Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1916-10-10
THE LAW MOVES FORWARD
: BY FREDERIC J. EAsKIN

J. EAsKIN - -, ~. ho,.. ~ lordss
ordered an investigation. The honorable Judges "eie
asked what they meant when tney sdlu I~a ~,
insane and how fact acquitted him. loro cnan-
ce1Ior of England had said that insanity as a
doTsnse was laughable. The honorable judges oenD-
Grated and finally replied that man was leealy
- 1yber he did not know the difference between
rigbt and wrong The accused had suffered from
deusons and his act had to be considered as lhoush
80 de1usions were facts. For him they were facts
hernore a crime has two parts-the GRIM
incl Intention act Both are necessary TO make
a crime you intend to hit man. ana DON you can
not be held for assault If you don't lntend 10 MT
man and do hit him. you can't be held for assault
either In McNaughtens shot the criminal intent was
lacking. ..,,1,
then has come down present day 1t is still in
Use But if reasoning which it was based were
1;ad to the data that medical science has gathered
an tbe meantime itself might often be contra
dtced For science shows today that man may have
mental disease that makes him commit crimes with
out criminal intentand yet he may be able 10 olsti-
gish perfectly we'll between right and wrong There
is the weI-known of kleptomania- The klepto-
maniac intent to steal so when he puts tower
or a saucepan under his overcoat he does not commit
larceny On the other hand, he knows right from
wrong well enough that it's not his sauce
nan and that he should what does not belong
to him. So he has. strictly speaking, defense In
insanity. 1t is pretty tangle
The new statute which will be proposed all over the
country in the near future proposes to the law
basis that recognizes the progress of medicine IL
provides that when mental disease is offered as
defense the decide whether the mental dis
ease so prisoner that he did not have the
se Of mind necessary constitute the crime charged
1t takes state mind we'll act to constitute
a crime. This has always been recognized in every
field but that insanity. If man is mistaken. the
law treats him as though the facts he thought
them. Brown thinks Jones took his umbrella, and
umbrella in turn, he be mistaken, but
that mistake is a perfectly good defense against
charge theft, If convince the judge of the
truth of it. is a crime because he didn't
have proper state of mind. Just under the
posed STATUTE the jury will have to decide whether the
mans mental disease prevented him from having the
prom of a
This nuts the question up the jury. Under the
old system various functions overlapped. Often the
alenst was practically deciding whether the prisoner
was guilty or not; judge practically decid-
ing whether he was not. Under this system
the iudge will tell the jury what mind law
prescrbes as essential the commission Of the crime
with which the prisoner is charged. The alienist will
describe the prisoners mind The jury VIII
put the two together There is no fiat ques-
ton sanity insanity, of right wrong. Mental
science has outgrown such test.
If the jury finds that the prisoner did the act but
that his brain affected the time, that he did
it without criminal of mind they must bring
in that effect and proceedings
started automatically determine whether the pris-
oner is person to have at large whether he
should be committed to institution.
committee which has worked six years in per-
fecting proposed bill until II squares with all the
principles of law and medicine consists of
some of the distinguished lawyers and alenists
in the States. Prof. F. r. Keedy of the Uni
versity Pennsylvania, is chairman. Other members
Illinois supreme hourt Dean Mikell Of the University
Pennsylvania law school; Dr. Adolf Meyer, of Johns
Hopkins; Meyer Of Chicago DR.. Prince. Of Boston.
and DR.. White, Of Washington.
The subject of their has been technical
the layman be able to evaluate the result IN
view of the question insanity at law
be lapsing into. the aynan hopes that they
done a good job