—— 
342 On Infanizy.. 
his progenitors, and why fhould he form 
2 different eltimate of his own? If, there- 
fore, he inherits wealth, he is proud of 
that wealth, If he inherits only the title 
and memory of paft opulence, he is mor- 
tified by the contraft between his name and 
his circumftances 3; and feels no neceffity 
fo urgent, as that of retrieving the honour, 
that is, the fortune of his family. To 
one whole prejudices preclude him from 
many of the moft ufeful and honeft ways 
of gaining a fortune, fuch an impreffion 
mu(t often be the caufe of hurtful and dif- 
honourable expedients. And, in fact, 
none have in all countries been fo fyftema- 
tically hoftile to the liberties and rights of 
their {ellow-fubje@ts, as the brood of in- 
digent nobility, who feem to think them- 
- felves unjuftly treated by the community, 
as long as their revenues are inadequate to 
the expectations of their birth. 
To revert to the queftion propofed as 
the object of enquiry,—TI conceive it to 
be the true nature of family pride, to in- 
ftitute an eftimate of perfonal value, ef- 
fentially founded upon fuperiority of 
wealth, and recurring to fuch a fuperio- 
rity for its fupport. It cannot, therefore, 
be relied upon as a folid principle for the 
elevation of the character. It may occa- 
' fionally prompt to great and noble a€tions, 
but there is no fecurity againft its in{piring 
pernicious and difgraceful ones. It is in- 
gcrior in worth, not only to genuine mo- 
rality, but to.a regard for the conmmon good 
epinron of mankind, which implies a fenfe 
of community of fentiment and intereft; 
whereas family-pride is a fecluding and 
diffociating principle. 
; SS 
$0 the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
“YN this fhort paper it is not intended, 
i it would almoit indeed be impoffible, 
to give any thing like a complete view of 
fo difficult and fo comprehenfive a fubje& 
as Mania. It will only be therefore upon 
fome parts of it, that appear to me par- 
ticularly interefting, that I fhall venture 
to make a few obfervations. 
There is {carcely any tafk fo dificult as 
that of defining wiih precifion. Amongtt 
’ the almoft infinite number of definitions 
which have been given of infanity, there 
1s HO one perhaps which may not be con- 
Gdered as liable to objection. | Thofe 
writers, for inftance, who have regarded 
it as confifting in az error of judgment, or 
in condué? that.is in of pofiticn to its didtates, 
may be charged with invol\ ing in the clafs 
of maniacs the whole race ot mankind: 
To others who have reprefented this dif 
By Dr. Reid. [May 1, 
eafe as depending upon uncommon affocia- 
tions of ideas, it may be objected, that 
from the infinite variety of education and 
accidental circumftances, there is not a 
fingle individual who has not many affoci- 
ations that are peculiar to himfelf. 
The maniac has, in the writings of 
fome, been characterized as’ a perfon, 
whole emotions are difproportionate to the 
value of their oljeés. 
But againft this definition it may be 
ftated, that there is no ftandard by which 
we can afcertaia the value of any obje&,. 
but the fentiment which it excites ;— and 
that, in fact, we perceive an aftonifhing 
variety of opinion upon this fubject. The 
mifer, for infiance, looks upen the lover 
as infane; and the lover, with at leaft an 
equal propriety, retorts the charge upon 
the miler. 
Falfe perceptions of external objeés have 
been jaid to conititute infanity—an opi- 
nion obvioufly érroneous, fince many cafes 
are there decidedly maniacal, in which 
this circumftance is not found to occur. 
Befides, thefe falfe perceptions originate 
moft frequently from fome fault in one of 
the external organs of fenie. . 
A definition of infanity lefs, perhaps, 
excepticnable than any I have as yet no- 
ticed, is that which makes it to confiff, in 
a lofs of the power af the wll over the at- 
tention. But even this feems not to be 
perfectly free from objection. Since a 
temporary failure of the voluntary power, 
over the current of thought occurs not 
unfrequently, without its being accompa- 
nied by any other fymptom of intellectual 
derangement. B 
Although it appears that no one of the 
circumftances which have been taken no- 
tice of, can, when occurring by itfelf, be 
Rridily regarded as conftituting infanity ; 
yet a perfon in whofe mind all or moft of 
them are united in any confiderable degree, 
we may, without {cruple, pronounce to be 
afflicted with this difeafe. Prefumptuous 
it might appear for me, to aim at a pre- 
cifion that has not been attained by the 
moft able writers upon the fubjeét; with- 
out, therefore, faying more upon the de- 
finition of mania, I fhall proceed to a 
confideration of fome of thofe caufes which 
have betn found moft frequently to in- 
duce att. 4 i 
By nearly every writer upon the fubject 
of infanity it has been oblerved, that there 
is.no circumftance which more frequently 
produces it, than the habitual and immo- 
derate ufe of inebriating liquors. That fuch 
mutt be their tendency, will appear evident 
from the following confiderations. 
: Fhe 
