in so far as desire is concerned, differ infinitely. One man wants fame, another money, another love. One longs for a life in town, another for a life in the country. And so, as we narrow the sphere, one man will read no books that have not to do with the absolute, while another will read nothing but tales of how bad people were converted and turned out of the broad path into the narrow one. One man will have nothing but diaper-patterns for his carpet, while another glories to be walking over worsted flowers and ferns. If such limitations are [135] compatible with health, we should expect in many cases to find still narrower pursuits under the influence of disease. If men who have the means of collecting many things concerning which human interest might be felt, devote themselves to the collection of postage stamps, why should we wonder that others, under the influence of disease, while the propensity to thieve gives them the means of obtaining many things, the possession of which is fraught with pleasure, should have all their energies directed to the acquisition of pins or table-cloths?1

199. The Precautions taken in relation to the Theft.The precautions taken by the individual will occasionally throw light upon the question as to whether disease is present or not. Some kleptomaniacs steal openly: they make no attempt at concealment. But cases do occur where much ingenuity is manifested upon the part of the individual to conceal the act from the knowledge of others. The occasions of the theft will have some bearing on the question in connection with the history of the individual, the probability of insanity as judging from the existence or non-existence of predisposing and exciting causes. Gall met with four examples of women who when pregnant stole, or were impelled to steal, and who were perfectly honest at other times. The

Marc, vol. ii., p. 355, mentions the case of a medical man whose kleptomania was manifested in stealing table-cloths and nothing else.

2 Evidence as to the hereditary character of the disease which is in question, so long as the evidence refers to those lineally connected with the supposed lunatic, is admissible in England. Frere v. Peacocke, 3 Curt. 670; Reg. v. Ross Tuckett, 4 Law, 750. See, however, Doe de Mather v. Whitefoot, 8 Car. & P. 270; McAdam v. Walker, 1 Dow. 179. But such evidence is inadmissible in Scotland. Gibson, 2 Broun, 332. See also chapter on Proof of Insanity.

precautions taken to avoid suspicion are, however, often indicative of the presence rather of moral turpitude than of moral insanity.

2200. Confession of the Crime.-Very frequently, the kleptomaniac is not unwilling to avow the act. Many confess that they know that what they are doing is wrong, but say that they have a mad longing to possess themselves of everything they see. Some plead inability to resist the temptation to steal when they see certain articles, and make no attempt at denial. And in connection with such confessions, we may often find the individual restoring the stolen goods to the real owner. When such restitution takes place without the presence of motives which would influence an ordinary man, such as probability of detection or the like, it is very strong corroborative evidence of the hypothesis that the [136) original taking was due to disease. The number of thefts, the conduct, and the circumstances of the individual upon each occasion, ought not to be disregarded in the consideration of any case.

2 201. Conduct Subsequent to Crime.-With regard to the conduct of the individual subsequent to the acquisition of the stolen article, the assertion that in many cases they make no manner of use of the property acquired may be taken as a rule. Kleptomaniacs very frequently seem to find the satisfaction of their morbid desires in the simple act of taking, and often throw away or disregard the article when actually possessed of it. In this they resemble children. The love of acquiring in the young outruns the knowledge of how to utilise an article when acquired. And so it is with many lunatics. When the article is not cast away or disregarded by the kleptomaniac, it will almost invariably be hoarded. And when neither of these courses of action are taken, but the individual proceeds to use it as it ought to be used, proceeds to derive the pleasure from it, it was meant to minister, there is some cause to be careful in believing in the existence of kleptomania. Another circumstance which will

Marc, vol. i., pp. 275-303.

assist the medical jurist in deciding whether the act belongs to the category of crime or disease is the existence or the non-existence of conspiracy, or a plan between the kleptomaniac and another person to steal together. Such a conspiracy to steal is common among sane persons, but does not exist amongst insane persons as a symptom of their insanity. There was once an idea that the insane could not combine to do any act, that they could not conspire together for good or evil. We believe, however, that such an idea is not borne out by the facts, and that insane persons do conspire to do certain acts, but quoad those acts they are sane, and for those acts they ought to be held responsible.

