[Frpm the American Journal of Insanity, for July, 1878.] 
TRUE AND FALSE EXPERTS. 
EUGENE GRISSOM, M. D., LL. 8., 
Superintendent Insane Asylum of Worth Carolina, Raleigh, 
TO WHICH IS APPENDED 
A REJOINDER 
TO 
DR. HAMMOND’S “OPEN LETTER,” 
WITH A 
POSTSCRIPT. 
John Nichols, Printer, Raleigh, N. C. True artel fihlse lyxpeftsT 
EUGENE GRISSOM, M. D., LL. D., 
Superintendent Insane Asylum for North Carolina, Raleigh;^ 
The full recognition of the harmony that should exist be- 
tween the claims of medical science and the demands of crim- 
inal law, is a social problem of the first magnitude. 
Notwithstanding the rich and varied literature, the mani- 
fold discussions, the numerous trials with their accompanying 
forensic display, that enter into the history of the struggle to 
secure substantial justice for the insane, or to defeat the pre- 
tences of the wicked, the subject is yet of no less interest than 
importance. It is of interest as are all the questions that 
involve the study of mankind by man; it is of importance as 
upon the conclusions hang the lives of so many fellow-beings. 
Although it has been so ably treated by members of this 
body, that their conclusions have modified the medical juris- 
prudence of more than one nation of the earth, the subject has 
yet a timely interest from the persistent efforts that have been 
made to turn back the hands upon the clock of time, and to 
return to ancient legal by-ways, long since abandoned for the 
open roads of scientific investigation established since the days 
of Coke and Blackstone. x* 
In modern times, insanity has been the subject of legal inves- 
tigation, when questions of capacity for the management of 
affairs, or the validity of wills, or of confinement to prevent 
injury to self or others were involved, but most frequently 
probably when offered as a bar to punishment by criminal 
prosecution. 
It is the mutual relations of law and medicine in regard to 
* Read before the Association of American Superintendents, Washington 
D. C., May, 1878. 2 
the plea of irresponsibility in criminal offenses, and the con- 
nection of expert testimony therewith, that we venture to 
examine at this time, under the conviction that whatever 
remains unsettled and doubtful in the law itself, whatever is 
injurious and misleading in the administration of justice, 
demands a speedy correction as soon as recognized by the en- 
lightened sense of mankind. 
It should be remembered that the physician must be the friend 
of the insane, and humanity demands that we consider and 
reconsider the fearful trust of the lives and reputations of the 
afflicted, until we shall be able in the fullness of time, to reach 
conclusions whose influence for practical good will sooner or 
later be acknowledged, and the jurisprudence of a coming gen- 
eration adjust itself by an equity that shall have more of the 
divine element of Knowledge than the rude justice of the Past- 
Chief Justice Shaw, in the case of Rogers,* defined the prin- 
ciples of expert testimony with clearness in the following lan- 
guage : 
The rule of Law, on which this proof of the opinion of witnesses, who know 
nothing of the actual facts of the case is founded, is not peculiar to medical 
testimony, but is a general rule, applicable to all cases, where the question 
is one depending on skill and science, in any peculiar department. In gen- 
eral, it is the opinion of the jury which is to govern, and this is to be found 
upon the proof of the facts laid before them. 
But some questions lie beyond the scope of the observation and experi- 
ence of men in general, but are quite within the observatian and experience 
of those whose peculiar pursuits and profession, have brought that class of 
facts frequently and habitually under their consideration. Shipmasters 
and seamen have peculiar means of acquiring knowledge and experience, 
in whatever relates to seamanship and nautical skill. When, therefore, a 
question arises in a court of justice upon that subject, and certain facts are 
proved by other witnesses, a shipmaster may be asked his opinion as to the 
character of such facts. The same is true, in regard to any question of sci- 
ence, because persons conversant with such science have peculiar means, 
from a larger and more exact observation, and long experience in such de- 
partment of science, of drawing correct inferences from certain facts, either 
observed by themselves, or testified to by other witnesses. 
It is upon this ground that the opinions of witnesses who have long been 
conversant with Insanity in its various forms, and who have had the care 
and superintendence of insane persons, are received as competent evidence, 
even though they have not had opportunity to examine the particular pa- 
tient, and observe the symptoms and indications of disease, at the time of 
its supposed existence. 
* Journal of Insanity, Vol. I, p. 270. Trial of Rogers for the murder of 
Lincoln. Worden (Mass.) Prison, 1844. 3 
When such opinions come from persons of great experience, and in whose 
correctness and sobriety of judgment just confidence can be had, they are of 
great weight, and deserve the respectful consideration of a jury. One cau- 
tion, in regard to this point, it is proper to add, the professional witnesses 
are not to judge of the credit of other witnesses, or of the truth of the facts 
testified to by them. 
The attempt to follow the motives of a frightful deed of 
violence into the recesses of the mental structure of the man 
who has committed the act, and is arraigned at peril of life to 
answer for the outrage, is one of the most solemn of human 
inquiries. It is, indeed, a momentary search, as it were, for 
the gift of the Omniscient One, who alone reads the whole 
heart of man. It is a type of that day of judgment that 
Christian belief assigns as the most tragic scene in all the 
history of man. 
No living man can entirely project himself into the con- 
sciousness of another. Whatsoever deals with human conduct 
must walk among mysteries. Some anomalies in human ex- 
perience will forever wear the shroud of uncertainty. Whoso 
would track the labyrinth of the insane mind should have the 
light of experience for his feet, and the courage of a pure and 
honest heart. 
There was a period in history, not so very remote, when the 
recognition of insanity as the result of physical disease had not 
dawned upon awakening humanity and civilization. What has 
been called the “modern refinement” of expert testimony was 
unknown, and the arbiters of science as well as law sat upon 
benches red with innocent blood. 
There are those as we shall see, who would fain restore the 
good old days. It was but a hundred and twenty years ago, 
when Christendom witnessed the tortures of Robert Francois 
Damiens, who in a maniacal paroxysm, wounded Louis XY.* 
The merciful law burned his hand, tore his flesh with red-hot 
pincers, poured melted lead and sulphur into the wounds, and 
tore him apart with four horses, after many efforts, amid the 
jokes of the pitiful insane wretch.f 
* Jotjknau of Insanity, Vol. 111, p. 185. 
fFitzroy Helly, a counsellor of the English bar, has publicly declared in 
London, that the records of the Assizes show the execution of sixty persons 
during the present century, who are conceded to have been lunatics in the 
eye of the medical science of to-day. We should not unduly censure the cruelty of an age in which 
the ignorance of the dependence of human conduct upon the 
physical condition of the brain was so dense and profound. 
Tribunals, after all, are without inspiration; they can only pro- 
nounce a judgment based upon the general assent of the most 
intelligent members of society; nothing more—and when that 
intelligence is vivified and immensely enlarged by the wonder- 
ful scientific advance which the world has witnessed, falsehoods 
hoary with time fall away, and truth after truth will assert its 
dominion at last. 
Sir Yicary Gibbs,* Attorney General of England, declared, “ I 
say this upon the authority of the first sages in this country, and 
of the established law in all times, which law has never been 
questioned, that although a man be incapable of conducting his 
own affairs, he may still be answerable for his criminal acts, if 
he possess a mind capable of distinguishing right from wrong f 
Dr. Bell, in speaking of the case of Bellingham, reminds us 
that under this very rule, “ A man whom nobody now doubts 
to have been insane, committed his homicidal act on the 11th 
May, 1811, was tried, convicted, sentenced, executed, and his 
body placed on the dissecting table on the 18th; all within one 
week ! ” 
Has America no addition to the sombre record ? What of 
the condemnation of Cornell, whose sentence was commuted, 
that his insanity might convince the world, at Auburn; or Wil- 
cox, also condemned and afterwards insane in Clinton Prison ? 
What of the deaths upon the gallows, of Cook, at Schenectady; 
of Prescott, in New Hampshire; of Baker, in Kentucky; or of 
Maude, in New Jersey, a man who had actually been confined 
as a patient in an asylum, and escaped therefrom ? 
It is no wonder that as medical science convinced mankind 
that insanity was the result of disease, the nobler minds in the 
legal profession should demand the light of medical informa- 
tion in the midst of issues of such vast importance, in the effort 
to define such insanity as the law could admit, and to recognize 
its victims with the keen and trained faculties sharpened by 
scientific use. 
* Journal of Insanity, Vol. IV, p. 32. 5 
The successive dogmas adopted to limit and bound so intan- 
gible an effect as insanity are a twice told tale to the profes- 
sion, but it is noticeable that until within a recent period, there 
has been an earnest and continual endeavor to reconcile the 
claims of offended justice with those of an enlightened human- 
ity, step by step, as the light of science leads the way, approxi- 
mating justice and equity. 
As early as thirty-three years ago, some manly and almost 
prophetic declarations were made by the presiding judge, in 
the case of Klein,* for murder, Kew York Court of Oyer and 
Terminer. His Honor said: 
That it was by no means an easy matter to discover or define the line of 
demarkation where sanity ended and insanity began, and it very frequently 
occurred that a condition of mental aberration shaded off from a sound state 
of mind, so gradually and imperceptibly, that it was difficult for those most 
“expert” in the disease to detect or explain its beginning, extent or du- 
ration. And in this, as in other diseases of the human system, there was an 
infinite variety, so great indeed, as almost to justify the remark that no two 
cases were ever precisely alike. ****** 
The discoveries in the nature of the disease, and the improvements in the 
mode ot its treatment, had been so great in modern times, that it had be- 
come almost a distinct department of medical science, to which some prac- 
titioners devoted themselves almost exclusively. The opinions of such per- 
sons, especially when to their knowledge they added the experience of per- 
sonal care of the insane, could never be safely disregarded by courts and 
What is meant by “an insane person,” is now, and long has been a matter 
of great difficulty. At one time it was held by the courts to be only such an 
overthrow of the intellect, that the afflicted person must “ know no more 
than the brutes,”f to be exempt from responsibility. As science progressed, 
the rule has been extended in modern times, until it begins to comprehend 
within its saving influences, most of those, who by the visitation of disease 
are deprived of the power of self-government. Yet the law in its slow and 
cautious progress still lags far behind the advance of true knowledge. * * 
If some controlling disease was in truth the acting power within him, 
which he could not resist, or if he had not a sufficient use of his reason to 
control the passions which prompted the act complained of, he is not re- 
sponsible, but we must be sure not to be misled by a mere impulse of pas- 
sion, an idle, frantic humor, or unaccountable mode of action, but inquire 
whether it is an absolute dispossession of the free and natural agency of the 
human mind. ******** 
In order then to constitute a crime, a man must have memory and intelli- 
gence to know that the act he is about to commit is wrong, to remember and 
understand that if he commits the act he will be subject to punishment, and 
reason and will to enable him to compare and choose between the supposed 
advantage or gratification to be obtained by the criminal act, and the im- 
munity from punishment, which he will secure by abstaining from it. 
* Jouknai, of Insanity, Voi. 11, p. 262, Judge Edmonds, 
t Judge Tracy, 1723. 6 
If, on the other hand, he have not intelligence and capacity enough to 
have a criminal Intent and purpose, and if his moral or intellectual powers 
are either so deficient that he has not sufficient will, conscience, or control- 
ling mental power, or if through the overwhelming violence of mental dis- 
ease, his intellectual power is for the time obliterated, he is not a responsi- 
ble moral agent, and is not punishable for criminal acts. 
In proportion as the public sense accepted the fact that in- 
sanity was to be attributed to disease, and not to a psychical 
possession akin to the notion of witchcraft, that, alike from the 
general mind, was reflected also in the language of the law, in 
annals that are painful to dwell upon; so did the conviction 
the more fully fasten upon the legal mind that the technical 
facts of insanity must be developed for the jury by a skilled 
understanding, and it became absolutely essential to call in the 
aid of medical experts. This process is still going on. 
The following is from a review,* in the American Journal 
oe Insanity, on a valuable “Report on the Medical Jurispru- 
dence of Insanity,” by Prof. Coventry: 
Reforms of every kind are indeed slow in progress, not in being assented 
to in theory, but in being accepted and carried out. * * * The 
legal relations of insanity, and the responsibility for supposed crime are as 
uncertain and unsettled as in the time of Blackstone or Lord Coke. This is 
because so comparatively little of the great light shed upon the subject of 
mental disease, and its relations to human responsibility during the past 
century, has yet penetrated the popular understanding, and the dogmas and 
precedents of the courts. But though slow in their progress “reforms never 
go backwards.” 
While it will be acknowledged that some progress has been 
made since that period, and in a few States of the Union admi- 
rable changes effected in the modes of administration of the 
criminal law, the great truth yet remains of the lamentable 
need, over the country at large, for yet farther revision and re- 
adjustment of modes of proceeding with persons pleading in- 
sanity in bar of punishment for offenses. In a free and intel- 
ligent land, statutes will be enacted as an expression of delib- 
erate public opinion. How important, therefore, that public 
opinion should be impressed by those whose lives are given to 
the practical study of insanity. Unpleasant as some aspects 
of the struggle may be, the physicians of the insane cannot do 
their whole duty if they permit the noisy charlatan to fill the 
*Jouei«tal of Insanity, Yol. XV, p. 420. 7 
public ear with sensational falsehoods to please a mob athirst 
for something strange to feed upon; or even if they surrender 
this field to the theories of legal gentlemen, who, with admira- 
ble motives, have, by their very education and mental habits, 
become unfitted for the reception of truths discoverable in so 
experimental a science as medicine. 
