesterday, as telephoned yesterday afternoon and have not been seen since. When they left they said Dubois was in Brandon doing a job of work and they would bring him back that afternoon and prove to the people here that he was a man and not a woman. It is believed here that they will not come back and the female husband and her wife will seek pastures new where [illegible] belief [?] of some people here that the Fuller girl is perfectly cognizant that Frank is a woman, and is merely an accomplish with her to help her get away from her husband, Hudson, but even this theory is one that can hardly be reconciled with the facts in the case; for why a young girl would assume the role of wife to a woman in men’s clothes and continue to live that way for months is hardly explained on any reasonable hypothesis.

AT BRANDON.

By Telephone.

Brandon, Oct. 31. – Your correspondent has just finished interviewing Mrs. Hewitt, step-mother of the Fuller girl who married the so-called Frank Dupois at Waupun. Inquire develops the fact that “Frank” came her on Monday and his (or her) wife came over yesterday morning. They both took dinner at the house of a man named Irwin, and after dinner started down town, saying that they were going to call on some friends. This was the last seen of them here, although both were seen by farmers between here and Fond du Lac going on foot along the public road toward the latter city. They are now probably in Fond du Lac. Mrs. Hewitt followed her daughter over here yesterday afternoon, but the two had disappeared. Mrs. Hewitt has just been interviewed by your correspondent. She now comes down with the statement that she believes and has always suspect that Frank was a woman. She says the first time he came to see her daughter and while they were going together she was firmly convinced that Frank was a woman, his form and features and voice always betokened a female sex. She therefore bitterly opposed her daughter’s marriage to a person she believed was a woman, but they were married in spit of her. They lived at her (Mrs. Hewitt’s) house ever since they were married and although she still had her suspicions and talked to her daughter about them, the daughter always declared that Frank was a man and that she out to know if anybody. Mrs. Hewitt further says now the matter cames [sic] out as it has that is firmly convinced that Frank is of the feminine gender. She is perfectly at loss to know the cause of her daughter’s actions or to see how she can be deceived in the sex of the person she calls her husband. Mrs. Hewttt [sic] further states that Frank is a vagabond and a thief, and that she can swear to instances where he (or she) is guilty of larceny. He (or she) was in the habit of stealing potatoes and other provisions for the house and worked to keep up appearances. Further than what is already state, Mrs. Hewitt is wholly at loss to explain or unravel this remarkable mystery.

AT FOND DU LAC.

By Telephone.

Fond du Lac, Oct. 31. – Information having been received that Frank Dubois (Mrs. Hudson) and his (or her) wife have come to this city, reporters have been on the search all day but as yet have been unable to get any trace of them although it is supposed that they are in the city.

Medical Discourse

1. T. Griswold Comstock, “Alice Mitchell of Memphis: A Case of Sexual Perversion or ‘Urning’ (a Paranoic),” New York Medical Times 20 (1892–92): 170–73.

Alice Mitchell of Memphis

By T. Griswold Comstock, Ph. D., M. D., St. Louis, MO.

A Case of Sexual Perversion or “Urning”

(A Paranoiac)

The facts about Alice Mitchell will long be treasured in medical works on insanity, and mental and moral perversion. The medical scholar will study the case in all its lights and shades, while the public will only recall that she suddenly, in a terrible manner, with a razor, cut the throat of her dearest companion and friend, Freda Ward, a young lady of an excellent family. The natural impulse of every one was that summary justice should be dealt to avenge such an unprovoked crime. A few among the people of Memphis were so horrified that they even suggested violence. Fortunately the law took its course.

As a matter of medical jurisprudence, it is of great interest and importance that such a case should be inquired into and thoroughly analyzed by the medical profession, and I may add by the most careful and reliable medical experts. The very first impression is, that there must be something radically abnormal in the mental and physical development of such a murderess – and so it was.

