The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-03-17 00:00:00

o require f
d cl►il

Vartiamtntarp prorerbings

HOUSE OF LORDS.—
he LORD CHANCELLOR called the attention of their lord
the law rezarding Fersons cornmitZin
fluence of insanity. The noble and
rable length to the recent

-MoND A.

to the state

rimes under t
earned lord re

~.4aughten, commenting on the various circum-
stances attending it, and contending that it was impossible
for the jury to have come to any other conclusion than that'
which they had arrived at, although he would have preferred
that the case had been heard to an end instead of being
stopped, as it had been. With respect to the law itself, it
was similar to that which had always prevailed, not only in.
England and Scotland, but also in France, Germany, and
other, countries, and was in fact the law of humanity. He
thought that no alteration of the law either could be or ought
to be made, and their lordships, he hoped, would direct their
attention to measures of precaution. To a certain extent in
this way their lordships might proceed, and within a few days
he should lay upon the table a bill for that purpose—a bill
which he hoped would be effectual, though he would not
assert that it would absolutely prove so when he considered
the nature of the disease, and the latent character which was
peculiar to it. Such occurrences occasionally had happened,
not only in this but in other European countries, and he
feared might occur hereafter; but the bill which he should
present would, he hoped, be a considerable check upon their
repetition. The bill would be ready in two or three days.
Lord BROUGHAM said the whole question ought to be
whether a man, in killing another, was so insane as not to
know right from wrong. Now a man might imagine he was
quite right in shooting a particular individual, but that was
not the sort of right and wrong alluded to by the law. It was
this :—lf a man took all the precautions that a sane man
would for the purpose of carrying out his purpose, concealing
that purpose till the proper moment came for carrying it into
effect, that man must be presumed to know he was doing
wrong, because, after all, doing right or wrong meant doing
so according to law. Judges should direct juries to ascertain
if such persons as 111`Naughten knew whether they were
doing wrong according to law; in other words, whether they,
were violating the law, for if so they were liable to punish-
ment, no matter what might be their abstract notions as to
the value of the lives they were taking. _ _ _ _ _

trial of

Lord COTTENHAM said he quite agreed in the definition of
the law as relating to right and wrong laid down by Lord
Brougham.
Lord CAMPBELL thought the law admitted of no altera-
tion, and quite agreed in the interpretation of the law laid
down by his noble and learned friends.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the consideration of the
Government had been directed to the prevention of such
persons as Francis and Oxford, &c., being made public spec-
tacles ; but there was no necessity for legislating upon the
subject, as her Majesty had already the power of confining
such persons wherever she might think proper. He would
take the earliest opportunity, if their lordships desired it, of
summoning the judges to give their lordships their opinions
upon the whole question.
Their lordships then adjourned.