What the status of the expert in insanity in courts of law, 
and before that court of last resort, public opinion, has been, 
is now, and should be, though often discussed, may still claim 
our careful consideration, inasmuch as its final settlement in- 
volves so much to the profession directly, and more to human- 
ity at large. 
We may fairly assume, that in cases of criminal accusation, 
what men desire is substantial justice. The legal effect of an 
act, should, in absolute equity, depend upon its moral quality. 
But the moral quality can only be approximately judged, and 
that by our knowledge of the natural history, so to speak, of 
the act. Knowledge must necessarily be supplemental in part 
by opinion. And the least possible room is left for a doubtful 
quantity, when every avenue of knowledge has been explored 
with a competent guide. 
The medical expert is in part a guide, as Dr, Reynolds has 
happily said, “he is one who knows ichat to look for, and why 
to search for it, as well as what to see.” 
I need not remind you that the most enlightened nations of 
the Continent have given large powers to medical experts. 
Thus, to avoid detail, we know that in France a preliminary 
step in the trial of the alleged insane is to submit him to the 
examination of a board of experts; and in Germany, medical 
experts are called upon to conduct an examination, in the pre- 
sence of a judge, and their opinion must be rendered with a 
written statement of the whole investigation. 
It is a familiar fact that the usual course of introduction of 
expert testimony in the courts, so far as insanity is concerned, 
is for the purpose of sustaining the position of counsel for the 
prosecution or the defense, as the case may ]?e, with the strange 
anomaly of a witness announcing the conclusions of a most 
recondite science, and straightway being cross-examined con- 
cerning the same, as though to demonstrate his ignorance or 8 
untruth, by a layman, presumed to be a stranger to the very 
science, of which the expert is supposed to have special knowl- 
edge. Nor is it altogether unknown, for the judge himself, 
after questions tending to intimate the unreality of medical 
knowledge to conclude with a charge to the jury, to stand by 
decisions whatever the consequences. And yet there was a 
period when the scientific world was as thoroughly convinced as 
to-day, that witchcraft was a monstrous delusion and still stare 
decisis from the lips of the great and good Sir Matthew Hale 
was the death knell of at least two poor women for sorcery. 
We cannot censure the upright judge who knew not his own 
wrong, but what can we say of a school of latter day philoso- 
phers who look back reverently to his dicta upon insanity of 
which he was equally ignorant, and who would persuade civil- 
ization and humanity to retrace their footsteps to the darkness 
of the past, amid the spectres of the innocent condemned ? 
And yet such men live not only among the mistaken devo- 
tees of legal precedent, but as we shall see. men who hide the 
Mephistopheles behind the cloak of the philosopher, and dif- 
fusing a subtle moral poison even through the fountains of the 
great daily press, would drug a Christian people into moral 
insensibility and practical atheism. 
The early history of the services of experts in insanity before 
American courts, is an honorable page in the literature of our 
profession. I need not remind you of the estimate humanity 
must accord to the labors of such men as Drs. Woodward, 
Bell,* Brigham, and others, who did so much to modify the 
expression of judicial opinion in regard to the proofs demanded 
to demonstrate the existence of insanity. I need not point you 
to the subsequent history of persons accused, especially in the 
trials as fully reported, occurring in the Eastern States, who 
were remanded to Insane Hospitals for care and treatment 
upon the evidence of these experts. 
And yet with so much of human experience recorded in the 
annals of the law, in regard to the value of medical testimony, 
Lord Campbell, from his lofty judicial seat, could say to three 
learned and respected physicians, “You may go home to your 
* Memoir of Dr. Bell, Joukstax. of Lnsaxity, Vol. XI, p. 114. 9 
patients and be more usefully employed there than you have 
been here.” This, it will be remembered, was in the Bain- 
bridge Will Case. 
And it is another of the legal anomalies remaining that in a 
number of States of this Union, to the present day, the testi- 
mony of non-experts* as to the mental condition of a prisoner 
is duly taken, if based upon personal observation. It is not 
matter of surprise that extraordinary results sometimes follow. 
The United States Courts permit the same. 
Let us note, that here at least, the rule should be modified, 
by which only the declaration of such acknowledged and noto- 
rious phenomena of insanity as are accepted Avithout question, 
with duly corroborating circumstances, should be received from 
such witnesses. Should not the force of such testimony be 
greatly restricted where there is appearance of doubt in the 
case, and should not its recognition by experts be demanded 
in such instance? 
In the comments on the case of Davenport,f for the murder 
of Wilson, Bennington, Yt., 1863, it is stated that the Court 
ruled “that medical witnesses can only be asked what certain 
facts admitted or supposed, tend to prove in respect to the men- 
tal condition of an accused party.” But as the writer well says: 
Neither substantial facts nor logical definitions can always describe a case 
of mental disease. As the opinion of an artist upon the genuineness of a pic- 
ture, and that of a ship-builder upon the sea-worthiness of a ship are lawfully 
taken because no scientific test is possible, so the judgment of an'expert in 
mental diseases should be freely admitted. 
It was by slow degrees that the position of the medical ex- 
pert came to be accurately apprehended, and development in 
this direction as we shall observe, is yet demanded by the jus- 
tice that shall approach nearest the sublime equity of our Maker, 
The London Medical Gazette (Nov. 28, 1851,) relates that: 
An application was made to the Lord Chancellor, last week, for the pay- 
ment out of a lunatic’s estate of a fee of fifty guineas to Dr. F. Winslow, for his 
examination and report on the condition of a lunatic. In refusing the ap- 
plication, the Lord Chancellor remarked—that in the present instance, as 
was likewise almost the invariable practice, the medical man had reported 
in favor of the views of those parties which had employed him. 
♦Dewitt vs. Daily and Schoonmaker (3 Smith, 310.) 
f Journal of Insanity, Yol. XX, p. 413. 10 
In regard to the basis of evidence properly receivable as 
such from the expert, we find in Beck’s Medical Jurisprudence, 
that the medical witness is cautioned: 
First. That his opinion must be based on the medical facts of the case. “It 
is not the province of the expert to draw inferences of fact fx-om the evidence, 
but to give his opinion on a known or hypothetical state of facts.” 
Second. Physicians are not allowed to give their opinions on the case as 
submitted to the jury. 
Third. Medical men are not usually allowed to quote the books of author- 
ity in their profession to fortify the opinions they have given in the case. 
The principle assigned by the bar to explain this exclusion 
of medical literature is, that nothing is evidence which is not 
sworn to. But it has been well remarked that much enters 
into a case that is not sworn to. Lawyers do not scruple to 
refer to medical works, and seek to entangle the expert amid 
seeming contradictions by questions intended to develop antag- 
onistic views on the part of the expert, to one or other leading 
authority upon insanity in regard to the nomenclature and the 
scientific appointment of language to define the various grades 
of mental alienation. Judges themselves not infrequently 
quote medical writers from the bench in the charge to the 
jury, in opposition it may be to the views of the expert, while 
denying him the advantage of the precision of language em- 
ployed by authors, to represent fairly his own views, to say 
nothing of the charm of the printed word and the ponderous 
volume upon the mind of the average juryman. 
In the case of the Queen vs. Frances, in London, 1849, Baron 
Alderson refused to allow a medical gentleman present in court, 
who had heard all the evidence, to testify to his opinion of the 
soundness of mind of the accused. He said: “The proper 
mode is to ask what are the symptoms of insanity, or to take 
particular facts and assuming them to be true, to ask whether 
they indicate insanity on the part of the prisoner.” Other- 
wise, it is really, he said, to substitute the witness for the jury. 
Sixteen years later we find the following opinion from the 
bench, in the charge of Judge Mellor,* in the case of Regina 
vs. Southey for the killing of his wife and child, 1865. The 
defense being insanity, and many facts having been sworn to, 
the Judge charged: 
* Journai. of Insanity, Yol. XXIII, p. 394. 11 
That every man was presumed to be sane until the contrary 
was shown, that the jury must not give themselves up to the 
medical testimony, but must exercise their common sense and 
judgment upon it. Some medical men had theories upon insan- 
ity, which if applied generally, would be fatal to society. The 
opinion of persons who had observed a man for months, was 
worth far more than that of those who went to see him once, 
for the very purpose of giving evidence that he was insane. It 
was not enough that some amount of insanity was shown. It 
must appear that the prisoner did not know that he was doing 
wrong. 
The natural conclusion perhaps followed this charge. The 
Judge succeeded as an advocate, and the accused was sen- 
tenced to death. i 
So also, as the writer to whom we have just referred re- 
ports, in Regina vs. Leigh, befoi-e Chief Justice Earle for the 
murder of Harriet Harton, February, 1866, the Judge charged; 
The question was, whether he was or was not responsible when he com- 
mitted the act—not whether he was not guilty, on the ground of insanity, 
that was an issue far too vague. * * * * The law, how- 
ever, did not say that when any degree of insanity existed, the party was 
not responsible, but that when he was in a state of mind to know the dis- 
tinction between right and wrong, and the nature of the act he committed, 
he was responsible. 
In striking contrast to these expressions, hear the voice of 
the lamented Griesinger, speaking of what some call partial 
insanity, “At what limits must it be said that a man is blind? 
Is it only when he can no longer perceive a ray of light? 
The unfortunate disposition to regard medical men as gov- 
erned by false sentiment, or imaginative fancies, at war with 
the best interests of society, may often be observed. So far has 
this feeling been manifested as to lead to the most fallacious 
reasoning, to the discredit of the bench. Thus, before the 
Judicial Society, we find Baron Bramwell declaring (Decem- 
ber, 1857,) that; 
The question to be discussed was not the relative amount of pity which we 
should feel for the sane or the insane, but how is the law to deal with the 
commission of an act which it prohibits? To solve this question, it is neces- 
sary to go back to the true theory of punishment, which is, that pain being 
in itself an evil, society has no right to inflict it upon an individual except 
for the purpose of preventing crime, by the fear of it on the individual pun- 
ished, and by the spectacle of it on the rest of the community. The certainty, 12 
therefore, with which punishment follows crime is of the last importance in 
teaching men to respect the law, and to obtain from breaking it; for since 
the law threatens all mankind, it would be a mere brutwm fulmen, if it did 
not also punish those who violate it. The madman, amongst others, is threa. 
tened by the law, why then should he escape if he infringes the law; and 
why destroy that certainty of punishment following crime which is the very 
essence of its preventive power? For his part, he could conceive an argu- 
ment being maintained to show that even idiots should be punished when 
they break the law ; but in such an opinion, if held by any one, he did not 
share. If you do not punish the madman, you hold out a premium to the 
commission of crime; for every man would calculate that he would be for- 
tunate enough to escape by some one proving that he was mad, on the same 
principle as that on which people lead a forlorn hope, or put into a lottery, 
not calculating the chances against them, but trusting that they will be the 
fortunate ones to survive, or to win the prize. 
Of such tenets held by the learned Judge, it was well m 
marked: 
That the legal profession generally, and especially the judges, have so lit- 
tle practical acquaintance with insanity, that their minds are absolutely 
unable to comprehend vast truths which are familiar enough to medical 
men. Examinations in courts of justice are peculiarly unfavorable to the 
diffusion of just ideas on these matters, and the medical witness consequent- 
ly gives his testimony amidst an amount of prejudice, arising from igno- 
rance, which is too often fatal to the best interests of humanity and justice. 
The natural responsibility of the position of a medical expert 
is heightened by the imperfect systems existing, whereby the 
physician is often hurriedly called to give an opinion based 
upon miscellaneous facts, gathered by laymen, with slight op- 
portunity for observation of the accused, with the forlorn hope 
that he may confirm or refute a plea, offered at the last mo- 
ment, or during the very progress of the trial for the first time. 
Surely this procedure is unworthy of that degree of civilization 
which our country has reached. If, as we know, one or two 
States have sought out a better way, it is time that the efforts 
of physicians, who have the especial charge of the insane, 
should arouse public sentiment to the urgent need of progress 
throughout our entire country. 
It has been well said by Dr. Chipley,* in speaking of the 
medical witness: 
It is an embarrassing position, not willingly assumed by intelligent medi- 
cal men. In fact, it is a matter of notoriety that physicians avoid a sum- 
mons in such cases by every means in their power; when they would not 
shrink from the discharge of their duty, if allowed an opportunity to analyze 
the case as they are daily doing in regard to other diseases. 
* Journal of Insanity, Vol. XVII, p. 302. 13 
They are required to pronounce an opinion which may involve the life of 
the prisoner on the one hand, or interfere with the just administration of 
the law on the other, on data, which in ordinary practice, would not author- 
ize a diagnosis in any case of disease, or justify the administration of the 
simplest remedies. 
But whatever may be the difficulties that surround us, it is 
unhesitatingly our duty to apply such powers as we possess to 
the solution of the question presented. We dare not turn our 
backs to this appeal, because the dearest interests of the insane 
are involved on the one hand, and the sacred bulwarks that 
encircle society He exposed to outrage on the other. How 
shall we gird our loins for the task ? 
First, since, when the true mental attitude of the expert is 
understood, he will be really recognized as upon the one issue, 
a virtual judge, we should cultivate a calm and impartial frame 
of mind, in addressing ourselves to the inquiry before us. This 
is a duty, the importance and solemnity of which it is impos- 
sible to exaggerate. The expert should follow neither in the 
train of the prosecution or the defense. Too long lias science, 
bearing the rich fruits of experience and skill, been dragged 
as a slavish trophy behind the conqueror’s chariot in the legal 
struggle. 
