Before discussing this let us consider two other cases--after which we may discuss the general proposition of whether high-grade imbeciles know right and wrong. CHAPTER II THE CASE OF ROLAND PENNINGTON On November 7th, 1913, Lewis S. Pinkerton, the manager of a certain farm in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, suddenly disappeared. As it seemed probable that he was the victim of foul play the detectives set to work and in due time arrested George March, the dairyman on the farm, and Roland Pennington, a farm laborer. Suspicion was directed to these two men largely through the testimony of the woman who was supposed to be the so-called common-law wife of March. At his trial it was shown that he had another wife living, and consequently she did not even have that as a claim upon him. This woman had heard groanings from the direction of the barn, and later when March came into the house, had noticed blood on the towel and on his clothing. The body of the lost man could not be found. After being taken to prison March accused Pennington of the crime, admitting that after the deed was done he assisted young Pennington in disposing of the body, because, as he said, he was afraid that he himself would be accused of the crime. Having made this admission, he took the officers to a wood some miles away where the body had been buried in a rude, shallow grave. [Illustration: ROLAND PENNINGTON. (By permission of "Alienist and Neurologist.")] When Pennington was confronted with March's accusation, he too made a confession, which, however, implicated March quite as much as himself. March was tried in Delaware County, and convicted of murder in the first degree. The defense was, in accordance with the above statement, "that he had nothing to do with the crime itself, merely assisted in disposing of the body." Pennington's trial occurred in June, 1914, when he also was convicted of murder in the first degree. The defense in this case was imbecility and irresponsibility. Although the jury did not accept this view, the case is a most interesting one from the standpoint of criminal imbecility. The story of the crime is probably best given in Pennington's own words, since his confession has all the marks of truthfulness and was evidently accepted by the jury in the March case. It was almost exclusively on the strength of this testimony that March was convicted. _Statement of Roland Pennington as to the Pinkerton Homicide_ I, Roland Pennington, being duly sworn according to law depose as follows:--