, 1873-05-04


chilling for confinement or any Of the restraints
usual in the treatment Of madmen. Mr. David
Dudley Field delivered an address, fem days
ago, before the Modico-Legal Society, in New
York, in which he took strong ground against
the admission Of emotional or percepEonal in
sanity rs establishing tho responsibility Of a
criminal in the eyes OF the Law. This view is
likely to meet with general approval 1t Ii
announced that DR.. William 4. Hammond,
who is eminent authority on everything pertain
ing to insanity, will soon publish an essay, in
which he will tako materially tho same Wow OF
the question as that advanced by Mr. Field.
The sentiment Of the Medico-Legal Society is
evidently in sympathy with the movement
against the construction Of emotional insanity
that has obtained in many OF the murder-trials,
and if the medical and legal professions join
hands in the effort to break it down, it is safe
to predict that the theory will be abandoned
which has induced emotional juries to acquit
men whose hands arc red With the blood Of their
fellow-nen.
Mr. David Dudley Field accepts the division Of
insanity into four kinds viz: That which de-
stroyB the reasoning faculties; that which affects
the perceptions; that which breaks down the
will; and that which disturbs the emotions.
Nlr. Field holds that only two Of these forms of
insanity those destroying the will and the rea-
| son-can relieve the man who commits crim-
inal act from responsibility under the law.
Emotional insanity and perceptiona1 insanity arc
admitted to furnish strong temptations to crime,
and as such are probably entitled to place
| among other extenuating circumstances that
may present themselves in nny particular case,
but they nro not in themselves 8 plea in bar Of
punishment. It is held that m affection OF the
perceptions, taking the form Of illusions Or
hallucinations or Of the emotions, which may
develop and intensity the PASSIONS cannot de-
stroy the power Of choosing Between right and
wrong. The reason still remains to pass upon
tie right or wrong Of an action, and the will re-
mains to enable the porson to control
his action. It is not necessary thai
these mental powers should be active
at the time of tho commission Of the
sary to prove that the crime was committed
under an actual knowledge of the law governing
the case; it is only necessary that tho criminal
should have been competent to know the law,
and the fault is his if he does not know it. The
| obBcuring Of the perceptions momentarily, which
might have been preserved in their nominal con-
dition by the proper exercise Of the reason, or
| the sway Of passion, which might have been re-
strained by asserting the power Of the will, can
| not therefore, be permitted to exculpate one
who commits a crime which he had the power
| within himBeh to avoid.
These clear distinctions between passion or
dclusion and that complete mental collapse
which shows itself in idiocy or uncontrolled mad
ness are very valuable, and it is necessary that
they should be impressed upon our criminal ju-
risprudenco, not that they are new or strange
but that they may defeat the ingenuity OF 1aw-
gers who hare rendered them Obscure. OF
course, there has never been belief in the
minds Of Judges, lawyers, or jurors, that emo
tiona1 or perceptonal insanity actually relieves
murderer from the responsibility Of his crime.
Had there been IN honest belief OF
this kind, Judges, lawyers, and jurors, would
have united in Cd effort to prescribe some form
Of restraint over the victims Of mental disease
who are so dangerous to the peace and welfare
! of the community. It is perfectly we'll known
that the pleas Of emotional and percoptonal in
sanity have been adopted simply for tho purpose
Of providing some quasi-logd pretext for &C.
| quitting men for whom there is some sympathy
On the part of the public, Or where there is
some scheme On the part Of friends to secure
their release.
As an instance Of the doctrine Of emotional
insanity, the case Of sickles may be cited es one
Of the first OF the category which has been go
largely increased since that time. It is perfectly
apparent to everybody now, as it Vas to every
body at the time Sickles was acquitted, that he
was declared not guilty Of the crime Of murder
because he hid shot the man who was supposed
| to be the seducer Of his wife. Tho jury did not
dare to bring in verdict Of acquittal on this
ground, for it was contrary to the 1aw. Insanity
WAS, therefore; the only assumption which would
authorize the acquittal under tho law. But the
sickles case also, Illustrates the absurdity of the
doctrine that every man has the right to kill his
wife's paramount which is all that emotional
insanity means in cases like those Of Sickles,
Cole, and Mcfarland, for subsequent develop
menta showed that the victim Of Bickles' emo
tional insanity could IN no light be regarded as
q ''seducer," and that sickles, who afterward
condoned his wifo's infdelity by living with her,
did not occupy the high ground which the jury
conceded to him as an avenger Of his honor.
Perceptional insanity, or TINT which takos the
form Of illusions, may be illustrated by the plea
that will be made On the part OF Robert Bleali1y,
the man who killed his niece in New York
brothe1. It will be urged in Bloaldy's behalf
that ho WAS religious enthusiast, and TINT he
believed it to be his duty to 11l his niece
because she Was leading life Of shame.
IF 91ch 4 rflca pEon}d In adr,if+ad