We should demand the enactment of statutes remanding to 
a commission of experts the examination of the accused, that 
the plea of lunacy may be disposed of, when presented, before 
issue is joined or trial begun. Compensation for this service 
should be made by the State only. And it may well be claimed 
that the observation of the commission should extend through 
such a period of residence in an insane hospital, as will supply 
ample data for exact conclusions. To this might be wisely 
added, the visits and observations of a physician especially 
sent by the defense to co-operate with the commission. 
But while we are waiting to secure the passage of laws retain- 
ing the valuable features of the statutes of New York or of 
Maine, the medical expert can at least frankly assure the coun- 
sel, in the case of hurried consultations, that he must testify 
from a knowledge of all the facts attainable, and that if import- 
ant facts are developed, previously withheld from him, that 
his views must be readjusted to the whole truth. Indeed, we 
should labor to place the expert in the position of amicus curice. 14 
I need not remind you with what care we should seek the 
history of the accused, what has been his parentage, education, 
and physical habits, whether there has been recognized any 
great physical or moral change in the man; and if so, whether 
sudden or gradual, what is his organic condition, and whether 
trophic degeneration of any character is discoverable, whether 
hereditary influences indicate hysteria, chorea, epilepsy, syphi- 
litic diathesis, or other profound disturbance of the nerve cen- 
ters; what inconsistencies of opinion are in sharp contrast with 
his usual course of belief, whether there is inordinate grandeur 
attributed to his personal abilities or interests, whether the 
bodily functions are performed with regularity, and he enjoys 
natural sleep, and whether there is that due accord of mental 
and physical manifestations which long experience has shown 
to be in appropriate relation to each other in the several forms 
by which insanity has been recognized, and by which there 
have been efforts at its classification. We are to avoid the sub- 
stitution of names for realities. “Test every case by its symp- 
toms,” is the very axiom to be dwelt upon by the medical mind. 
This is abhorrent to the legal profession who can not under- 
stand the belief of the physician, that within certain limits 
every case is a law unto itself. 
One of the primary demands, therefore, on the witness-stand, 
is a classification from the expert, of the forms of insanity, and 
nosological distinctions once obtained, the forensic struggle is 
made to show that the expert has failed when drawing his 
lines, “to divide a hair twixt south and south-west side,” or 
to triumphantly show that the accused may not belong to the 
special division, in which with some reservation, the expert 
may have unwarily assigned him. 
It would not be profitable here to enter into the long stand- 
ing questions concerning the forms of insanity, nor can it be 
conceived that it is the special province of the expert to enter 
into such dissertations before a jury, any more, than if a sur- 
geon were asked concerning the existence of disease of the 
heart of a certain character or of locomoter ataxy, it would be 
proper to enter into obscure theories of causation. It is enough 
that he can affirm the existence of a prolonged departure from 
ordinary human conduct, whether it appear to his mind to be 15 
primarily cine to intellectual aberration, or to the deprivation 
of natural affections and emotions, or to inability to use the 
will in accordance with the dictates of the intellect and the 
control of the moral sentiments, or to impairment of the 
mutual counter-play of all those powers of the mind. 
Is it not true that wre are to fix our minds upon results, to 
look narrowly for physical symptoms of physical changes, 
whether those changes proceed from what may be commonly 
termed moral causes, or otherwise ? The existence of the insane 
condition is the fact in question, and not wdiat authors, or phy- 
sicians, or lawyers, may have fancied to constitute ideal insan- 
ity, but the insanity of the individual under investigation—that 
exceptional condition which marks him as an unfit person upon 
whom to inflict the penalties designed for actions involving 
the conscious and willful violation of the rights, of others. 
Whether, indeed, we may believe with Dr. Gray and many 
other distinguished alienists, that no case of moral imbecility 
exists without some deprivation of intellect and reason, whether 
immediately observable or not; whether we are ready to accept 
the conclusion of our honored President, Dr. Nichols, whose 
eminent services to the insane were rendered for a quarter of 
a century in this Capital of our country, when he says: “It 
is evident to my mind that cases of insanity have run on for 
years, under the observation of competent men, without the 
discovery of any intellectual lesion whatever;” whether we 
may agree with the late lamented Dr. Landor, in more exten- 
sive views, when he says: 
Daily experience shows abundantly that a man or woman may be imbe- 
cile morally, from cerebral disorder or disease, and yet have great intellec- 
tual or even high logical powers. There are many who being thus diseased 
mentally, drink to drunkenness, are lascivious, lie, steal, are obscene, homi- 
cidal and malicious, in spite of a knowledge of right and wrong, and even 
with reasoning powers little or at all affected, and whatever the law may 
decide, the inexorable logic of facts will hold its own.” 
Or whether again we accept the views of Dr, Walker, who 
declares that, “when the will is overborne, the intellect is dis- 
turbed. You may call it ‘impairment,’ ‘ disturbance,’ ‘ excite- 
ment,’ or what not, when the will is gone, the individual is 
gone;” we say, that whether our belief coincides with any of 
these, is, after all, not of such transcendent importance in a 16 
practical point of view, not at least to the extent that such 
divergences of belief are pictured in the psychology of the 
gentlemen of the bar. 
It will surely be conceded that the typical examples alleged, 
of emotional insanity, leave at least a strong suspicion of latent 
weakness in primary or purely intellectual cerebration, often 
confirmed by the later history of absolute delusion with mania 
and resultant dementia. On the contrary, it will hardly be 
disputed, that in general paresis there may be a prolonged 
early stage, in which, while the emotions and feelings that ele- 
vate man above the brute, seem palsied and destroyed; yet 
bodily vigor is great and the reason apparently acute. And 
still again, it may not be easy to show, a priori, that the men- 
tal dynamic force which we denominate the will, may not be 
irresistibly set in action by the consentaneous work of passions, 
with or without the cognition of the dictates of reason. 
So that to wander at all into psychology is, for the expert, 
an abandonment of the safe middle-ground, from which he 
pronounces an individual sane or insane, from the judgment 
derived by his experience, from physical indications, and well 
ascertained history, and yet again from a recognition, which 
long familiarity with the insane may give, but which can no 
more be formulated in identifying dicta, for cross-examination, 
than we can explain the recognition of an animal or any article 
of daily use among many similar thereto, without a possibility 
of defining that which makes it different to us, by accurate 
description. 
Prof. Meyer,* of Gottingen, has well said, in connection with 
the identification of insanity, that: 
To judge this affection, the physician is satisfied with a series of symptoms, 
which his experience has taught him to consider characteristic of insanity, 
in their mutual relation, in their connection, without his being able to give 
a sharp definition of the number arid meaning of symptoms. 
The law takes insanity, or the irresponsibility dependent upon it, as being 
proved only when the result or the manner of thinking is entirely abnormal; 
when lively illusions are indicated, and the condition is one of complete 
confusion. The accused therefore will suffer the penalty of the law, if his 
thoughts do not differ from the common run, if he talks with tolerable co- 
herence, if he knows his way of action to be criminal and deserving of pun- 
ishment. Yetit is a fact to be proved, even by laymen, that many of the in- 
* Journal of Insanity, Yol. XXVII, p. 419. 17 
mates of our asylums, when subjected to the same ordeal, would be perfectly 
responsible persons within the meaning of the lawT. 
He points out with clearness, the often in that first onset of 
mania, the intellect still powerful, struggles with the morbid 
influence, and thus the mental conflict ensues, which to the 
world seems the height of madness, but in its onward progress, 
and with the intellect breaking down in anticipation of ap- 
proaching dementia, and under such remedies as may serve to 
calm physical agitation, an appearance of coherence is again 
restored, and there is a simulation of action of a truly intel- 
lectual character. But this, he affirms is unreal—the fact is 
that these actions are more or less automatic of previous mani- 
festations, and are not the outgrowth of original thought or of 
determination guided by a will influenced normally by the 
intellect. There is no power of originating. He says: 
The whole doctrine of morals and ethics, the tenets of the Christian cate- 
chism may be found with the insane in their accustomed connection, like 
the stamp of an ancient coinage, but their ideas are not the product of think- 
ing; their actions not the effect of free will; they are mixed at times with 
delusions, but reproductions from their former mental lives. 
Whether we assent entirely to these propositions, they con- 
tain matter of reflection. 
If we may be pardoned for digression to a subject too vast 
for consideration in a paper like this, may v e not fairly sug- 
gest in leaving this topic, that less stress upon names and divi- 
sions, less warmth of adherence to favorite authorities, and a 
more thoroughly catholic disposition of mind, and courteous 
acceptance of non-essentials, by medical experts, who may 
equally recognize the presence of insanity, but by different 
lines of belief, may tend to good, by its impression upon the 
bar, the bench and public opinion; that, after all, the facts are 
too solemn, and demand too much sincerity and earnestness of 
mind, to allow room for speculations upon the particular chan- 
nel by which they occur. 
Yet the medical expert cannot be guiltless if he fail to ac- 
quaint himself with the revelations of the most advanced think- 
ers and laborers of the profession. Would any toxicologist of 
the present day be justified in appealing to the rude tests of a 
hundred, nay, of fifty years ago, in regard to the detection of 18 
poisons? Have we not seen what will become of such mistakes ? 
Chemical science grows and its growth is formally accepted 
and acted upon by the courts. Why not medical science too, 
and that most exquisite branch which weighs in imponderable 
scales the capacity of a fellow creature to fulfill the demands 
of society. 
One of the singular anomalies of criminal procedure, is the 
denial of the right of the expert to express an opinion in the 
hearing of the jury upon the facts as proved before the court. 
But the counsel upon either side may frame hypothetical ques- 
tions, containing as many half-truths as possible, only with 
phases reversed, omitting what they please, and perhaps, join- 
ing inference and implication to actual evidence, and may 
demand a categorical answer, which may require Yes and JSFo 
to be said of the same individual, with a cross-examination to 
follow, the whole to be concluded by an appeal to the jury to 
perform the mental acrobatic feat with safety, of resting their 
conclusions upon whatever they may gather from each* side 
that bears the semblance of certainty. 
It is to be regarded as fortunate that there is now a disposi- 
tion on the part of some judges to permit the expert to declare 
his opinion, from the entire burden of the testimony. It is at 
least an advance, when facts and not fiction form the basis of 
opinion. 
It must be remembered that the opinion of an expert who is 
truly such, is more than a dictum—it approaches the dignity 
of a judgment, so far as the particular plea of insanity is con- 
cerned. True, there should be great caution that the witness 
is truly qualified. That he be a physician is not enough, for not 
all physicians are experts in every branch of medicine. That 
he has had opportunities for observing insanity is not sufficient, 
for such opportunities may not have been improved. In Page 
vs, Parler, N. H. Reports, 59,* the Court well said that it must 
be shown “ at least that they have superior actual skill or scien- 
tific knowledge, in relation to the question, before their opin- 
ions can be competent.” 
But when fairly acknowledged and respected as an expert 
in insanity, what, after all, is the opinion of the alienist, so 
* Quoted in Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, July, 1877, p. 478. 19 
objected to? It is a declaration of what he esteems a central 
fact, appealing to his consciousness for an existence, because of 
the union of analogies from many minor facts. These can be 
taken as a whole, and weighed at once by the educated mental 
grasp of the expert, but can not be apprehended by a mind un- 
fitted to gather and associate the many elements of one truth. 
What is the universally accepted fact of the law of gravity 
but an expression of acquiescence in the scientific opinion of 
Newton, that only in that manner could the many motions of 
natural objects be susceptible of explanation ? 
A shipbuilder may declare that a bolt of a certain size is 
weak, that a beam of a certain character is unsound, that con- 
struction upon such and such lines is faulty, but it is from his 
knowledge intimate and accurate of the bearing of all such 
facts, taken together to constitute another and the central one, 
that he boldly aftirms the unseaworthiness of a vessel. 
If it be asserted that another builder is of a different opin- 
ion, it becomes a question of the weight of their several testi- 
monies, and preponderating experience must govern; but sure- 
ly, not the crude views of a jury, composed perhaps of men, 
who may have no knowledge whatever concerning the archi- 
tecture of a ship. * 
But if we have justly portrayed the strength and the pro- 
found moral dignity accompanying the careful declaration of 
an expert, after cautious investigation, where human life and 
high honorable repute hang in the balance, what language can 
characterize the rash intruder who pla}’s with such fearful is- 
sues without knowledge, or the trafficker in human misery who 
sells his opinions for gold ? 
In olden time only the vestals robed in perpetual purity could 
keep alive the sacred fires, and profanation of their vows was 
punished by burial alive. What burial of public contempt 
could be too deep for the man who should prostitute science in 
the market, and smother her pure light under his greed for pelf ? 
Such a man would be the Benedict Arnold of his profession— 
such a man, we say it reverently, would be a Judas Iscariot to 
humanity, selling the blood of her children for thirty pieces of 
silver. 
Is it true that the former honorable record of testimony has been recently darkened by the conduct of men more wicked 
than the victims whom they judged, bringing unmerited dis- 
grace upon real alienists, and holding up the just claims of 
medical skill to the scorn of mankind? Difficult as it is to 
credit such depth of ignominy, we are told by the Managers 
of the New York State Lunatic Asylum, in a report not many 
years ago: 
It may not be amiss to observe that this matter of the testimony of ex- 
perts, especially in cases of alleged insanity, has gone to such an extrava- 
gance that it has really become of late years a profitable profession to be an 
expert witness, at the command of any party, and ready for any party for a 
sufficient and often an exhorbitant fee; thus destroying the real value of the 
testimony of unbiased experts. Vaunted and venal expertness is usually 
worthless evidence; and yet such testimony is getting to be in great demand. 