202. Theft in relation to Bright Objects.—A curious fact has been observed in connection with the diseased propensity to acquire, viz., that in many instances it is felt only in relation to bright or glittering objects. People steal things that glitter. This rule is, however, by no means invariable. The analogue of such a propensity is to be found in certain birds. Every one knows the old story of the maid and the magpie-how the bird took the spoon, and the maid was suspected of theft. And few persons have not laughed over Ingoldsby's "Little Jackdaw of Rheims." We suspect that the individual who took and retained common pins must have had the diseased desire for the brightness. And in a very instructive case mentioned by Casper, to which we [187) shall again have occasion to refer, the lady during her pregnancy had an irresistible desire to possess shining objects, especially those of new silver. Other cases of the same kind might be mentioned. We need not again call attention to the fact that the history of the case must be carefully considered. Cases are on record where moral insanity has been ascribed to the injury of the head by the instruments which were used in the accouchement. And in the Journal de Paris, March 29th, 1816, (it is a case often quoted,) the following paragraph appeared: "An ex-commissioner of police at Toulouse BeauConsiel has been condemned to eight years' confinement and hard labour and to the pillory, for having while in office stolen some pieces of plate from an inn. The accused persisted to the last in an odd kind of defence: he did not deny

the crime, but attributed it to mental derangement produced by wounds he had received at Marseilles in 1815."

2203. As to the Frequency of Kleptomania.—We will only in this place add a very few words. Kleptomania is by no means common. The Times" upon one occasion said: "Every one who is acquainted with London society could at once furnish a dozen names of ladies who have been notorious for abstracting articles of trifling value from the shops where they habitually dealt." This, it appears to us, is an exaggeration. However, that there are true cases of theft-madness, in which neither delusion nor imbecility is connected with the desire to acquire, we are bound to admit.

204. How are Kleptomaniacs to be Dealt with by Law. And the question for us here is, how are such persons to be dealt with when they come before our criminal courts? And we have only again to repeat the recommendation that, if the individual is charged with any other crime than theft, the insane propensity to steal should not be regarded as a bar to punishment. It may be said that incarceration in a prison may aggravate the disease under which they labor, and it may be so, but that ought to make such individuals more careful not to commit such acts as may bring them into circumstances not compatible with health. If the individual is charged with theft, and it can be shown that he was in a condition to be deterred by the fear of punishment; if, for instance, it is shown that it was the advantageous circumstances which tempted him to commit the crime; if he can be shown to be, even with regard to his diseased propensity, under the influence of ordinary motives, he ought to be held responsible for his acts. If, on the other hand, he is not in a position to weigh motives, and if his (188) incapacity is due to disease, if no ordinary circumstances induced to the theft, as no ordinary circumstances could have restrained him from its commission, he ought to be regarded as irresponsible, and ought to be exempted from any punishment.

205. Case of Kleptomania of Bright Objects.-The case above alluded to as reported by Casper will be of some

importance in this connection. Madame de X- had committed thefts in three goldsmiths' shops during her pregnancy. She had after her accouchement confessed to her husband that she had during her pregnancy had an irresistible desire to possess herself of shining objects. She confessed to having taken objects from shops, and declared that on one occasion when she went to return the goods she had been restrained from so doing by the belief that the articles were her own. Much evidence was given which went to prove the existence of mental aberration. Casper was referred to, and he concluded that the diseased propensity of Madame de X— was not irresistible, that she had not been compelled to commit the three thefts in spite of herself, and they were criminal actions for which she was responsible, and he gave as reasons: 1. That although the accused had besought her husband not to take her to those places where shining objects were to be seen, she went to goldsmiths' shops of her own accord, and without any necessity for so doing. 2. That she paid away silver. 3. That she broke up the objects she stole in order that they might not be recognized and in that way lead to her detection. 4. She had not gone to the same goldsmith's shop twice. 5. She had concealed her conduct from her husband. 6. And when she was interrogated, had made many false and contradictory statements. Looking at all the circumstances of the case, we cannot but think that the medical jurist's decision was in accordance with sound principles of law and medicine.

PART II.-EROTOMANIA.

? 206. Sexual Instincts. The passion which unites the sexes is not a simple feeling, but "compounded of many simples," like Jacques' melancholy. The purely physical elements of love are, as it were, its raw material, or rather the foundation -stone of the lofty house love builds and man dwells in. The admiration of personal charms, beauty the more imaginative, and handsomeness the more animal, excellence of human form, grows about the physical feelings as lichens do about rocks. Then comes the higher friendshipthe sentiments of respect, affection, reverence-the grateful