The facts were that there was an unnatural affection existing between Alice Mitchell and Freda Ward. Alice Mitchell seems to have been the ardent one. The love they had for each other, to the public, seems something hard to conceive or explain, but to experts in insanity it is nothing unusual. Alice exhibited in her passion for Freda Ward all the impulses of the male sex for a female. She was to have been dressed as a man and take the bridegroom’s part in the marriage ceremony. She had already even arranged with a clergyman to perform the services, but Miss Ward’s friends interfered and they were separated. This disturbed Alice. When riding out with a friend, she meets Miss Ward. She suddenly stops and alights from the carriage, and overtaking Miss Ward deliberately cuts her throat with a razor which she carried for the purpose. She jumps into her buggy and drives rapidly home. She was arrested. She confessed the dreadful deed. She said she murdered her best friend because she loved her. For six months while in prison she did not exhibit any remorse or regret, but showed great devotion for the photograph of Miss Ward. And during the trial, and while the verdict was being rendered, her conduct was scarcely altered. The most reasonable conclusion of the jury, and those who have made a study of the alienated mental condition of those who commit such homicides, is, that the motive must have come of mental delusion. By scientific experts it is recognized as insanity of a peculiar kind. Alice having been indicted for murder, her attorneys looked at once into the antecedents of the family for mental aberrations. They learned that the mother of Alice in her first confinement, which occurred in St. Louis, had child-bed fever and puerperal insanity, and was confined in an asylum, and that before the birth of Alice she was deranged, and this aberration continued until sometime after labor. I attended the mother of Alice in her first confinement in St. Louis more than thirty years ago. She became insane just after delivery and her mania was of the acute form with fever. I attended her for a month and then advised that she be sent to an asylum. She was sent to the State Asylum at Fulton, where she remained for some time – I think six months. Within a few days after her return home from the asylum, she was first informed of the death of her child, and then her mind became again unbalanced. This demented condition, however, continued only a few days, but she did not recover from the shock. She remained melancholy for a long time, suffering from hallucinations, and was infatuated with the most groundless prejudices and fears. I had occasion to see her for some three years until the family removed from St. Louis to Memphis, and I could always remark a peculiar expression about her eyes which would bring to mind her former furious delirium. I mention this matter since it is a most important factor in the case of Alice, and must not be overlooked. The fact of a real engagement of marriage with one of her sex indicated at once that she was what is known in forensic medicine as a sexual pervert. On the 19th of July, 1891, a judicial enquiry was instituted before Judge Du Bose, of the criminal court of Memphis, to examine into the sanity or rather the insanity of Alice Mitchell. A commission was issued and sent from Memphis to St. Louis to take my evidence regarding the particulars of the first confinement of the mother when puerperal mania followed. Also a hypothetical case was cited describing the life of the mother, her antecedents, her family history, and mentioning the fact that other members of her family had been of unsound mind. It was also described the particulars and all the peculiarities of the life of Alice, from the date of her birth up to the time of the murder of Miss Ward. This was presented by a commissioner to Dr. Hammond of Washington, to Belot of Paris, as well as to myself. My affidavit stated that from the antecedents of the mother, Alice was a sexual pervert and affected with emotional monomania, without doubt hereditary, and that her condition was one of paranoia, resulting in homicidal mania, and consequently her conditional might be regarded as intrinsic insanity. That Alice is a sexual perfect and a paranoiac is quite probable, and the jury unanimously decided that she was insane.

Of course, such a jury was not competent to go beyond the general evidence, and to give a detailed description of the evidence which revealed her mental status and the character of her insanity. But the jury was competent to decide whether she was responsible for her acts, even though she had committed murder in apparently cold blood.

Here I may say something of sexual perverts. It is a revolting subject for the laity, for they have no toleration for anything of that kind. It is strictly a scientific matter of professional interest and of great importance to the medical expert. Until recently, little has been said upon this subject in text-books of insanity. It is mentioned in the recent works of Spitzka and Shaw, but for a full elucidation we must examine the work of Krafft-Ebing,Footnote * Professor of Nervous Diseases at the University of Vienna.