We denominate him a criminal who counterfeits the coin of 
his country, or who adulterates the food of the people. What 
shall be said of the poisoner of the fountains of Justice? The 
world hangs upon eloquent lips like those of a Curran or a Grat- 
tan that denounce the baseness of an informer who testifies 
against the guilty comrade to save his own unworthy life. But 
what language can fitly fasten that man in the pillory of uni- 
versal execration, who has bartered innocent blood over which 
the law gave him fearful power, at the bidding of jealous 
envies, and the lust of gold ? Such a man, if he exist, must 
have denied his God in impious atheism, else there were no 
refuge from remorse save in madness, that dread sanctuary 
which he has denied his wretched victims ! 
The case of David Montgomery* who killed his wife, while 
suffering from epileptic mania, is alas, yet fresh in your minds, 
and the admirable review of the expert testimony by Dr, 
Echeverria, than whom no man stands higher as an authority 
upon epilepsy in this country. 
On that trial a physician called to enlighten and instruct as 
an expert, asserted that, “it by no means follows that an indi- 
vidual suffering from epilepsy is not as fully responsible for 
his actions as healthy persons.” And again on being ques- 
tioned he declared “that not many cases of epilepsy are accom- 
panied with insanity or obvious mental deterioration.” Yet 
again he answers that, “ according to his experience, fifty per 
*.Journal of Insanity, Vol. XXIX, p. 347. 21 
cent, develop mental deterioration.” Little importance, be 
said, should be attached to the views of asylum physicians, on 
the subject of the responsibility of epileptics, because the epi- 
leptics in lunatic asylums are at the same time insane. 
He makes the surprising assertion that insanity with epi- 
lepsy, is a very different thing thing from the insanity which 
results from epilepsy. Whereas every one knows that epilepsy 
precedes the insanity, it being exceedingly rarely noted, if 
ever, that epilepsy is developed after or from the insanity. 
This very person gave the evidence upon which Reynolds 
was executed, although the poor wretch had an epileptic par- 
oxysm on the day of the homicide. Too late was the world 
horrified at the direct physical evidence of brain degeneration 
in this cruel case. Yet the supposed expert has handed the 
helpless accused over to the hangman, at the demand of the 
populace thirsting for blood. 
To stamp with additional infamy, the whole transaction, 
there was another so-called expert, who agreed and consented 
unto the death of Reynolds upon the gallows as a guilty man, 
yet who, on being asked when McFarland was tried for the kill- 
ing of Richardson, to describe a case in which insanity could 
exist without delusion, replied to the district attorney: “Take 
the case of Reynolds.* There was no delusion there; the man 
acted as a mere machine having no consciousness of his act, 
and when he comes to himself he has no recollection of what 
he may have done.” Why did not the recollection that he had 
declared the insane epileptic a free agent and delivered him to 
the hangman, rise within his soul, and drive him from the 
court-room with shame ? But no, alike with his partner in 
such science, they are now there at the command of the oppo- 
site side, and have changed their views of insanity. 
But to return to the man who has done so much to debauch 
the course of justice, the records of the court in the case of 
Montgomery show contradictions most violent in answering the 
prosecution, and again the cross-examination by the defense—- 
separated by a single night and an interview with the inter- 
ested counsel. 
*JOUENAL OF INSANITY, Vol. XXIV, p. 274. 22 
He delivered the following dicta, as expressions of scientific 
truth, the falsity of which has been shown by Echeverria, 
beyond possibility of contradiction: 
That patients committing acts of violence during epileptic mania, have 
apparently no motive unless it is a false one. 
That he has never known a case of an epileptic fit or seizure, where during 
the continuation of it, the party will be spoken to, will answer, and then 
relapse into the same condition, and being spoken to again, will answer and 
relapse again. 
That deliberation takes away the idea of an insane act. 
In temporary insanity from cerebral disturbance there is no disposition to 
resist the impulse, the person yields to it and strikes. 
When an epileptic has suffered from an attack, the mental disturbance 
continues frequently several days. 
This medley of contradictions prevailed to convict Mont- 
gomery. Although evidence was abundantly exhibited that 
Montgomery had paroxysms of epilepsy throughout the week 
before the homicide, and according to this expert himself, his 
delusions were the result of epilepsy, yet the opinion declared 
was, “ the circumstances of the affair are irreconcilable with 
the theory that the homicide was perpetrated during a par- 
oxysm or an accession of epileptic mania.” 
“Deliberation takes away the idea of an insane act.” This 
silly and ignorant pomposity, which any alienist would receive 
with a quiet smile of contempt, was a declaration sealing 
Montgomery’s conviction—for had he not confessed that he 
stood five minutes over his sleeping wife before he struck her, 
and then stooped to kiss her. 
What then shall be said, when this very expert, with heart 
of iron and forehead of brass, affirmed when testifying for the 
defense in the McFarland trial, and on the cross-examination, 
by the district attorney, that “ the insane are very persistent 
in their revenge. I have known insane men occupied with the 
idea of killing their keeper for years, and finally do it.” It 
will be remembered that the point of the application of this 
view, was that two witnesses had testified that McFarland had 
waited ten minutes in the Tribune office, behind the partition, 
looking for Richardson to appear, upon which he fired. 
The distinguished author from whom we have quoted, well 
says: 
If such assertions are to prevail, if insanity, whether it be of an epileptic, 
or any other nature, must preclude every attempt at design or premedita- 23 
tion, we may as well reject every other principle equally confirmed by every 
day’s observation of the insane, and by the numerous examples cited in the 
annals of insanity and medical jurisprudence in this country and abroad. 
Again, in order to convict Montgomery, this false expert 
declares, “when an epileptic has suffered from an attack, the 
mental disturbance continues, frequently several days.” 
But that Reynolds might not escape, he had affirmed on that 
trial the opposite opinion. “The disease (epileptic mania) is 
of remarkably short duration. There is not a case on record 
where it has lasted fifteen minutes.” So that on the strength 
of one opinion the latter was actually executed, and upon its 
opposite, the former was condemned, but by the merciful inter- 
position of the governor his life was spared. I need not remind 
you that he was placed in an asylum for the insane, and his life 
has demonstrated the correctness of such competent alienists 
as Drs. Gray, Cleveland, Ordronaux and others, when they 
pronounced him insane. 
It must be that a man so lost to conscience and honor, as to 
inflict almost irreparable damage upon the science of medical 
observation, must have speedily fallen into obscurity—power- 
less for farther evil. On the contrary, he publishes books, 
which are accepted in the medical world by a large and admir- 
ing clientage; books in which he walks among cases of rare 
affections as numerous as the soldiery of an army, and yet diag- 
noses with unerring certainty as with the magical wand of a 
Heller or a Wyman. He is the honored member of numerous 
medical societies, the Magnus Apollo of such as the Neurolog- 
ical Society of the metropolis of this country, and a Professor 
of Diseases of the Mind, in a most respectable university. He 
has the great dailies of the country under his command, and 
has waxed great, until he now appears as the philosopher who 
is to inaugurate social improvements, the medicolegal jurist, 
who will re-adjust criminal law, and relegate insanity from the 
list of misfortunes to appear in the catalogue of crimes. The 
alienists who are superintendents of the insane standing in the 
way of this giant, to whom Christianity itself, with all the pes- 
tilent theories of humanity is but a myth, are to be reformed 
out of existence, and the institutions administered under the 
new lights of such modern philosophy. 24 
What indeed are the restraints upon moral action, which to 
other men are sacred, to him who declares that, “ whenever 
there is grey nervous tissue in action, there is mind also,” and 
that, “of the mental faculties, perception and volition are 
seated in the spinal cord as well as in the cerebral ganglia;”* 
who asserts that there are two forces resulting from vitality— 
mind and animal electricity—who affirms that the brain 
secretes mind as the liver does bile.f 
Dr. Parsons has happily replied that the whole question turns 
upon what is mind. True, indeed, if the motions of a decapi- 
tated frog prove the existence of mind in his backbone, why 
not allow its possession to all animated nature, to the amoeba 
that feeds itself, to the endosmotic action in the life of plants ? 
Why stop with the grey matter only, in man? Why draw 
lines between mind and matter at all? 
How shallow is such latter day philosophy after all, when 
confronted with the facts of consciousness and the great phe- 
nomena of the world’s history. 
Strange that a man who contemptuously rejects the fact of 
any miraculous occurrence in the history of religion, and to 
whom, therefore, the Scriptures are a fable; who says that “sci- 
ence is truth,” “religion ” but faith in the truth, and, therefore, 
beneath the eternal verity of science, and who arrogantly de- 
nominates the belief which would give to the mind an existence 
independent of the nervous system, a “mere metaphysical and 
theological dogma;” strange, we say, that of all men, he has 
the presumption to teach reforms in the reconstruction of the 
criminal law, to secure safety to the morals of society, which 
his own doctrines would reduce to theological dreams. For if 
mind and bile are congeners, and man’s spirituality is a fiction, 
what is morality after all ? 
Yet this man has a code, so rigid, that scarcely may it be said 
that he would suffer a maniac to live. In his “Insanity in its 
Relation to Crime,” he compares the insane man who has com- 
mitted homicide to the wild beast, and the mad dog. The idea 
of justice in human law, is utterly ignored. He says: “What 
*“ The Brain not the Sole Organ of the Mind.” Hammond in Journal of 
Mental Diseases, January, 1876, p. 10. 
f Spiritualism and Allied Cases, &c., of Nervous Derangement, Hammond. 25 
society requires is protection, and it has no more business as 
such with abstract justice, than it has with any other bit of 
philosophy.” 
The safety of society is the only thing, he argues, to be con- 
sidered in the formation of the law, or in the punishment of the 
offender. He demands the punishment of the insane homicide, 
and cites as parallel cases the operation of the law of attainder, 
and the penalties inflicted for ignorant violation of law, seem- 
ingly unaware that the first is regarded as a hateful relic of the 
dark ages now obsolete, and the ignorant man might have in- 
formed himself, but that the insane is bound in pathological 
fetters, and is the helpless prisoner of misfortune. Such is his 
language: 
Looking at the matter therefore, from a similar point of view, no valid 
Argument can be adduced against the punishment of the in sane, even though 
they be morally irresponsible for their acts, by reason of deli rium, dementia, 
morbid impulse, emotional insanity, or any other form of mental aberration. 
To such wild assumptions, may we answer in the clear, cold, 
but just and logical expression of Balfour Browne, of the Eng- 
lish bar: 
The doctrine of all true educational or reformatory punishment is to pun- 
ish as long as the individual and class to which he belongs, and on whom 
the example will operate most powerfully as a deterrant, have capacity suf- 
ficient directly to concatenate the suffering with the offense, and to under- 
stand how they may avoid the commission of a like crime. Any infliction 
of punishment under circumstances other than those just alluded to, is not 
only inefficacious, hut tends to diminish the aggregate happiness of man- 
kind. and is to that extent a breach of the trust reposed in the government 
of the country. 
But the pretended expert and philosopher says: 
The individual who has sufficient intelligence to know that pointing a 
loaded pistol at a human being, cocking it and pulling the trigger, are acts 
which will cause the death of the person, against whom they are directed, 
should be subjected to the same punishment for a homicide as would be 
awarded for a like offense committed by a sane person. 
Indeed ! Does he think so as a philosopher pure and simple, 
so that like justice it is too abstract to be applied to the law, or 
does he think so, practically as an expert ? Then what motive 
could have annihilated such opinion and even stimulated his 
zeal to bring opthalmoscopes and dynamographs like Chinese 
artillery to bear upon the jury that McFarland might be set 26 
free, even though he could “cock a pistol,” and what induce- 
ment could have made him alike forswear his cherished opin- 
ion, to break the bonds of Cen’l Cole, although he too, “ could 
pull a trigger,” both “with a full knowledge of the conse- 
quences of the act.” 
It may be that an apology is due to my brethren for asking 
their consideration of a Bombastes Furioso of false experts. 
But in truth, he is the type of a reckless class of men who are 
attempting to control the medical and even the secular press 
of the country, and to poison the public mind until they shall 
have worked upon popular ignorance and passion, as they 
hope, to the destruction of the present system of providing for 
the insane in the United States. As individuals they are insig- 
nificant, but wild and unreasoning waves of feeling sometimes 
arise in this country, and sweep with the velocity of our own 
prairie fires. How have we seen juries first acquitting, then 
convicting all supposed criminals under such daily goadings 
from the press. In fact, the natural conversation of widely dif- 
fering and separated masses of men throughout a great territory 
like ours, as an important factor in the social problem, has al- 
most disappeared under the rapid spread of consentaneous sen- 
timent, by modern modes of publication, aided by the telegraph. 
These modern Spartans who would sacrifice the weaker mem- 
bers of society, and consign the insane to the fate of the wild 
beasts, just as the defoi-med child was flung from Laconian 
cliffs, are not without the cunning so admired as a virtue by 
their ancient prototypes. First would they destroy, in order 
to rebuild. If such delusions can be made to possess medical 
men, in the center of intelligence and refinement, what may 
not a Titus Oates accomplish as he fills the credulous ear of 
the mob with his imaginations and inventions? 
