In those instances where the word unsound is used in our own profession, it designates something cognizable by the senses. An unsound tooth bears in its external character or internal feeling, sufficient evidence of its unsoundness. A fistulous sore may appear to be healed, but the skill of the surgeon can readily detect that it is unsound at the bottom: and both the dentist and the surgeon can give sufficient reasons, as the foundation of their opinion. Unsound doctrine, differs from that which is orthodox in certain particulars or essential points, which constitute its unsoundness.
Superadded to these, let the facts be examined as they are recorded in nature and experience. Of the human intellect there can only be three states: sound mind, insanity, and idiotcy. Of these states there may be different degrees. The mind of one
man may be relatively more sound than another; his attention may be more fixed and enduring—his memory more retentive; his judgment may be clearer, and possess superior vigour; and his imagination shall exhibit a brighter flame. Notwithstanding this exalted capacity, the individual who is removed many degrees lower on the scale, may possess sufficient soundness for the purposes of his nature:—he may be capable to conduct himself, and likewise to manage his affairs. Insanity, is another condition of the human mind, and of this state there are various forms and different degrees; and when a morbid state of intellect prevails, under which a man cannot conduct himself, which implies that he is not safe to be trusted with his own life, nor with the life of another—that in his motives to action he cannot discriminate between right and wrong, or without
motive is irresistibly impelled to act, and therefore becomes a being, not responsible for his conduct, and is incapable of managing his affairs—such state implies the necessity of being guarded by the instrument of the law: and this state of insanity, which includes all the various terms of madness, melancholy, lunacy, mental derangement, &c. necessarily evinces the unsoundness of the individual’s mind. Lastly, idiotcy, which, whether it be ex nativitate, or supervene at any period of life, implies a deficiency of intellectual capacity, to an extent which renders him incapable of the mental offices, which enable a man to conduct himself, and manage his affairs, and which of necessity infers the unsoundness of his mind, and the propriety of legal protection.
Those are the states of the human intellect which have a distinct and separate existence,
and which are capable of being described from their manifestations; there can be no intermediate state, and certainly no abstract or independant unsoundness: which, when it is acknowledged, must, on the one hand, be derived from insanity, or from idiotcy on the other. But the law has established a different system, and it is observed that “It seems to have been a very long time before those who had the administration of justice in this department, thought themselves at liberty to issue a commission, when the person was represented as not being ideot ex nativitate, as not being lunatic, but as being of unsound mind, importing by those words, the notion, that the party was in some such state, as was to be contradistinguished from idiotcy; and as he was to be contradistinguished from lunacy, and yet such as made him a proper object of a commission, in the nature of a commission to enquire of
idiotcy, or a commission to enquire of lunacy.” Accepting this with great humility as the law, it is equally dutiful to endeavour to discover on what facts or experience it was established: and the only clue to this investigation is found in the words “in some such state,” as was neither idiotcy nor lunacy, but “such” as disqualified him from exercising the volition of an ordinary man, by an instrument “in the nature” of a commission applicable to ideot or lunatic.
If this undefined unsoundness of mind, can thus dispossess the individual of his liberty, and of the use of his property, under the issuing of a commission, it performs sufficient; but it may be respectfully enquired, what would be the general opinion, or that of the commissioners of the College of Physicians, if a medical practitioner were to give a certificate to confine a person in a madhouse, declaring
he was neither an ideot nor a lunatic, but of unsound mind?—And what attention would the judge and jury give to a physician in a criminal court who came to prove that a man who had committed murder was not responsible for the crime, because he was neither an ideot nor a lunatic, but of unsound mind; importing by these words that he was in some such state as was to be contradistinguished from idiotcy, and as he was to be contradistinguished from lunacy? After having taken this view of the subject, which is the result of extensive experience in this department of the profession, and of diligent enquiry into the nature of the human mind; it appears to me, that the medical practitioner may safely and conscientiously infer unsoundness of mind, if such term be legally insisted on, whenever a morbid condition of intellect prevails, to an extent which deprives the mind of its natural and healthy offices, by producing
an incapacity or inability in the individual to conduct himself and manage his affairs.