INSANITY AND CRIME. 581 



toad," and seemed to think this quite sufficient justification for 

 his conduct. 



While seventy towards criminals cannot be dispensed with, 

 and moral reprobation is a weighty instrument where the moral 

 sense exists in its objects and is not altogether blunted, to 

 feel hatred towards criminals seems to me utterly unworthy, 

 and to show that those who entertain it have yet much progress 

 to make. Between the hatred which Sir James Stephen 

 justifies and the majestic serenity of the mind which, while 

 detesting crime, can still regard the criminal as an erring and 

 deeply unfortunate brother, the gulf is wide indeed. Can we 

 doubt which is the most worthy of a high moral nature, and 

 of a truly strong character ? 



There are other aspects of my subject which cannot be 

 dealt with in the limits of this paper. But I wish to draw 

 your attention to some remarks made by Mr. Justice Bundey 

 in a paper recently read by him before the Adelaide branch 

 of the Australian Natives' Association. His Honor's expe- 

 rience has led him to the conclusion in many cases where 

 men are guilty of certain class of offence the act is one of 

 the first open indications of insanity, and that the Hoggings 

 and imprisonment to which they are subjected are under the 

 circumstances not useless and unjustifiable. Dr. Strachan, 

 in a paper read before the British Association for the 

 Advancement of Science, about the same time as Mr. Justice 

 Bundey 's was read in Adelaide, expresses the opinion that 

 the ordinary punishment of a great many criminals in 

 England is absolutely useless as a preventive measure. He 

 shows that a very large proportion (I have not the figures at 

 hand) of the criminal class are convicted over and over again 

 without the slightest deteri'ent effect, and holds that many of 

 the offenders are more or less insane. He suggests special 

 treatment in special institutions. Even if this resulted in 

 lifelong imprisonment, in many cases it would appear to be 

 more in accordance with rational principles than the course 

 now adopted. It does not follow from the fact of insanity in 

 any person that no punishment at all should be administered. 

 Sir James Stephen suggests that juries should have the power 

 of returning a verdict of " Guilty, but his power of self- 

 control was diminished by insanity," and that a person so 

 found guilty should in cases of murder be sentenced to penal 

 servitude for life, or not less than say 14 years, and, in cases 

 not capital, to any punishment which might be inflicted upon a 

 sane man. He certainly does not err upon the side of mercy, 