He describes the “vita sexualis” of perverts, such as Alice Mitchell, under the classification “Urnings.” This term, used frequently by German writers upon forensic medicine, refers to those who in a sexual sense are only stimulated when consorting with their own sex. It applies to those who indulge in unnatural sexual practices. But it especially includes sensuality and sexual desire of one female for another, and a disgust for a male. The same made be said of males – mutatis mutandis. Krafft-Ebing describes the “Lesbian Love” – (tribadism), saphismus, cunnilingus, fellator, paedicatio mulierum, sadismus, masochismus, and fetischismus. Sadismus is a fierce, wild sensuality and lust, together with cruelty before, during and after coitus. Masochismus is another form of perverted lust during the act of constupration or coitus, accompanied with cruelty and special acts to terrorize and injure the female. Fetischismus or erotic fetischism refers to the “urning” or pervert, who superstitiously adores and worships some article of clothing or some organ of the person loved; or the odor of the person loved excites the orgasm, which the desire for natural coitus is disregarded. In some cases of these unnatural perverts, under the head of “Sadismus” or “Masochismus,” the subject, before he can accomplish the sexual act, must, in order to induce priapism, practice cruelty to the woman or upon some animal; e.g., he will bring along a live chicken, a duck, a rabbit or a dog and decapitate it in her presence. And then only can he be excited to complete the sexual act. In these cases coitus is only performed with accompanied by acts of horrid cruelty, or murder after its completion. The awful murders of “Jack the Ripper,” in Clerkenwell, London, can be account for only on this theory.

Subjects like Alice Mitchell, who come under the classification of “Urnings,” are all given to the cruelties of the lower animals. This seems to have been the case with her, as proved by the evidence at the trial. These facts are all unpleasant matters to deal with, but they were germane in dealing with this young woman, and they are verified by numerous cases quoted in the authoritative work of Krafft-Ebing, extending through 432 pages. It is a sad truth that the existence of sexual perverts is of frequent occurrence, especially among the upper class of society. Some months since we saw in the newspapers an account of some scandalous acts (of paedicatio, vel cinoedi,) that occurred in Cavendish Square, London. They were reported in the Pall Mall Gazette, and were of such a nature as to unfit for publication. But what was most remarkable, the newspapers states that princelings of royal blood and other aristocratic profligates were named as not merely participators, but the instigators and principal actors in the horrible practices. For the “good of society” and for “State reasons” legal inquiry in the Cavendish Square scandals was suspended. Sexual perverts readily recognize each other, although they may have never met before, and there exists a mysterious bond of psychological sympathy between them. Instances have been authenticated to me where such perverts when meeting another of the same sex, have at once recognized each other, and mutually become acquainted and have left in company with each other to practice together their unnatural vices. I am informed by an expert in nervous diseases, that in New York, upon elevated railroads, these perverts travel and frequently meet others of the same sex, and leave the cars in order to be in each other’s private company. Dr. Moll, in Berlin, has recently written a work upon the same subject as Krafft-Ebing’s. Moll says he knows personally, and from authentic evidence, that there are 400 sexual perverts in Berlin, and he has reason to believe that there are half as many more. He says that they frequently consort together in localities prearranged. They also meet in certain restaurants in Berlin, and he states that the same custom exists in Paris.

The sexual function and passion are not to be trifled with. For it is nothing less than the keystone of society, and plays a great rôle in forensic medicine. Horace said,Footnote ^† “Lust, long before the time of Helen, was the dismal cause of war.” The practices of sexual perverts I have alluded to, but they can not be described – they are fit to be studied only by competent medical men. These individuals are naturally objects of disgust to the laity, but in a professional man they excite the deepest sympathy. We have known many cases, sad to say, among the ministers of the Gospel – in high places – who were perverts, and one case not long since in the medical profession. Some of the most unnatural crimes that are chronicled in the newspapers result from mental aberrations that affect the sexual system. And again, the practice of a neurotic vice will intensify delusions and insanity in a sexual pervert.

Among such persons, Krafft-Ebing mentions manustupration, paedicatio mulierum, saphism, libidinous constupration with intense violence and the killing of their victims, sadismus and masochismus – which are frequently practiced. Among sexual perverts, jealousy is always a prime passion, and Alice Mitchell’s separation from Freda Ward seems to have excited the most intense jealousy, and the fire of this passion at times burning in her breast was a motive for her to commit the homicide. The sexual relations of the human race are indeed mysterious, and when practiced in any unnatural manner, Nature will certainly avenge herself on the offender. Mental disturbance and insanity will often follow.

The case of Alice Mitchell will be instanced for a long period hence as un cas célebre, and we feel that the verdict of the jury declaring that she was insane was just and proper. The relation of insanity to perverted sexuality is one of the most delicate matters that the physican has to treat, and it can be readily appreciated that in such cases the advice of experts and specialists in medical jurisprudence should be sought. Our mental organization and its workings are something that we can not entirely fathom, but the safety of society requires us to guard with constant care all persons who are in any way mentally irresponsible.

