Cruelty, ignorance, prejudice, and the like, are freely ascribed to the law and to those who administer it, on the grounds that it is said not to keep pace with the discoveries of science and to deny facts medically ascertained. The heat and vehemence with which such charges are made makes a perfectly impartial discussion of the whole matter difficult. It is hard for any one not to resent attacks upon a small body of which he is himself a member, such attacks being often harsh and rude, and almost always connected with if not founded upon misconceptions. The interest and possibly the importance of the task is, however, upon a par with its difficulty, and it certainly should be said, in extenuation of the violent language which medical writers frequently use upon this matter, that they are sometimes treated in courts of justice, even by judges, in a manner which, I think, they are entitled to resent. Sarcasm and ridicule are out of place on the bench in almost all conceivable cases, but particularly when they are directed against a gentleman and a man of science who, under circumstances which in themselves are often found trying to the coolest nerves, is attempting to state unfamiliar and in many cams unwelcome doctrines, to which he attaches high importance.

     I think that what can truly be said of the law, as it stands, is this. The different legal authorities upon the subject have been right in holding that the mere existence of  madness ought not to be an excuse for crime, unless it produces in fact one or the other of certain consequences. I also think that the principle which they have laid down will be found, when properly understood and applied, to cover every case which ought to be covered by it. But the terms in which it is expressed are too narrow when taken in their most obvious and literal sense, and when the circumstances under which the principle was laid down are forgotten. Medical men, on the other hand, have contended in substance that every person who suffered in any degree under a disease of which the nature is most obscure, whilst the symptoms vary infinitely, should be free in all cases from legal punishment. The subject is one of the greatest difficulty, and it is most imperfectly understood by medical men as well as by lawyers. I think the lawyers were, and are, right in admitting with great suspicion and reluctance excuses put forward for what on the face of them are horrible crimes, especially as some medical theories seem to go to the length of maintaining that all crime is of the nature of disease, and that the very existence of criminal law is a relic of barbarism.