Has he not entered the Capital, whence he was once driven 
with the brand of ignominy after having occupied the highest 
medical seat of honor in the gift of the country, but occupied, 
as his superior declared, only to listen to base music rather than 
the groans and dying plaints of his thousands of country-men in 
the agonies of mortal strife ? Has he not cajoled even Congress 
to strive to wipe away that stain, when a new generation has 
forgotten the wrongs of the old ? Does not this great moral 27 
reformer, without a belief in a Divine Master anti a system of 
Christian morals, this judge of men’s actions, to whom their 
conduct after all has no more of guiding spiritual motive, than 
the contortions of a frog, hold a magic ring, whereby the great 
magician of the New York Herald becomes his obedient hench- 
man ? Not the least extraordinary indeed of the powers of 
this Cardiff Giant is his ability to hoax a great metropolitan 
educative power like the Herald. What sublimity of audacity 
to dictate an editorial like that of the 23d March last: 
Thus within a short period a measure of personal restraint has been intro- 
duced which equals in horror anything used in asylums before Pinel and 
Conolly undertook their reformation, and in which a wild beast could not 
be humanely confined. This is a crib, made after the pattern of a child’s 
crib, but with a barred lid to it. 
We have farther a harrowing description of this newly inven- 
ted engine of torture, with a declaration that restraint is not 
allowed in Great Britain at all, and that there the asylum super- 
intendent who should put one of his patients into a crib would 
lose his position in twenty-four hours, if he did not incur more 
severe punishment, and closing with the exclamation: 
Let the asylums be Investigated. If they are in good condition and well 
managed, so much the better for those who control them. If they are as 
bad as they are said to be the sooner the public knows the fact, the sooner 
the proper remedy can be applied. 
Will it be believed that so complete has been this hoax upon 
the Herald, that it is seemingly unaware that the crib-bed or 
protection-bed was really introduced thirty-three years ago by 
the humane Aubanel of Marseilles, and that at this day its great 
value in certain cases is recognized by its use, even in the most 
extreme non-restraint asylums in Scotland ! How does it hap- 
pen that the Cagliostro of to-day, even with his wondrous ar- 
mory of drugs and stage properties, has so lulled the hundred 
eyes of the metropolitan Argus to unconscious slumber? 
But there is a side of this question of the existence of false 
experts, who impose upon the courts and the public mind, their 
presumption for learning, and their ignorance for discovery, 
which is too solemn for ridicule, too momentous for trifling or 
jest. It*is not that as we remember the victims already buried, 
that we see Draco reappear, with swift condemnation upon his 
lips, it is not that the scales of justice drip with blood from 28 
hands already dyed in gore, but that behind the black robe of 
the serai-judicial expert, may be heard a sound, more fearful 
than the groans of suffering humanity, more ominous than the 
click of loaded arms, a sound that chills the marrow as with 
the breathing of a fabled vampire—it is the clinch of money 
under the girdle. Now at last we shudder as we recognize 
that the false expert is no man at all, but a moral monster, 
whose baleful eyes glare with delusive light; whose bowels are 
but bags of gold, to feed which, spider-like, he casts his loath- 
some arms about a helpless prey. 
It can scarcely be needful to say, that the more investigation, 
and the more information for the people, the better will be the 
final result to the institutions for the insane. Let there be light 
freely radiated. Dr. Kirkbride has well urged that the study 
of insanity by physicians be encouraged, and its more thorough 
exposition in our medical colleges. But it is at least absurd that 
a captain who has sailed his vessel over many stormy seas, should 
know less of navigation than the junk-dealer who cuts up the 
hulk in port. It is not outside the ranks of those who have given 
their lives to the practical care and cure of insane men, that 
science will find her guides, and the law, that does not exclude 
equity from justice, her most honest and faithful co-laborer. 
The declaration of the committee of able men,* appointed by 
the legislature of Massachusetts to examine into the condition 
of the insane, in 1863, is only verified by length of experience; 
The interior management of hospitals, and the treatment of the insane can 
not be regulated by law. It would be.as absurd and futile to attempt by sta- 
tute, to regulate and control the minute and subtle details of mental hygiene 
and therapeutics in our hospitals, as it would be to legislate how physicians 
should treat fever, or how or when a surgeon should amputate in a case of 
gangrene; or even to place on the statute book, laws with penalties, for guid- 
ing the practice of a shipmaster when in peril of shipwreck, with hundreds 
of alarmed passengers dependent for safety on his free will, cool head, and 
skillful hand. The entire management and treatment of the insane must be 
confided to the humanity and skill of the superintendent. 
The profession of medicine can not prostrate itself to the pro- 
crustean bed of ancient legal prejudice, and as fast as truth is 
developed and acknowledged, so should the people be taught, 
until the statutes shall reflect the humanity and justice alike 
of a Christian nation. 
*Jouekal of Insanity, Vol. XXI, p. 263. APPENDIX 
To the Medical Profession : 
The foregoing paper was read at the late meeting of the 
Association of Medical Superintendents of American Institu- 
tions for the Insane, held at Washington, D. C., May, 1878. 
Its preparation was conceived purely in the interests of sci- 
ence, and the yet stronger claims of justice and humanity. 
The reader has the pages before him, in which an effort has 
been made to present a truthful and dispassionate review of 
the position assigned to medical experts testifying in relation 
to the mental condition of the alleged insane, in the past history 
of our courts. ' Some suggestions of changes in the manner of 
receiving expert evidence, and the collection of the same, with 
considerations of the weight that should attach to the unbiased 
declarations of a truly scientific physician of the insane, serv- 
ing as amicus curios, have been respectfully offered, to the end 
that the purposes of justice may be more effectively subserved 
than is possible under the present modes of legal investigation. 
It is, in fact, an appeal for a better and more direct approach 
to the truth, in so solemn an inquiry as an inquisition appointed 
by the law involving the fortune, the reputation, or the life of 
a fellow-being. 
No one can deprecate the entrance of unseemly strife within 
the peaceful walks of medical philosophy more than the writer. 
But a deep sense of duty to the unfortunate who have been 
wronged, and to the honor of the medical profession, made it 
imperative to lay the whole subject before the body of profes- 
sional alienists in America, and my brethren of the medical art. 
It was impossible to claim greater dignity for skilled medical 
testimony, to ask more freedom for expression of opinion by 
the expert who truly represents the conclusions of science, and 
to demand that an independent standpoint be accorded to him, 
rather than a continuance of the present practice of calling him 30 
to the assistance of counsel on either side; it was impossible, 
wre say, to urge this change in the interests of justice, without 
painfully acknowledging the reproach cast on medical wit- 
nesses under the present system, by ignorant pretendei’s and 
mercenary charlatans under the garb of scientific experts. 
The records of the courts show that a class of men exist, 
whose reckless and opposing opinions before uninformed juries 
of laymen, in accordance with the interests of the side which 
paid their fees, could have been inspired only by the lust of 
gain. The immediate duty, therefore, was to scourge the 
cheat from the shrine which Ids voice profaned, as in the lan- 
guage of the preceding pages: 
“But if we have justly portrayed the strength and the profound moral 
dignity accompanying the careful declaration of an expert, after cautious 
investigation, where human life and high and honorable repute hang in the 
balance, what language can characterize the rash intruder who plays with 
such fearful issues without knowledge, or the trafficker in human misery, 
who sells his opinions for gold. In olden time, only the vestals robed in per- 
petual purity could keep alive the sacred fires, and profanation of their vows 
was punished bylburial alive. What burial of public contempt could be too 
deep for the man who should prostitute science in the market and smother 
her pure light under his greed for pelf?” 
That such infamy absolutely existed among us, in this day 
of Christian civilization, it was needful to show, for as it was 
hard for the Roman law-giver to conceive the existence and 
provide for the punishment of a parricide, so is it not the less 
difficult for the true physician to realize that persons exist, and 
even rejoice in high places, who would sell science, humanity, 
their country, justice, nay, even pity, too, for jingling silver in 
their sordid palms. Therefore, from logical necessity, came 
the demonstration of this fact by the illustration presented in 
the history of a conspicuous man, who has \>e.en primus inter 
pares in this venal trade. Naturally he who has been the chief 
offender, and whose ill-gotten gains and strong personal influ- 
ence enable him to debauch the public press and gild his wick- 
edness before the world, is the proper person upon whom to 
invite the stern retribution of betrayed justice. It must be 
admitted that the task is repulsive, and no motive short of 
absolute duty could have inspired the writer to its performance. 
So far as the fate of the particular man is concerned, who serves 
as the illustration of the sad truth, it is a matter or indifference. He might have been Smith, or Jones, or Brown; he might 
have been John Doe or Richard Roe so far as the subject mat- 
ter is concerned. Personally, he was, and is, nothing. The 
writer never had the misfortune to meet him, nor have circum- 
stances in the remotest manner brought aboiit any personal 
antagonism whatever. It is tha principle, not the individual, 
that is at stake. His history was known by reason of the noto- 
riety that follows such names, and his existence was a fact that 
established the issue in question; namely, that the dangerous 
witnesses which we have denominated False Experts did infest 
the courts. Nor have I conceived it needful to use tender lan- 
guage in describing any witness whose ready opinions con- 
demned the innocent for money’s sake, as a Titus Oates, or in 
denominating the charlatan on a colossal scale, as another 
Cagliostro. 
Strange to say, the witness referred to is not content to re- 
main unheralded under the merciful silence which forbore to 
give his name to the public, although his history and charac- 
ter had long been appreciated by many of the most eminent 
physicians of the Union. Letters and telegrams and personal 
congratulations from many sections of the Union have assured 
the writer that this effort to cast off an opprobrium from the 
profession was understood and sympathized with by many of 
the noblest members of the profession, whose special practice 
and research lie in other departments of medical science, rather 
than in those of the alienist. 
Under the name of William A. Hammond, M. D., of New 
York, he has addressed the writer an “Open Letter,” which is 
a fit and appropriate production to emanate from such an 
author. Self-respect forbids that a man, capable of such a 
vituperative production, and whose personal and professional 
history are such as his is known to be, should be addressed by 
a gentleman, even in terms of hostile defiance. The shower, 
therefore, of personal abuse with which he wishes to conceal 
his own acts cannot receive the dignity of personal notice, nor 
shall the true status of the question at issue be thus artfully 
hidden. 
The writer’s words are for the honorable fraternity of medi- 
cine, regardless of the assaults of one whose misdeeds concern 32 
us directly only so far as they point a moral. What concerns 
the medical profession and all intelligent and honorable men 
are the following questions: 
Is it true that there are men who have debauched the course 
of criminal justice, by offering mercenary statements for impar- 
tial and scientific testimony, so that the regulations for the 
admission of expert evidence need modification ? 
Is Dr. Wm. A. Hammond, whose name was not called by me> 
such a man as has been described, and as the facts adverted to, 
in the several cases mentioned in the foregoing paper, indicate 
He has been solemnly impeached, before the bar of publu 
opinion. The impeachment is sustained by reference to the 
records of his shame. 
Has he denied the record ? Does he disprove the fearful 
facts? Does he even argue the possibility of his innocence? 
Nay, instead of addressing himself to the reason of an intel- 
ligent public, and appealing by argument against the justice of 
the impending sentence, which shall drive him from the pale 
of respectable association, he turns with ribald but impotent 
fury upon the writer, and insults decency, by threats and ex- 
ecrations and virtuperative abuse, just as some poor cur of the 
kennel spits venom at the hand which has whipped him back 
to his own place, lest he hurt again the unwary and innocent 
passer-by. 
There is an intimation couched in vulgar terms, in the course 
of Dr, Hammond’s pamphlet, that had he been present on the 
occasion of the delivery of the address upon “True and False 
Experts” that he would have resorted to personal and degrad- 
ing violence. Could anything add to the immeasurable scorn 
with which any gentleman, and I am sure ray esteemed readers, 
view this token of his underlying character, it would be, that 
he confines himself to a printed threat, at a distance of five 
hundred miles. I confess my inability to find language, and 
my distaste if such be found, to reply after such fashion, to 
one who so signally demonstrates his fitness for the title of 
Bombastes. For the rest, let him venture nearer with his 
threats, if he dare. 
Personal controversy is, however, not of interest to the pub- 
lic. The duty of the hour is to place facts before such mem- 33 
bers of the medical profession as may not be acquainted with 
the character of the individual referred to. This is needful, 
simply to establish the correctness of the position, that such 
persons are to be found as False Experts. 
So far as the connection of this witness is concerned with 
the cases of Cole, McFarland, Montgomery and Reynolds, as 
referred to in the preceding pages, the facts speak for them- 
selves, inasmuch as they exhibit him in the attitude of making 
general declarations of scientific dicta, of an exactly opposite 
character, in accordance with the interests of the side upon 
which he testifies as a paid expert. 
With the text of the paper upon expert testimony before 
the reader, and the explicit statements that convict Dr. Ham- 
mond of so high an offense against justice and humanity, as 
the offering of contradictory evidence, it would naturally be 
supposed that the “Open Letter” would at least present some 
sort of a refutation, if it were possible, of the fearful facts 
alleged, and would meet the issue with something at least of 
the courage that sometimes remains, when other virtues have 
departed. But no, indeed, readers of the “ Open Letter ” are 
gravely told that the sole cause of his offence was the expres- 
sion of his views, “ without the slightest personality, on the 
subject of mechanical restraint in Insane Asylums.” That such 
a declaration is absurd need not be dwelt upon; it is as if the 
burglar when arraigned, should defend himself upon the imag- 
inary charge of a solecism in good manners, or as if a forger 
should complain that his political opinions had been questioned 
by the prosecution. The professional alienists feel no concern 
at any attacks upon the present mode of treating the insane, 
and especially as to whether the restraint, which is the merci- 
ful privilege of the unfortunate maniac who has lost Nature’s 
own powers of restraint, should be in any particular case best 
exercised by manual, mechanical or moral means. If better 
modes can be suggested for the comfort and restoration of 
patients than any now employed, they will be glad to avail 
themselves thereof. If, however, the suggestions are merely 
artful devices to awaken popular distrust and clamor for sinis- 
ter ends, they are competent to meet the issue. It is but tri- 
fling with a grave question of the infliction of deep wounds upon society, to account for this arraignment, by the supposi- 
tion that a difference in opinion upon a scientific question, or 
indeed that of any other question whatever, personal to the 
individual, inspired the condemnation of offences, conceived in 
wrong motive, performed with disastrous results, and so injuri- 
ous to the medical profession as imperatively to demand expo- 
sure and reprobation. 
