Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1909-01-15
CONTINUED from PAGE ~

Sinclair answered by recitinB
case given in well-known work on
| insanity, which was similar In most
OF the prominent features.
Magoon asked on what he based
his conclusion that Atcherley was in
sane and should be committed.
81 believe" answered Sinclair" so
because he in his examination gave
history of having been prosecuted
| by DR.. Wayson, that this persecution
had extended for many years. Fur
thermore. there was a distinct wan
dering of the ethical sense, which Is
"a valuable symptom. | asked why
he had done this act. and he said
that DR.. Wayson had stolen his rem
edy for leprosy. also think that
the fact that he thinks he has discov-
cred a remedy for leprosy is a symp-
tom of paranoia, in line with that Of
other cases, who have imagined that
they had discovered perpetual motion
and the like. | asked him why he
had done It, even If DR.. Wayson had
stolen his remedy, and he answered
that a remedy for leprosy was not dis
covered every day, showing again
that he placed an undue weight on
his discovery; more than a sane man
would"
DIR. Sinclair went on to say
that DR.. Atcherley was in the
habit of taking cocaine and other
drugs, and this was one of the things
which led to paranOia. Furthermore
Atcherley's Authorizations about
voices from the sewer, etc, were all
in line with the conclusion the wit
ness reached. .Atcherley had been
very restless during the examination
but had spoken intelllgently and log
ically. showing that his act was not
one of sudden impulse.
For how long a time has DIR.
Atcherley, in your opinion, been suf-
fcring from paranoia?" asked Ma
COON.
II believe about month, since he
heard these voices. Beyond that
make no statement"
Magoon asked Sinclair what were
the facts which first led him to be.
lieve that DR.. Atcherley was insane
THE idea he had of persecution
the idea he possessed that Waysor
had stolen his remedy, on grounds
entirely inadequate for such conclu
sion: on his abnormal ethical sense
on his general manner, and the fact
that he was addicted to cocaine ant
morphine or opium" answered Sin
. clair.
Magoon-Had you formed thi
conclusion before you knew thes'
facts?
q Sinclair-I was strongly inclined
to believe he was insane.
Magoon-Do you know how muci
cocaine DR.. Atcherley took?
Sinclair-Dr Emerson told me two
or three grains. lie was not GER
tain.
Magoon-And how much NOR
phine?
Sinclair-Dr. Emerson said sever
to ten grains. He did not know pos
itively.
Magoon-I understand that from
these indefinite statements of DR.. Elm
erson you formed your belief tina
DR.. Atcherley was a paranoiac?
Sinclair-It confirmed my belief
Magoon-If you found out tha
DR.. Emerson's statement that DIR
Atcherley took two TO three grains
Of cocaine was incorrect, and that h,
took only one-half grain, would yol
still consider DR.. Atcherley para
noiac?
Sinclair-You may put 1t dowr
that | would.
Magoon--And you would still con
slider him a danger to the commu
nifty?
Sinclair would.
MagOon asked Sinclair II he knew
If any cases similar to that of DR.
Atcherley in which the subject hat
Ieen committed.
sinclag referred to cases cited b,
bl'g WI II oi ihphHlNst plOhua
ed the book, quoting several cases
= which, however, did not satisfy Ma
soon as being in point. Sinclair sal
that other books gave such cases, an
Magoon insisted on their production
Cathcart objected, and the Court OF
dered the examination to go on.
Magoon--I understand that one q
your reasons was that DR.. Atcherle
thought DR.. Wayson was persecutin
him?
SinClair-Yes.
Magoon wanted to know what Il
would think in case Atcherley ha
good reason for this belief
Sinclair answered that Atcherlc
had been unable to give any ground
He merely said he knew II. Furthe
more, his method of retaliation WI
irrational.
"If the facts existed which thel
was no dispute of, which led ID
Atcherey to believe that he was pc