226 INSANITY. 



subject is one so beset with metaphysical and verbal 

 subtleties, that it is hard to find firm ground to stand 

 upon ; and the only suggestion which can be offered is 

 that of eschewing all formal definitions, and connecting 

 the question of sanity or insanity in each particular 

 case, as far as possible, with some specific practical 

 test. 



But, deal with the matter as we will, the difficulties 

 are great, and explain, if they do not vindicate, the 

 frequent contradictions noted in medical evidence upon 

 insanity. The intellectual character of the witness 

 himself becomes an element in the question. Aberra- 

 tions of mind such especially as arise from excess or 

 deficiency of natural faculties and feelings are dif- 

 ferently seen and construed by different men, according 

 to their own temperament and several capacities for 

 observation. My experience furnishes me with many 

 examples to this effect. 



One of the best as well as simplest tests of insanity 

 is the inversion of some distinct habit of feeling or 

 action, strikingly marked in the previous character of 

 the individual ; the more sudden and complete this in- 

 version^ the stronger the evidence of unsound mind. 

 Such proof can only occasionally be had, since insanity 

 shows itself more frequently as an excess or distortion 

 of some wonted habit or feeling. But enquiry should 

 always be directed to this point. 



A question which in one form or other has hung 

 over any theory of insanity is its relation to the cere- 

 bral organisation. One opinion attributes all devia- 

 tions from what we call reason to changes in the 