It is sufficient perhaps to dwell here, unless there should be 
denial of these facts. Sufficient evidence can be produced, 
not only in these, but in other cases, to demonstrate their 
truth. But there is a case, not adverted in “ True and False 
Experts” which it may serve the cause of truth to recall. 
Dr. Hammond says that he respects the State (meaning North 
Carolina), whose record has been such that all her sons when 
they call it to mind, can hold up their heads in honest pride. 
He will not forget perhaps that a part of the records of her 
Supreme Court is the Johnston Will Case, Wood v. Sawyer, 
251 Phillips’ N. C. Reports (Law), The case is the appeal of 
the caveators of the will of Jas. C. Johnston, Esq., of Chowan 
county, N. C., who died in March, 1865, having made his will 
in April, 1863, by which he placed the disposition of his large 
estate, in four counties, in the hands of the persons whom he 
deemed best fitted to manage such estate in the interest of the 
benevolent objects he had nearest to heart. Mr. Johnston was 
a gentleman of advanced years, and unmarried. The caveators 
sought to break the will, on the plea of insanity, and Dr. Wm. 
A. Hammond was summoned as an expert. Through the kind- 
ness of eminent legal gentlemen, the original notes of his testi- 
mony are before me. He declared that Mr. Johnston was in- 
sane. He had no personal knowledge of the case, nor did he 
hear a single witness in behalf of the propounders of the will, 
but announced his decision as an expert upon the ex'parte hear- 
ing of the other side (the caveators), although he was opposed 
in such opinion by most, if not all, the local physicians who tes- 
tified on this point, and who were personally acquainted with 
the testator, and had been for years, including his family phy- 
sician. 
He next affirmed that in mania there was no such thing as a 
lucid interval, in order to make it doubly sure, that the will 35 
was the product of an insane mind. But pressed hard upon his 
doctrine of the impossibility of lucid intervals in mania, he re- 
tracts and agrees that there might be lucid intervals in mania, 
but never in monomania, of which he had declared Mr. Johns- 
ton a victim ! 
In other words, when disorganization of the brain prevents 
the normal use of all the mental faculties, the condition is not 
irremediable or constant, for reason may be reseated perma- 
nently or temporarily, but when only one faculty is affected 
the case is continued and hopeless. What a psychologist! 
What a professor of mental diseases and expert in insanity ! 
The estimation in which his testimony was held by the dis- 
tinguished Jurists of the Supreme Court of North Carolina 
(June, 1867,) in the review of this case will be seen by refer- 
ence to their opinion. Their language while expressed with 
the calm precision of the bench, is eloquent of contempt. 
“ It is well settled that the opinion of an expert is competent evidence in 
questions touching the science or art which he professes. And when an ex- 
pert has given his opinion, it is also competent for him to give the reasons 
upon which his opinion is founded, in order that it may be seen whether his 
opinion is entitled to more or less weight. And, in this way, and in this 
way only, can it be determined whose opinion is entitled to most considera- 
tion, where experts differ. 
Here the caveators took the opinion of an expert as to the sanity of a tes- 
tator, and then attempted to elicit facts to support the opinion. And if the 
facts sought to be elicited were relevant, then it was error to exclude them. 
What then were the facts sought to be elicited? Not anything that he had 
learned in relation to the testator, or anything which he knew or had learned 
from science or from scientific men, but facts which he had heard an insane 
man relate as to the history of his disease, and facts which he had heard an 
unprofessional nurse relate of the history of the patient, facts to wdiich he 
had applied no test of truth, and to which none could be applied. Surely the 
exclusion of such testimony from the consideration of the jury was most 
proper, and so far from injuring, must have benefltted the caveators ; for if 
the expert had sustained his opinion upon such considerations as these, his 
conclusion would have been as worthless as his reasans were frivolous. 
They could not possibly have added any weight to the most hesitating, and 
they would certainly have detracted from the most confident opinion. 
Courts charged with the investigation of truth are greatly indebted to men 
of science who contribute the aid of their opinions. But marvellous narrar 
tions and careless stories disparage science, mislead rather than instruct, 
and ought not to be allowed consideration.’’—Phil. Law, page 251. 
The Will was sustained, the sanity of the testator having 
been confirmed. 
But what was the reason for his deep interest in establishing 
the insanity of the testator ? It appeared that for his testimony 36 
he should not only receive five hundred dollars, but that should 
he make it sufficiently strong to break the Will, he expected to 
receive a contingent fee of twenty-five hundred dollars. What 
superb and audacious mockery of justice this spectacle of an 
impartial witness testifying to five hundred dollars worth of 
truth, cash in hand, and a thousand or two more on credit, 
provided he could discover enough of such truth ! 
Will any man esteem his life, or reputation or even bis pal- 
try purse, safe in the hands of a man who could make such 
bargain of his conscience? Who is secure where the “False 
Expert” can win belief to his mercenary tale? 
Is it unprofessional to vindicate the medical profession from 
such reproach ? The writer has the honor, most gratefully 
esteemed, of a seat in the Judicial Council of the American 
Medical Association, and far be from his thoughts a conscious 
departure from the rules of medical ethics, but the task of 
unmasking conduct like this, however destructive the result 
may be to the reputation of the witness referred to, is but obe- 
dience to that lofty principle in both medical and moral ethics, 
which demands truth and justice of us for the safety of society. 
Dr, Hammond left before the conclusion of the trial,''and, it 
is said, gave up his contingent share of the spoils, because it 
was believed that the law forbade the reception of the testimony 
of any party interested in a suit. Such was not the actual state 
of the law at the time, but the statute allowing parties with 
interests contingent in a suit, to testify had been lately passed, 
and was not generally known to the people at large. And he 
was taken aback on the stand when confronted with his decla- 
ration to one of the medical witnesses that he came as “medi- 
cal counsel,” forgetful that paid advocates in cases are not 
supposed to be impartial scientific experts in North Carolina. 
If the facts as the writer has related them are denied, the 
statements are within his reach of the learned and justly cele- 
brated . counsel in the case, from whom his information is 
derived. 
In order that the allusion to the dismissal of Dr. Hammond 
from his position as Surgeon-General of the United States Army- 
may be the better understood by those members of the medical 
profession in the section of the country where he has widely dis- 37 
tributed his abusive letter, it is necessary to quote the charges 
and specifications of which he was found guilty by a General 
Court Martial convened at Washington, I). C., Jan’y 19th, 1864$ 
GENERAL COURT MARTIAL ORDERS, No. 251. 
WAR DEPARTMENT, 
Adjutant Generates Office, 
Washington, August 20, 1864. 
I. Before a General Court Martial, which assembled in the city of Wash- 
ington, D. C., on the 19th day of January, 1864, pursuant to Special Orders, 
No. 24, dated War Department, Adjutant General’s Office, Washington, Janu- 
ary 16,1864, and whereof Major General R. J. Oglesby, U. S. Volunteers, is 
President, was arraigned and tried— 
Brigadier General William A. Hammond, Surgeon General, U. S. Army. 
CHARGE I.—“ Disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and 
military discipline.” 
Specification Ist—“ln this; that he, Brigadier General William A. Hammond, 
Surgeon General, United States Army, wrongfully and unlawfully con- 
tracted for, and ordered Christopher C. Cox as Acting Purveyor in Bal- 
timore. to receive blankets of one William A. Stephens, of New York. 
This done at Washington city, on the 17th day of July, in the year of 
our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two.” 
Specification 2d— “In this: that he, Brigadier General William A. Hammond, 
Surgeon General as aforesaid, did, on the first day of May, in the year 
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, at Washing- 
ton city, wrongfully and unlawfully, and with intent to favor private 
persons resident in Philadelphia, prohibit Christopher 0. Cox, as Medi- 
cal Purveyor for the United States in Baltimore, from purchasing drugs 
for the army in said city of Baltimore.” 
Specification 3d—“In this: that he, the said Brigadier General William A. 
Hammond, Surgeon General, United States Army, did unlawfully order 
and cause one George E. Cooper, then Medical Purveyor for the United 
States in the city of Philadelphia, to buy of one William A. Stephens 
blankets for the use of the government service of inferior quality, he, 
the said Brigadier General William A. Hammond, then well knowing 
that the blankets so ordered by him to be purchased as aforesaid were 
inferior in quality, and that said Purveyor Cooper had refused to buy 
the same of said Stephens. This done at Philadelphia, in the State of 
Pennsylvania, on the twenty-eighth day of May, in the year of our Lord 
one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two.” 
Specification 4th—“ In this: that he, the said Brigadier General William A, 
Hammond, Surgeon General as aforesaid, on the fourteenth day of June, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, at 
the city of Washington, in the District of Columbia, unlawfully and 
with intent to aid one William A. Stephens to defraud the government 
of the United States, did, in writing, instruct George E. Cooper, then 
Medical Purveyor at Philadelphia, in substance as follows : 
‘Sir: You will purchase of Mr. W. A. Stephens eight thousand pair 
of blankets, of which the enclosed card is a sample. Mr. Stephens’ ad- 
dress is box 2,500, New York. The blankets are five dollars per pair,’ 
and which blankets so ordered were unfit for hospital use.” 38 
Specification sth—“ln this: that he, the said Brigadier General William A. 
Hammond, Surgeon General, United States Army, on the sixteenth day 
of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty- 
two, at the city of Washington, did corruptly, and with intent to aid 
one William A. Stephens to defraud the government of the United 
States, give to the said William A. Stephens an order, in writing, in 
substance as follows: ‘ Turn over to George E. Cooper, Medical Purveyor 
at Philadelphia, eight thousand pair of blankets/ by means whereof 
the said Stephens induced said Cooper, on government account and at 
an exhorbitant price, to receive of said bankets, which he had before 
refused to buy, seventy-six hundred and seventy-seven pair, and for 
which the said Stephens received payment at Washington in the sum 
of about thirty-live thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars and 
twenty cents.” 
Specification Gth—“ln this: that he, the said Brigadier General William A. 
Hammond, Surgeon General, United States Army, on the thirty-first 
day of July, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and sixty-two, at 
the city of Philadelphia, in the State of Pennsylvania, well knowing 
that John Wyeth & Brother had before that furnished medical supplies 
to the Medical Purveyor at Philadelphia which were inferior in quality, 
deficient in quantity, and excessive in price, did corruptly, unlawfully, 
and with intent to aid the said John Wyeth & Brother to furnish addi- 
tional large supplies to the government of the United States, and there- 
by fraudulently to realize large gains thereon, then and there give to 
George B. Cooper, then Medical Purveyor at Philadelphia, an order in 
writing, in substance as follows: ‘You will at once fill up your store- 
houses so as to have constantly on hand hospital supplies of all kinds 
for two hundred thousand men for six months. This supply I desire 
that you will not use without orders from me.’ And then and there 
directed said Purveyor to purchase a large amount thereof, to the value 
of about one hundred and seventy-three thousand dollars, of said John 
Wyeth & Brother.” 
Specification ~th—11 In this: that he, the said Brigadier General William A- 
Hammond, Surgeon General, United States Army, about the eighth day 
of October, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and sixty-two, at 
Washington city, in contempt of and contrary to the provisions of the 
act entitled ‘An act to reorganize and increase the efficiency of the Medi- 
cal Department of the Army,’ approved April 16, 1862, did corruptly 
and unlawfully direct Wyeth & Brother, of Philadelphia, to send forty 
thousand cans of their ‘ Extract of Beef’ to various places, to-wit: Cin- 
cinnati, St. Louis, Cairo, New York, and Baltimore, and send the ac- 
count to the Surgeon General’s Office for payment, and which Extract 
of Beef so ordered was of inferior quality, unfit for hospital use, unsuit- 
able and unwholesome for the sick and wounded in hospitals, and not 
demanded by the exigencies of the public service.” 
Specification Sth—“ In this: that he, the said Brigadier General William A. 
Hammond, Surgeon General, United States Army, about the first day of 
March, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and sixty-three, at 
Washington city, in disregard of his duty, of the interests of the public 
service, and of the requirements of the act entitled ‘ An act to reorganize 
and increase the efficiency of the Medical Department of the Army,’ 
approved April 16, 1862, did order and direct that the Medical Inspectors 
should report the result of their inspections direct to the Surgeon 
General.” 
CHARGE II.—“ Conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman.” 39 
/Specification—“ln this: that he, Brigadier General William A. Hammond, 
Surgeon General, United States Army, on the thirteenth day of Octo- 
ber, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and sixty-two, at Wash- 
ington city, in a letter by him then and there addressed to Ur. George E- 
Cooper, declared in substance that the said Cooper had been relieved as 
Medical Purveyor in Philadelphia because, among other reasons, 1 Hal- 
leck,’ meaning Maj. Gen. Henry W.Halleck, General-in-Chief, requested 
as a particular favor that Murry might be ordered to Philadelphia, 
which declaration so made by him, the said Brigadier General William 
A. Hammond, Surgeon General as aforesaid, was false.” 
CHARGE lll.—“Conduct to the prejudice of good order and military disci- 
pline.” 
