Case CLXXX

Two aged peasants, who had been intimate friends from infancy, and who had always lived on the most friendly terms, fell victims to this superstition. They were engaged in their usual occupations in the fields, when night unexpectedly overtook them. Being fatigued by labor, they seated themselves, on their way homeward, under a tree which grew by the roadside. Under these circumstances, they began to talk about the Swedish knights, and their imaginations, excited by drink, led to the impression that they were surrounded by them, and could only escape by combat. Each had a stick, as is usual with peasants; they continued dealing blows on each other, believing they were striking the Swedish knights, until one of them suddenly disappeared. The other, whose stick was broken, picked up by chance his friend's hat, imagining that he had gained a complete victory over the spectres, and that this was the head-piece belonging to one of them. Furnished with this trophy, and armed with his broken weapon, he returned to the village, and went to the house of his friend, whose wife and daughters were anxiously expecting their husband and father. As soon as he had entered, he exclaimed, with great satisfaction: "The devils tried to carry me off, but I have given, at least one of them, such a beating with my stick that he will never return." But the hat which he carried soon caused a suspicion of the misfortune which had occurred. The sons of the victim repaired to the spot where the old men had sat beneath the tree to drink, anil there they found their aged father lying dead with a deep wound at the back of his head, which rested on a pointed stake. With this exception, his body exhibited no external injury.

* Marc, op. cit. p. 618. Henecke, Annates, vol. viii. Supplement, p. 186.

On the following day the unhappy author of this homicide having recovered his reason, wept bitterly, and expressed the liveliest regret. During the summary interrogatory, which he underwent, he could say nothing, but that, having continued to drink with his friend, they appeared to be surrounded by spectres on horseback in blue regimentals turned up with red; and persuaded, on seeing this, that some harm would happen to them, they resolved to defend themselves with their sticks; in consequence, they both assailed the spirits, recollecting to have heard that, if courageously attacked, they would be put to flight; he added that, in the midst of the combat, he missed his friend, and the spectres also suddenly disappeared; finding a hat on the ground, he carried it off; and, believing that his friend had gone home, he thought it his first duty to call and inquire how he was.

The faculty in law of the University of Holmstadt being consulted on the case, gave the following verdict: "Drunkenness is a vice to be shunned by all. If any one becomes voluntarily intoxicated, without having been constrained thereto, and in that state commits a crime, it shall be imputed to him, since he owes to himself the loss of his reason. The law has adopted as a rule, that when a crime has been committed in a state of complete drunkenness, the excess of the state should exempt the culprit from the usual punishment, excepting in a case where, being restored to reason, he evinces no regret for what he has done; such conduct proving that he approves of the act committed, and would in all probability have done the same even if he had not been overtaken with drink. It must also be admitted, that complete drunkenness cannot exempt from ordinary punishment in a case where legislation has decided that no regard should be paid to it in fixing the scale of punishment. On the other hand, a crime committed in drunkenness cannot be charged on the individual when it has been produced by means foreign to the will of the culprit; for example, if he has been made to drink what he believed would not intoxicate him, but into which some drug has been introduced which has that effect. It is therefore on these principles that the accused must be judged and sentenced."

He was condemned to the galleys for ten years, for having induced the commission of the crime by breaking the laws of the country, which expressly forbid the people, under severe penalties, to be drunk, and which ordain that homicide committed in drunkenness, even involuntarily, shall be severely punished, and shall even be regarded as less excusable than that crime which results from imprudence.*

Had the doctrine of hallucinations and illusions been better understood at the period and in the country where this event took place, and had the power of those phenomena accompanying drunkenness been better appreciated, the sentence would probably have been less severe.†

The superficial observer has much difficulty in finding the key to a great number of actions which appear incomprehensible. The circle is still more contracted to philosophers and moralists; but to the eyes of the physician, the thick veil, behind which so many fancy themselves concealed, becomes transparent, and their faults, passions, vices, and moral and physical disorders, exhibit a natural explanation of their conduct. Thus, for example, to confine ourselves to our subject, hallucinations and illusions, better understood in our day, have given a reason for a number of inexplicable actions, attributed to depravity, bad propensities, and crimes.

Amongst cases of this nature, we have particularly directed attention to melancholy monomania combined with hallucinations. We have proved, by numerous and conclusive facts, the evidence of which has convinced magistrates, that many individuals who have passed as quarrelsome, hot-headed, and event as murderers, belong to this catalogue.*

* Eiscnhart, Relation de Proces remarquables, t. i. p. 25. Muller, Mede-cine legale, t. ii. p. 281.

† Convinced, as we are, that individuals really insane are condemned to painful and infamous punishments, we suggest that, in imitation of England, there should bo a special division for criminal madmen and vagrant madmen. Annal. d'Hygiene et de Medecine Legale, t. xxxiv.

The question of isolation is so intimately connected with our work that we must say a few words on the subject, although we have already touched on it in speaking of treatment. It is needless to repeat what we have before advanced; we will only add, that the hallucinated who are tempted to suicide, theft, incendiarism, murder, etc., should be sequestered. No proofs are required to point out the necessity of this measure. The same precaution should be taken against hallucinated monomaniacs who imagine themselves surrounded by enemies, as soon as they utter threats, because experience has demonstrated how instantaneously they are driven to acts of violence; but isolation should not be resorted to unless the hallucinations are of a serious character.

An interdiction can be claimed in cases of hallucination, when the delirium is such as to threaten ruin to the individual and his family; but this privation of civil rights cannot be exercised simply on account of a peculiar mode of living, singular conduct, strange words, or a belief in imaginary circumstances, which do not in any manner compromise the fortune of the individual, or expose him to become the dupe of intriguers.†

Amongst cases of this nature, we will mention a demand made by M. and Mad. D. for an act of lunacy against Madlle. D.: -