If the mind is deranged, self-control is lost and the acts of the person alienated may not only endanger his own life, but may be a constant menace to society. Physically, Alice Mitchell was a woman, but psychically her cerebral functions were those of a male, and still her preference, like other Urnings – were for her own sex. All this came from an abnormal neuro-psychical development, and, as we believe, was inherited. The insanity of her mother was undoubtedly its prime cause, and that the mother was deranged before the birth, and the mania continued after the delivery, is a legitimate reason for placing the daughter in teh category of one not responsible for the dreadful murder which she committed. It was then indeed a case of sexual perversion from hereditary taint, and was probably intensified by unnatural practices – primitive degenerative insanity; though of these we can only conjecture, as there was nothing of the kind elicited by the evidence. Insanity in such cases is more liable to be transmitted from mother to offspring of the same sex than to any male issue.

This case of Alice Mitchell, not only to the family of the pervert, and to the afflicted family whose daughter was so ruthlessly murdered, and to society in general, is indeed sad, and must cast its dark shadows far and wide. To the medical profession it suggests more thorough and exact study of mental disease.

Addison once said: “Babylon in ruins is not so affecting a spectacle or so solemn as a human mind overthrown by lunacy.”

Publius Syrus said: “Ulcera animi sananda magis quam corporis” – “Mental diseases demand of the physican more attention than those of the body.”

So in ancient times mental maladies were considered more important to treat than somatic diseases.

Firsthand Accounts

1. Claude Hartland, The Story of a Life: For the Consideration of the Medical Fraternity (St. Louis, MO: 1901).

CHAPTER X: Fleeing from Self (pp. 68–69)

The city was full of handsome men, and I burned with passion all the time.

I soon found that many others were suffering from a disease similar to my own, and while this knowledge gave me great relief, I was grieved to find the victims so numerous.

One night, while standing upon the sidewalk listening to a public speech, a very handsome and stylishly dressed man about thirty-five years of age, began a conversation with me.

I suspected him of course, for I could see that he labored under some nervous strain, and I decided to let him take his course.

We talked for some time, when he proposed that we go for a walk. I agreed and we walked down to the river.

When we were in a quiet and dark spot, he placed his arms around my neck and kissed me several times.

Leaning forward, he whispered something in my ear. I had an idea what he meant, but was not sure.

Passion and curiosity tempted me sorely, and I did not repulse him.

Ten minutes passed.

A new experience had been added to my life, and a half slumbering desire awakened in my breast.

One night, several months later, when I was more lustful than usual, I went on the streets actually in search of some one with whom to gratify maddening passion.

I was passing down a dimly lit street, when I saw in front of me a man whose form was simply perfect.

I had not seen his face, but I was sure that he must be very handsome.

I quickened my pace, and in the act of passing him I glanced at his face.

One look was enough—too much.

He was all that my passionate soul could desire, and I could not pass him without a word.

I begged his pardon, then asked him the way to some place that I knew to be in the direction he was going, and he kindly offered to show me the way.

He talked freely, but my own voice was so choked with passion, that I could scarcely answer him.

He soon took on my condition, and before we had gone another block, he had my hand in his and—we were in love.

We turned into a still darker street, for the city was not well lighted, and at that time we did not even have a moon.

He placed his strong arms about me, strained me to his great manly breast and kissed me again and again.

I lay perfectly still against his breast, for I was completely dazed with the sweet blissful feeling his caresses brought to my soul.

He too was aflame with passion, and placing his lips close to my ear, he made a request that I could not grant and I told him so.

He gently put me from him, told me I did not care for him and turned to leave.

I put my hand to detain him, and he repeated his request.

I hesitated a moment, and he again placed his arms about me.

I felt my resolution give way, for oh, how I loved him and how I longed to please him!

Placing his cheek against my own, he whispered: “Will you?”

At this moment reason returned, and springing from his arms, I firmly answered: “No, not if I die,” and turning, I hurried away and left him.

I did not look back for some time, and when I did, he was gone, and I knew I had lost him.

I sat down upon a curb completely exhausted by the great strain under which I had been laboring.

I felt at that moment that I would grant any request if I only had him with me again.

I will not describe the rest of that wretched night in my room alone.