Specification Ist—'“ In this: that he, the said Brigadier General William A. 
Hammond, Surgeon General, United States Army, on the eighth day of 
November, A. D. 1862, at Washington city, did unlawfully and corruptly 
order and cause Henry Johnson, then Medical Storekeeper and acting 
Purveyor at Washington city, to purchase three thousand blankets of 
one J. P. Fisher, at the price of 15.90 per pair, and to be delivered to Sur- 
geon G. E. Cooper, United States Army, Medical Purveyor at Philadel- 
phia.” 
Specification 2d—“ In this; that he, the said Brigadier General William A. 
Hammond, about the third day of December, A. D. 1862, at Washington 
city, unlawfully and corruptly purchased and caused to be purchased 
of J. C. McGuire & Co., large quantities of blankets and bedsteads, and 
which Avere not needed for the service.” 
Plea. 
To all which charges and speciflaations the accused pleaded “ Not Guilty.” 
Finding. 
The Court, after due and mature deliberation upon the evidence adduced, 
does And the accused, Brigadier General William A. Hammond, Surgeon Gen- 
eral, United States Army, as follows: 
Charge I, 
Of the Ist Specification, “ Guilty.” 
Of the 2d Specification, “ Guilty; and that the offense therein charged was 
committed on the 30th day of May, A. D. 1863, except as to the words ‘and 
with Intent to aid private persons resident in Philadelphia,’ and as to which 
words so excepted, ‘ Not Guilty.’ ” 
Of the 3d Specification, “ Guilty.” 
Of the Ith Specification, “ Guilty, except as to the words ‘and which blank- 
ets so ordered were unfit for hospital use,’ and as to which words so excepted, 
‘Not Guilty.’” 
Of the sth Specification, “ Guilty.” 
Of the 6th Specification, “ Guilty.” 
Of the 7th Specification, “Guilty, except as to the words ‘corruptly and,’ 
• and which Extract of Beef so ordered was of inferior quality, unfit for hospi- 
tal use, unsuitable and unwholesome for the sick and wounded in hospitals, 
and not demanded by the exigencies of the public service,’ and of the words 
so excepted, ‘ Not Guilty.’ ’ 
Of the Bth Specification, “-Not Guilty.” 
Of the Ist Charge, “ Guilty.” 
Charge 11. 
Of the Specification, “ Guilt y.” *■ 
Of the 2d Charge, “ Guilty.” 40 
Of the Ist Specification, “Guilty, except as to the words ‘and corruptly/ 
and cause,’ and as to which words so excepted, ‘ Not Guilty.’ ” 
Of the 2d Specification, “Not Guilty.” 
Charge 111. 
Of the 3d Charge, “ Guilty.” 
Sentence. 
And the Court does therefore sentence him, Brigadier General William A. 
Hammond, Surgeon Gjneral, United States Army, "Thai he shall be dismissed 
the service, and be forever disqualified from holding any office of honor, profit or 
trust under the government of the United States." 
II.—In compliance with the 65th of the Buies and Articles of War, the 
whole proceedings of the General Court Martial in the foregoing case have 
been transmitted to the Secretary of War, and by him laid before the Presi- 
dent of the United States. 
The following are the orders of the President of the United States : 
The record, proceedings, findings, and sentence of the Court in the forego- 
ing case are approved; and it is ordered that Brigadier General William A. 
Hammond, Surgeon General of the United States Army, be dismissed the 
service, and be forever disqualified from holding any office of honor, profit, 
or trust under the government of the United States, 
August 18,1864, A. LINCOLN. 
lll.—The General Court Martial of which Major General R. J. Oglesby, 
United States Volunteers, is President, is dissolved. 
By order of the Secretary of War: 
E. D. ‘TOWNSEND, 
Official : Assistant Adjutant General, 
Assistant Adjutayvt General. 
That this degrading and dishonoring sentence should have 
been agreed to by a Court of Officers of high rank, upon their 
solemn oaths, and the evidence received and the sentence con- 
firmed by the President of the United States, is a crushing fact 
that no explanation can remove. After many years, and sev- 
eral changes in the presidential chair, and after many of the 
Officers familiar with his offences have passed away, and Gen- 
eral Halleck, whom he libeled is also dead, he has succeeded in 
having the case re-opened, in the hope to wash away the an- 
cient stain. Vain expectation ! No declaration of a commit- 
tee of two or three officers, able as they may be, would, after 
the lapse of so many years, outweigh the deliberate finding of 
a large Court of disinterested Officers, held at the very seat of 
his powor; long and patiently employed in his trial, until 
twenty-four hundred pages of evidence had been accumulated, 
and therefore familiar with all the details of the wrong-doing. 
Abraham Lincoln was not the man he has been pictured to the 
American people, by both Northern and Southern writers, if 
he sanctioned the dismissal in disgrace of the first medical offi- 41 
cer of the Army, upon anything less than the necessity of such 
punishment, swift and condign. Such a reflection is to impute 
to him a want of common sense, and the wanton surrender of a 
useful servant such as his direst enemies never accused him of. 
It is needless to enter into the numerous apparently unpro- 
fessional acts that have characterized his career in private prac- 
tice. But one instance is so flagrant that it appeals to the 
common sense of the reader, as laughably absurd, as if it were 
indeed Cagliostro displaying his arts again. 
I have authentic information that a distinguished and en- 
tirely reliable gentleman in North Carolina, once had occasion 
to consult Dr. Hammond, on account of apprehended conges- 
tion of the brain, or some trouble incident to the great amount 
of mental labor which he had undergone. Dr. Hammond re- 
ceived him, heard his statement of symptoms, and gravely 
brought forth one of the many instruments, which are well cal- 
culated to dazzle the eyes of the laity. Instructing him to fix 
his gaze upon the needle, he solemnly informed him that he 
was endeavoring to ascertain the seat of the temporary con- 
gestion from which, he said, the gentleman was suffering; and 
that if the trouble were in the front of the brain, the needle 
would be found to point in a certain direction, but if at the 
base of the brain, then the reverse movement would take place. 
The writer is aware that some of these revelations will shock a 
portion of his professional brethren almost into incredulity, but 
let Dr. Hammond deny this statement, and he shall be con- 
fronted with the testimony of the gentleman whom he could 
not deceive. So far as allusion is made to the atheistical opin- 
ions of Dr. Hammond, the reader will observe that reference to 
the same, is only made upon the score that it ill becomes one 
who assumes the role of a reformer in social ethics, and advo- 
cates the execution of actual maniacs who have broken the 
laws, when for him morality can scarcely have an existence,— 
and religion must be a superstitious dream. Nor is he content 
to express his disbelief in events sacred to all Christendom in 
any moderation of language, but speaks, for example, of the 
great work done by the sincere and devout Wesley for the re- 
formation and blessing of mankind, in a tone that vividly tells 
of a whole mental and moral constitution at war with the no- 42 
blest emotions and deepest sympathies of Christian life. In 
reference to a long extract from Wesley’s journal descriptive 
of what are termed “revivals,” he uses the following language: 
“ This is not all, there is a great deal more to the same effect, 
and were it not that there is such a condition as hysteria, we 
should be disposed to take the other alternative of demoniacal 
possession as an explanation of the frightful orgies which under 
the blasphemous designation of the “ out pouring of the spirit 
of God ” excelled in hideousness the frenzies of the demonola- 
tors of the East.” (See Hammond on Spiritualism and Nerv- 
ous Derangement, page 239.) 
In a preface and postscript to a second edition of the “ Open 
Letter” addressed to the writer by Dr. Hammond, appear sev- 
eral accusations, one of which is, that I did not advertise the 
fact, that in the Association of American Superintendents of 
the Insane, representing the British Provinces, and every sec- 
tion and most of the States of this Union, he had three sym- 
pathizers. It ought to be satisfactory to him to know that I had 
had no opportunity of doing so, notwithstanding his untruthful 
charge that I had published my speech in the newspapers. If, 
however, the extent of his merit is to be judged by the number 
of his sympathizers, he ought not to complain of the omission. 
Another charge he has the temerity to attempt to sustain by 
the authority of the Chief Justice of North Carolina, in this 
language: 
“I have ascertained that the Chief Justice of North Carolina has decided 
that you are not entitled to hold the office you occupy, but that thus far, by 
a legal stratagem, you have succeeded in defeating the trueintent of the law.” 
In reference to this absurd untruth, the writer appends the 
certificate of the Clerk of the Supreme Court, for the past nine 
or ten years, that there has not even been litigation in regard 
to the office which I have the honor to hold, at the hands of the 
good people of North Carolina. I further add the statement 
of the President of the Board of Directors, than whom no phy 
sician of this State is more widely known and honored by the 
medical profession. Since the war our State constitution has 
been altered several times, and there have been changes as to 
the manner of appointment to office and of terms of office. And 
as is usual party politics has had its influence, and there has 43 
been litigation in several cases. As for instance whether the 
Governor or the Legislature should appoint or whether a term 
expired at one time or another. There has been no litigation 
as to my term of office, but the question was at one time can- 
vassed in the papers with the usual political severity—some 
holding that my term expired at one time and some at another. 
The question was settled by the Board of Directors as stated 
by its President, Dr. E. Burke Haywood. Since my connection 
with the Insane Asylum, as is well known, I have taken no 
active part in politics; and my management of the Institution 
and my professional qualifications being satisfactory, whatever 
there might otherwise have been of political animosity, gave 
way. During the newspaper discussion there was some bitter- 
ness displayed, especially by those who wanted the place for 
themselves or their friends. 
If any unfriendly communications have been made to Dr. 
Hammond by physicians and gentlemen from North Carolina 
as he boasts, the public can understand their character and mo- 
tive. With the exceptions above mentioned, the intelligent 
public of North Carolina have been personally and profession- 
ally kind to me, and 1 do them the justice to say, that I do not 
believe that they have lent themselves, as Dr. Hammond says 
they have, to aid his attacks upon me. But there are a few 
Hammonds everywhere. 
Another accusation is implied in various artful expressions 
to catch the popular ear, of cruelty to the patients under my 
charge, as for example, in the expression “mechanical restraint 
not less galling than that which you are in the habit of inflict- 
ing on the poor wretches under your supervision in the Insane 
Asylum at Raleigh.” 
It is scarcely necessary to remind any North Carolinian, that 
if this wicked charge of cruelty to those whose misfortunes set 
them apart from their fellow-men, and so challenge the holiest 
emotions of sympathy and profound pity, had the least foun- 
dation save in the base imaginings of its author, it would carry 
condemnation to many of the noblest and most eminent men 
of the State. For ten years have Committees of Investigation 
been appointed by our Legislatures, and they have given the 
most continual and ample examination of all the details of the 44 
general administration and interior management of the institu- 
tion, and their full and ample reports are parts of the proud 
history of the Asylum deeply prized by its officers. 
North Carolinians, too, are familiar with the fact that the 
Asylum while under my charge, has been under the immediate 
supervision and control as Directors, of such gentlemen as Dr, 
Chas. E. Johnson, for many years President of the Board, and 
Dr. E. Burke Hay wood, who now fills that honored position; of 
the late Gov Thos, Bragg, and the Hon. A. S. Merrimon, pre- 
sent U. S. Senator from this State, and the Hon. Kemp P. Bat- 
tle, the distinguished President of the University of North Car- 
olina; of Dr. J. J. Summered, a physician of forty years ex- 
perience and extensive reputation, and Rev. B. Craven, D. D., 
LL. D,, the President of Trinity College. Such Directors too, 
as the Hon. Joseph J. Davis, the present representative in Con- 
gress from the Metropolitan district, and such gentlemen of the 
elite of the State, as Dr, Pride Jones; Charles Dewey, the emi- 
nent banker; Maj. C. Dowd, the law partner and friend of Gov. 
Vance; the Hon. W. N. H. Smith, now Chief Justice of North 
Carolina; Dr. J. G. Ramsay, of Rowan county; Hon. R. C- 
Badger, of Raleigh; Col. W. R. Myers, of Charlotte, so well 
known throughout the State; Maj. F. H. Cameron, the Presi- 
dent of the North Carolina State Life Insurance Company, and 
Col. T. G. Walton, a leading citizen of Western North Carolina. 
He is a bold man who will have the hardihood to assert that 
this long line of eminent North Carolinians, with others who 
might be named, taken from all divisions of the political field, 
and with the most varied talents and accomplishments, could 
not discover and bring to light anything wrong or unjust in the 
management of this institution, or such being the case, would 
not have had the firmness and independence to apply the in- 
stant remedy. On the contrary, nothing is better known to the 
people to whom this Institution and its charities are a charge 
inexpressibly sacred, than the generous and the unfaltering 
support which these distinguished citizens always gave to ray 
administration, and to all the interests of the Asylum. 
Nor can I say less of the able and devoted members of the 
present Board of Directors appointed by His Excellency Gov- 
ernor Z. B, Vance, and to whom I am proud to acknowledge 45 
the same obligation of kind appreciation as from their prede- 
cessors, and whose humane care and deep interest in the work 
committed to their charge has never been exceeded by any 
however gifted and patriotic in devotion to duty. 
Rev. Dr. B. Craven, Dr. E. Burke Haywood, and Maj. C. 
Dowd are again in their old labor of philanthropy, with the ef- 
ficient aid of Col. J. S. Amis, esteemed and beloved in so wide 
a circle of friends, of Dr. J. T. Leach, Avhose name is a terror 
to evil doers, of Col. A. M. McPheeters, foremost ih many good 
and charitable works, and of Dr. S. G. Ward, Julius Lewis, 
Esq, and Col. James G. Burr, among the most respected and 
esteemed citizens of the State. 
