Lettsomian Lectures on Insanity (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1854 edition. Excerpt: ... not sound psychology. In many cases the "atrocity and malignity of the crime" afford to the practical physician invaluable evidence of the existence of insanity, the derangement manifesting itself in the character of the act itself. I willingly admit that we should cautiously act upon such evidence; but should we not be culpable if we were to set it altogether aside P the wisdom of exempting this class from responsibility and punishment. In regard to the second point--that of "partial insanity"--the law is thus expounded by the judges. In answer to the question, "If a person under an insane delusion as to existing facts commits an offence in consequence thereof, is he thereby excused " the reply was as follows: "If the delusion were only 'partial, the party accused was equally liable with a person of sane mind. If the accused killed another in self-defence, he would be entitled to an acquittal; but if the crime was committed for any supposed injury, he would then be liable to the punishment awarded by the law to his crime." It will thus be perceived that the law repudiates "partial insanity" as a plea in extenuation of crime, or as an exemption from punishment. In the strictly legal signification of the term, what is "partial insanity?" Lord Lyndhurst clearly defines the condition to be, "a mind in an unsound state--not unsound upon one point only, and sound in all other respects, but that this unsoundness manifests itself principally with reference to some particular object or person." According to this definition, it is evident that "partial insanity" and "monomania" are not, as some have supposed, exactly equivalent terms: they have, however, ...