Year: 1879

A strange-looking creature named Bar
raud was convicted, under the name Of
Ramel, ut Albany, last week, of arson in
the third degree. His crime was having ex-
ploded two cans Of powder in stateroom
on board tho crowded Hudson River steam
boat Drew at dead of night. He was
man of questionable antecsdents and
just u few days out Of jnil when
he once more fell into the hands OF the law.
The crime was fairly traced to him, and his
sentence of seven years will seclude a dam
gerous character for some time to come.
Bnt there is one feature of his case which
makes it specially interesting to jurists.
He had, it is stated by those who know his
history, been several times an inmate Of
lunatic asylums. lie certainly was sent
from the Tombs to the Flatbush Asylum
a little moro than year ago. He presents
an extraordinary instance OF the fine
ness OF tho dividing line between the
depraved and the insane. Like the habit
ual criminal, the moral sense with him was
only IL rem;niscence; but, unlike the ordi-
nary criminal, there was an utter want Of
proportion between the means and tho end.
His swindling operations were generally on
the scale Of man with some mighty illicit
profit in view, but they really aimed at u
practical Jokes. lie exhibited technical
learning of an order high enough to de-
ceive business men, experts and professors
rs to his real character; but his object was
nothing moro than to get a meal or two.
Even in his Ia. est criminal exploit the mo-
tive OF tho ficndish deed is still mystery.
The theory that his idea was to plumber in
the resulting confusion is probably correct;
for he was all but penniless. and it the
panic had not boen stayed plumber would
have been easy. Yet so little was
there to sustain it that we read
of the Albany Chief of Police, who has
had him under his eye for months. offering
the theory that it was mere lewdness
prompted the deed. The disproportion
between means and end is therefore again
apparent. 1t may be added here that he
utterly disclaims the idea OF being insane,
and 1t was never mentioned by one side or
the other on his trial. He aims to be con-
sidored a man OF scientific requirements
and polite learning, and his vanity would
not let him plead arrangement. Yet a
counsel who made use OF the cIreer
of his client could have turned
that very opposition to being considered
lunatic to good account. 1t is tho
commonplace of insanity to deny mental
alienation. With the defence conducted
on this line would it be straining proba-
bility too much to make an acquittal on the
ground Of insanity the result of the trial !?
Conceding it would not the question in
our mind comes up, How long could he,
under the present state of the law, be kept
in lunatic asylum? l. must be answered
that the verdict Of the jury would have no
effect upon the question. He acts sanely
enough when not at liberty, and it is
safe to say would talk himself in q
short time out of any institution
where he was not kept by mandate,
to be probably heard OF next in
a new fantastic crime. 1t is we'll for society
to have this man put away. but If he is q
lunatic he should not be in prison for tho
sane. He may perhaps be one case of de-
rangement out of ten thousand, yet one
such in whole generation would, with all
his possible destructiveness, be worth pro-
viding against. The law should take con-
elusive cognizancc of such cases, and on
proof of tho committal OF insane acts
that are normally crimes confine tho un-
fortunates during tho remainder of their
| lives.