It is not, I say, in such a body of men, that any toleration 
can be found for any system of treatment that shall be want- 
ing in whatever humanity and the most approved systems of 
treatment can devise, for the comfort and restoration of the 
victims of so dread a calamity. 
What feelings must sway the heart of one who could out- 
rage the official honor of such men, by wanton slurs upon an 
Institution under their control; nay, who could harrow up the 
fears and apprehensions of the friends of these sad unfortu- 
nates whose consolation is our daily study. Thus would he 
forge a weapon from their anxieties and sorrows, to pierce one 
whose calm statements of fact he cannot meet. Is this the 
conduct of a true physician ? 
As a final answer to this charge of cruelty to the patients 
who are under the fostering care of the State, in this institution, 
I herewith append a letter from the Executive Committee, who, 
in the absence of the Board of Directors, have immediate 
charge and supervision of the affairs of the Asylum, both inter- 
nal and external, and whose ceaseless vigilance and devotion it 
is unnecessary for me to commend to their fellow-citizens. 
He but repeats, however, his own history in these charges. 
It will not be forgotten that a court of high rank has convicted 
him of deliberate falsehood. 
If it be possible that any man has played the part of jackal, 
or scavenger for such a person as this “ False Expert,” let his 
name be given, that he may be properly branded and scorned. 
If any “prominent physician” or “gentleman” in North 46 
Carolina wrote him as he claims, let him give his name. And 
if not, let him at least advise him that it would be more manly 
in a “prominent physician ” or a “ gentleman ” to assume the 
responsibility of any criticism that he may have to make either 
of my address or of myself, than to hide behind a mountebank 
or a charlatan, to shoot his arrows. 
EUGENE GRISSOM. 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, 
Supreme Court, 
Raleigh, July 6th, 1878. 
Dr. Eugene Grissom, Raleigh, N. C.: 
My Dear Sir: In response to your request of this date, I reply that I have 
been Clerk of this Court, continously, since January, 1869, and that there has 
been no suit or matter pending in said court or before either of the Chief 
Justices, who have occupied the bench during that time, in which your right 
or title was involved to the superintendency of the Asylum for the Insane of 
this State. Very truly yours, 
WM. H. BAGLEY. 
/ RALEIGH, N. C., July Bth, 1878. 
Eugene Grissom, M. D., Sup’t of the Asylum for the Insane of North Carolina : 
Dear Sir: I have just received your note, calling my attention to the fol- 
lowing extract from the postscript to an “Open Letter,” addressed to you by 
William A. Hammond, M. D., of New York. “I have ascertained that the 
Chief Justice of North Carolina has decided that you are not entitled to hold 
the office you occupy, but thus far by a legal stratagem, you have succeeded 
in defeating the true intent of the law.” For several years I have been a 
member, and part of that time, President of the Board of Directors for the 
Asylum for the Insane of North Carolina. During that time there has not 
been any litigation or judicial decision in relation to your tenure of office. 
At a called meeting held March 6th, 1878, the present Board of Directors re- 
solved unanimously to regard and sustain you as Superintendent for four 
years from January Ist, 1878. 
Yours, very respectfully, 
E. BURKE HAYWOOD, M. D., 
President of the Board of Directors of the 
Asylum for the Insane of North Carolina. 
RALEIGH, N. C. July 19th, 1878. 
Dr. Eugene Grissom, Superintendent Insane Asylum of North Carolina : 
Dear Sir : Yours of this date to hand, in which you call our attention to 
the fact that in a recently published “ Open Letter,” addressed to you by Dr. 
Hammond, of New York, he, by implication, charges you with cruelty to the 
patients in our Asylum. 
As the local members of the Executive Committee ot the Board of Direc- 
tors, we have, at all times, free access to the Asylum, and frequently visit it, 
and are brought in contact with the patients, attendants and officers, and 
all others connected with the Institution, and we have never heard from 
any one even an intimation of unkindness, much less cruelty, on your part, 
or any other officer, but on the contrary we have every reason to believe that 
in your intercourse with and treatment of the unfortunate ones under your 
care, you are uniforrnally kind and considerate, doing every thing in your 
power for their relief and comfort. 
Yours truly, &c., 
A. M. MCPHEETBRS,) Ex. 
JULIUS LEWIS, { Com. POSTSCEIPT 
The members of the medical profession, and indeed, the general 
public, have been troubled with a publication distributed broad- 
cast throughout the country, declaring itself a “Second Open 
Letter,” addressed to the writer by the person whose career has so 
conspicuously illustrated the “False Expert” hereinbefore described. 
Raleigh, October Ist, 1878. 
It is a labored effort to gather together whatever of the low and 
vile in expression our language can suggest, to a mind fitted by natural 
tastes for the base, and with desperate energy, to pour forth upon 
the writer the mass of personal abuse thus laboriously heaped togeth- 
er, consisting, as it does, of ideas the most loathsome of which one can 
conceive. Yet such a production has been gravely sent to physicians 
of character and distinction, and widely distributed among the most 
eminent citizens of the country, in the expectation of its perusal. A 
brief glance will strike every reader with the audacity of the indi 
vidual who could so insult the ordinary decencies of life as to present 
such a paper for the consideration of gentlemen. 
But if lack of manners be pardoned in an unhappy man, driven by 
public scorn into passionate revilings, and lashed by self-contempt 
into a paroxysm of rage, the reader will farther observe that although 
Dr. Hammond has time and space enough for pages of hysterical 
denunciation, he does not offer a single paragraph of argument in 
defence of his conduct, touching the infamous charges of which he 
stands accused, and alas, for the honor of his profession, convicted. 
The case is before the reader in the preceding pages. Months have 
elapsed since the meeting of the American Association of Superinten- 
dents of the Insane—two publications have been made by him, and 
yet not a line of evidence is offered to exculpate him, or even to 
mitigate offences which almost exceed belief. He simply avoids 48 
and hides. Not one fact in his wicked career as alleged, has been 
disproved, nor can he attempt to explain. He can not, he dare not. 
So long as this is true, idle railings but render such a position more 
pitiable, and place him farther from a renewal of former associations 
with any reputable physician. 
Among the many false statements which disgrace the last paper of 
Dr. Hammond, there are several conspicuously slanderous assertions 
of his, which may be concisely disposed of, as follows: 
We are informed that an instrument entitled Lombard’s Thermo- 
Electric Calorimeter, a certain complicated double thermometer for 
the testing of animal heat was the apparatus employed in the case 
heretofore "considered in which congestion was to be diagnosed 
through the gaze of a patient at a needle. 
It is sufficient to say that I have in my possession letters from 
some of the most distinguished physicians from the most learned 
centres of the Union, and all disclaim any knowledge of such an in- 
strument, save in the reference given in Dr. Hammond’s own book. 
They stand among the first in the medical world. Some write “I 
regret very much that I can give you no information in regard to the 
Calorimeter you mention. Indeed I had never heard of the instru- 
ment before,” others say “I have never seen one,” “ I have never 
seen its use mentioned in standard works on diseases of the Nervous 
System.” “I can get no definite information as to the practical use 
of the Calorimeter of Lombard,” &c. 
So much for the acceptation in the medical profession of such ap- 
plications of Chinese artillery, to dazzle the eyes of the laity. It re- 
minds one of the array of opthalmoscopes in McFarland’s case by the 
same individual, and his claims to diagnose conditions of the brain 
by appearances, which the best opthalmoscopists pronounce utterly 
insufficient and unreliable. 
So much, too, for the imputation upon the intelligence of the medi- 
cal profession in North Carolina, in a sneer at the physicians for the 
want of intimate acquaintance with an instrument, which the first 
physicians of the Union have not adopted in their practice, nor can 
obtain any trustworthy information concerning; which no “standard 49 
work’’refers to, and which in various cases has not even been 
“heard of” by them. 
So far as Dr. Hammond’s connection with the Johnston Will Case 
is concerned, as hereinbefore stated, he has no reply to make to the 
charge (of which the evidence is in my possession, from the original 
notes of counsel taken on the trial) that his intention until foiled in 
the attempt, was to accept $6OO as a fee for his expert evidence, and 
$2,500 more if he should succeed in establishing the insanity of Mr. 
Johnston, in his function of ostensible expert. To this there is no 
word of denial, and his answer is a claim to the friendship and sym- 
pathy of the gentlemen named in that trial as counsel and judge, 
which I have authority for stating, they have no kuowlege of. Let 
him dare to deny one jot or tittle of his misconduct in the Johnston 
Will Case, and the public shall receive ample testimony of its truth 
from impartial and unperjured lips. 
The only portion of the “Second Open Letter” which is fit for 
perusal, as containing subject matter of a scientific character, is a 
part touching epilepsy, and especially the citation of authorities to 
show that epileptics may be sometimes responsible for their actions. 
I am not aware that such a proposition has been denied, in any pa- 
per of mine. 
The true point in issue, as will be seen by the reader, on referring to 
pages 21 and 22, is the fact that Dr. W. A. Hammond testified on 
the same trial, in reply to questions of similar meaning, with directly 
conflicting answers ; first in such manner as to condemn, and sec- 
ondly as to acquit the poor wretch; after, an interview with the op- 
posing counsel. 
This new attempt to deceive would be ludicrous if it were not so 
wicked. He has given authorities to show that Ais true and Bis 
untrue, concerning his answers, but tries to hide the fact that he after- 
wards told the jury that B was true, and A untrue. It is, in fact, 
the very gravamen of the crime, that he swears on one trial to the 
truth of certain assumed scientific dicta, and on another trial to their 
falsity, as may best serve the side whose money he seeks. Alas for 
truth and honor! 
My conjectures in regard to the hidden genesis of epilepsy in the 50 
pamphlet from which he quotes, and attempts to ridicule by the in 
troduction of a colloquy with a vulgar friend, have at least the mer- 
it, unappreciable by him, of not being copied from Continental wri- 
ters, ancient or modern. 
To those who live in distant States, it may be proper to observe 
that the assertion on page 16, of the “ Second Open Letter” of my 
“fraudulent election to the Legislature by means of wholesale ballot- 
box stuffing, using for this purpose the statements of Capt. John T. 
Deweese,” is worthy of an author, already convicted by a competent 
court of falsehood. 
The only sessions of the Legislature of which I have ever been a 
member were those of the General Assembly of 1862, when I was 
elected (while lying wounded in a hospital at Richmond,) on the same 
ticket with the late beloved and venerated Hon. Robert B. Gilliam, 
of Granville, and in 1864, when I was re-elected almost without op- 
position, on the ticket with Col. J. 8. Amis. These events occurred 
some time before the advent of John T. Deweese on North Carolina 
soil, and of course a number of years previous to the sudden depart- 
ure of Mr. Deweese from the United States House of Representatives 
for corruption. They occurred, in fact, at about the same period, 
when Dr. Hammond was being tried on the other side of Mason and 
Dixon’s line, for fraud, falsehood, and other conduct unbecoming an 
officer and a gentleman, for which he was cashiered on the order of 
the President of the United States. 
It is to be regretted that the scavengers whom this man employs 
in North Carolina, or elsewhere, cannot even be true to their master, 
and supply of their stores of slander that which has, at least, some 
semblance of foundation. 
The empty boast is made that a suit for libel will be instituted 
against Dr. John P.Gray for the publication of my paper upon “True 
and False Experts.” Dr. Gray, it will be understood, edits the 
American Journal of Insanity, the first authority on that subject in 
the Union, in which my paper appeared. The editor is, and has been 
for many years Superintendent of the New York State Insane Asylum 
at Utica, which justly ranks among the most celebrated institutions 
in the world. 51 
The profession will recognize the justice of the proposition which 
I make, that suit for libel should rather have been entered in North 
Carolina, where the damage, if any, has been inflicted. Ample bond 
can be given to secure the payment of all that an honest jury of 
North Carolinians would award to whatever injury the unsullied 
purity of his character has sustained. Would that their verdict 
could likewise heal the wrongs he has inflicted upon his honored 
profession, upon medical science,upon the unfortunates he has duped, 
and saddest of all, those he has doomed. 
That such members of the profession as have not been favored with 
a copy of the “ Second Open Letter” may know from the portrait of 
his moral character which he unconsciously paints as he writes, what 
sort of being it is that was once known among gentlemen as Dr. 
Hammond, I compel myself to quote a paragraph, while I profound- 
ly apologize for the necessity of sullying the fair face of the page. 
His chaste pen declares, 
“A distempered and snarling cur has nobler mental and moral 
qualities than you; the vibrio that wriggles in decomposing filth is 
higher in the scale of existence; the foul bird that defecates in its own 
nest is less odious; the wretch who, actuated by perverted instincts, 
revels in nastiness and abominations, is not so execrable; the monster 
who insults the mother who bore him is more entitled to human 
sympathy.” 
Every pure minded and honorable reader will concede that the 
creature capable of such a paragraph has already descended to a 
depth which no epithet in our tongue can fitly describe, and safely 
placed himself where it would be folly to pursue, even to award him 
the honor of contempt. 
Convicted from his own mouth, condemned by the impartial tribunal 
of the medical profession, he will be surely sentenced by the com- 
mon voice of society. 
His threat to pursue me as long as I live has no terrors for me, 
but I cannot afford to follow his example, as I have higher and better 
aspirations than to devote my life to the notice of a blackguard. 
May the hollow echoes from the grave of a ruined and dead repu- 
tation serve at least to warn any flatterer or follower, who may be 
tempted for the sake of gain, to pursue the wicked career which 
Providence has mercifully arrested. E. G.