178 FEDBBAL EEPOBTEE. �stalwart mng of the republican party were delusive, and that these men were denouncing his deed, and that then, for the first time, when he saw the necessity of making out some defence, he broached this theory of inspiration and irresistible pressure, forcing him to the commission of the act. �It this be true, you would have nothing to indioate the real motives of the act except what I have already considered. Whether it is true or not, you must determine from all the evidence. �It is true that the term "inspiration" does not appear in the papers first written by the defendant, nor in those delivered to Gen. Eey- nolds, except at the close of the one dated July 19th, in which he says that the inspiration is -worked out of him; though what that means is not clear. It is true, also, that this was after, according to Gen. Eeynolds, he had been informed how he was being de- nounced by the stalwart republicans. �In one of the urst papers I have referred to, the president's removal was called an act of God, as were his nomination and election; but whether this meant anything more than that it was an act of God, in the sense in which all great events are said to be ordered by Provi- dence, is not clear. �Dr. Noble Young testifies that a few days after defendant's ou- trance into the prison — a time not definitely fixed — he told him he was inspired to do the act, but qualified it by saying that if the pres- ident should die he would be oonfirmed in his belief that it was an inspiration ; but if not, perhaps not. �The emphatic manner in which, in both the papers delivered to Gen. Eeynolds, the defendant declared that the assassination was his own concept'ion and execution, and whether right or wrong he took the entire respousiblity, his detailed description of the manner in which the idea occurred to him, and how it was strengthened by his reading, etc., and his omission to state anything about a direct inspiration from the Deity at that time, are all circumstances to be considered by you on the question whether he then held that idea. �On the other hand, you have the prisoner's testimony in which he nmv asserts that he conceived himself to be under an inspiration at the time. He also advanced this claim in his interviews with the expert witnesses shortly before the trial. �It becomes necessary, then, to examine the case on the assumption that the prisoner's testimony may be true, and to ascertain from his declaration and testimony what kind of inspiration it is which he thus asserts. ��� �
