597

That the college would be altered in its nature is evidentenough; but that is so absolutely desirable an object, that what-ever the legislature may do in medical affairs, I do not believethe profession will cease the conflict till that object be obtained.Instead, however, of the college being lowered by the change, ineither public or professional esteem, it would, in my opinion, beraised infinitely above its present position; for the alteration whichI anticipate would be its conversion into a National Faculty ofMedicine and Surgery. The College of Physicians would in duetime die a natural death, and every individual who will in futurepractise that branch of the profession, would anxiously associatewith the National Faculty. The combined energy and intellectof the whole profession would thus be centred in one noble insti-tution, to which the present and future ages would point withpride and pleasure. Science would advance, for we should thenresume our wonted state of peace. The public would be satis-fied, for energy and intellect would meet with their reward.Let me, then, with all the earnestness of which I am able, once

more entreat you to carry on the warfare. Unless I have mis-calculated, you will find some thousands of able, sturdy,-ay,determined volunteers to aid and assist you ; and in so good aoause, with humanity and right, arrayed together, against insultand injustice, the battle, though perhaps it may be protracted,cannot, indeed, be of doubtful result.

I am, Sir, your most obedient servant, ,

WILLIAM HEMPSON DENHAM.Pyon, Hereford, May 19, ]845. !

WILLIAM HEMPSON DENHAM

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

FRIDAY, MAY 16.—(Before Lord DENMAN, Mr. Baron ALDERSON,and Mr. Justice COLTMAN.)HOMICIDAL MONOMANIA.

MARTHA BRIXEY, aged eighteen, was placed at the bar, chargedwith the wilful murder of Robert Barry Ffinch, in the parish ofGreenwich, on the 4th of May instant. The prisoner, a mild-looking girl, was accommodated with a chair, and during theproceedings seemed to suffer extreme emotion.Mr. BODKIN, in stating the case to the jury, observed-thathis learned friend, Mr. Clarkson, who appeared to defend theaccused, would call their attention to the single question-namely,whether the prisoner at the bar was or was not at the time ofcommitting the act a responsible person, accountable for heractions, and subject to the consequences of the criminal act shewithout doubt had committed. The facts in the case were ex- Itremely simple and clear, and these the learned counsel detailedat length as they appear in evidence. He apprehended the lawto be, that every person who committed an offence of the sortwas presumed to be in such a state of mind as made him orher responsible for the acts committed, and the onus of provingthat he or she was not so was cast upon the party accused. Ofthe soundness of that rule there could be no question, and henceit was that the accused would have to make out that at the timeof the transaction she was in a state of irresponsibility.Mr. John Drake Ffinch, examined. I am a solicitor, and

reside at Greenwich. On Sunday morning, the 4th of May, Iwas sitting in the dining-room, at about a quarter to ten o’clock,with my wife and Mr. Traill, the police-magistrate, when theprisoner entered the room in a very excited state, and addressingme, said, " Oh, sir, what have I done? What have I done? Willyou forgive me?" I said, "What?" and immediately rose, as,indeed, we all did. The prisoner said, " Oh, sir, I am a murderer.I have murdered the dear baby. I have cut the dear baby’sthroat." I instantly ran from the room and proceeded to thenursery, and on going into the back sleep-nursery, I foundmy child in his cot with his head very nearly cut off. Therewas an ordinary table-knife lying across the child coveredwith blood ; and I saw that my child was dead. I then left theroom, and on the landing I met Mr. Traill. I called his atten-tion to what had happened, and then went down stairs. I sawthe prisoner in a room called my room. She then again addressedme, saying, " Oh, sir, will you forgive me ? what have I done ?what will become of me?" She attempted to take hold of me,but I thrust her from me, and replied, " You wretch! you havemurdered my poor child, who never could have injured you, andyou will be hanged for it, that is what will become of you." Shethen went down on her knees and prayed to God to forgive her.A police-constable was sent for, and I gave her into his custody,and he took her away. Before that, one of her fellow.-servantsbrought her bonnet and shawl, which she put on. I desired theconstable to take her away, when she said, "Oh, sir, let mestop to change my boots." I said, "you have no occasion forthem;" however, the boots were brought, and she changed them,and then went away. In her general conduct she had always

been previously extremely kind in every respect. Her conducthad always been quiet, harmless, and inoffensive. I believe shewas at the time under a course of treatment by the familysurgeon for a disease or stoppage to which women, especiallyyoung women, are subject. For a fortnight or three weeks be-fore this transaction took place, I observed that she had becomevery dull and restless. Her mother was sent for, as it was con-templated that the prisoner should leave my service, but after-wards she prayed to stay. This was on Thursday, the first ofMay. I do not know that she had complained of her head. Ihad seen the prisoner with the deceased child in her arms on themorning of the murder, about an hour before it happened. I hadno reason to suppose that the prisoner entertained any vindictivefeeling to my wife or to the child. The prisoner had lived withme for three years on the 31st of August last. The childrenwere very fond of her, and she was very fond of them.

Sarah May, examined by Mr. Bodkin.-I am upper nurse inthe service of Mr. Ffinch. The prisoner had nursed the de-ceased that morning. She always appeared to me to treat thedeceased and the other children with very great kindness. AfterI had placed the deceased in the cot, the prisoner assisted me tomake the beds in the same room. Whilst so occupied, she askedme if I thought Mrs. Ffinch would allow her to stop. I said no,for I was sure Mrs. Ffinch had determined that she should leaveher service. During the time I have known the prisoner, Ialways considered her a person of a very kind disposition, andthe children were all very fond of her. There had been recentlya death in the family, and the servants were put into mourning.The prisoner complained that the body of her gown did not fither, and she ripped the body from the skirt, and thrust it withthe poker into the fire. She had before that had it altered a goodmany times, but still was not satisfied with it. For myself, I sawnothing the matter with the gown. I had not noticed any changein the prisoner’s appearance that morning. She did not lookwell, and was rather low in spirits. When she burnt the bodyof the gown, she was very much excited, and said she wished thedress at the devil." I felt it my duty to inform my mistress ofthis conduct. I did so, and I was present in the nursery whenMrs. Ffinch told the prisoner that she had acted very wrong; thatshe must have been in a great passion; and that if she re-peated such conduct, she must leave her service. Mrs. Ffinchwas induced to overlook the misconduct of the prisoner, but shewas told that if she altered the dress any more she must leaveher place. On the following day, Friday, May 2, the prisonerwas sent to fetch the children from school, and it turned out thatshe on that occasion again took the dress to be altered. On herreturn, she came with the gown in her hand, and, in reply toMrs. Ffinch, said she had been with it again to the dressmaker’s.Mrs. Ffinch said to her, " Martha, I told you last night that if youwent again you must leave my service, and now you mustleave." The prisoner began to cry, and said she was very sorry,and hoped she should not leave, and several times asked hermistress to allow her to stop, and added, that she should never behappy again if she went away. On Saturday, Mrs. Ffinch men-tioned that she had been to Deptford to see a young woman, whowas coming to take the prisoner’s place in the nursery. Theprisoner said she was very sorry indeed for what had happened,but hoped that she would be forgiven and allowed to stop. Inthe course of the Saturday, I did not hear anything more; theprisoner seemed then to be very comfortable, and in the after-noon I heard her singing in the nursery. On the Sunday morn-ing, while at breakfast, she inquired when her mistress wasgoing about the young woman at Deptford, and I repliedthat I believed she would go to-morrow. The prisoner saidshe would not leave, for she did not like another to come inher place. For some weeks before this happened, the prisonerhad been unwell and taking medicine. She complained to meof a curious sort of aching pain in her head. She took medicinefor some weeks until she said her head was better. The prisonerwas very much liked in the family, and was treated with greatkindness.

Mr. BODKIN.-Do you remember any conversation you hadwith the prisoner on the Saturday night before the child met withits death? Did she not say something about hanging? Tell us.as nearly as you can what she said.

Witness.-She said, " I need not make myself so very un-happy as I do; one would think that I had committed murder ;but I have not done so." I replied to her, " Martha, do nottalk in that way. I hope you will never be guilty of such acrime as that." She then asked me if I ever knew of awoman being hung. I answered, " Why, if they commitmurder they are hung as well as men who were guilty of thatoffence." The prisoner responded that she would as soon behung as transported or put into a madhouse. This conversationthe prisoner began herself. She was continually talking about

598

her leaving her place-the matter seemed to be always on hermind.

Elizabeth Middleditch, examined by Mr. WILDE.-I am house-maid in the family of Mr. Ffinch, and have been so for the last twoyears. On the 4th, I saw the nurse, Mary, who had Elizabeth, oneof my master’s children, with her in the kitchen. In a short’time after, I saw the prisoner go into the pantry. I followed her’there, and saw her take an ordinary table-knife out of the box.I asked her what she was going to do with it? She replied, thatshe was going to cut a pencil for Miss Mary. I said to her, asmaller knife would be better for that purpose. She said shewould take the larger one as well, as it would do to cut the chil-dren’s bread and butter in the afternoon. I saw her try theedge of the large knife with her finger and thumb, and then shewent up stairs, taking both knives with her. In a short time-after this I heard a scream, and went up stairs. In the hall I sawthe prisoner and my master. I said, " Martha, what is thematter?" She exclaimed, 11 good God! I have cut the dear

’baby’s throat." I had noticed of late a change in the pri-’soner’s appearance. She was always a very kind and good-natured girl.Mr. John Mould Burton, examined by Mr. BODKIN.-I ama surgeon, and attend the family of Mr. Ffinch. By desire ofMrs. Ffinch, I have, since the 31st of March, - sent the prisonerSome medicines, to remove some constitutional irregularities towhich young women are especially subject. Those irregularitieshad been of some months’ standing, and the medicines I gavewere intended to counteract them. ,

Cross-examined by Mr. CLARKsoN.-I have frequently had ioccasion to attend young women who have been subject to tem- Iporary suspensions of the action of nature, and I believe any sus- Ipension of that action is calculated very much to derange the Igeneral constitution, and in proportion as the suspension is longor short, in the same proportion the general constitution of thepatient is jeopardized. Sometimes the effect assumes an appear-ance as though the patient was labouring under dropsy, and oc-casionally, instead of affecting the body, it attacks the head.Under the latter circumstances, the patient is subject to dullchronic pains in the head and the region of the brain. This isattended with restlessness of manner, moroseness, and dulness ofappearance. The patient is subjected also to fits of irritability,and great excitement and passion. These symptoms will presentthemselves very suddenly. I have known instances where thefunctions of the mind of a woman so situated have been seriouslyaffected. I have not been watching the prisoner during the wholeof the time she has been taking the medicines I sent her. I saw

very little of her, and only spoke two or three words to her, whenshe told me that she was better. I suggested to Mr. Ffinch thatthe prisoner ought to be sent away, because she had exhibitedgreat violence of temper in burning the dress, which was such anact as unfitted her to be amongst young children. That act waslikely to have arisen from the difficulties or disease under whichshe was labouring, and I thought it would be an act of prudentprecaution that she should be sent away. She has been under theinfluence of the medicine I prescribed for her up to the time ofthe melancholy catastrophe.

Re-examined by Mr. BoDKIN.-I have no reason, from any-thing I heard or know, to suspect the soundness of the prisoner’smind, or to suppose she was labouring under any affection of the’head.By Lord DENMAN.-From what you have heard now, do you

think she was a person of a diseased mind previous to this oc-eurrence ?

Witness.-That is a very difficult question to answer.Mr. CLARKSON stated that the jury were to decide the mo-

mentous question now before them on the facts in proof, and onthem alone. The simple question for them was, whether or not,on the evidence, they were of opinion that the prisoner, at the

time of committing the act, was a responsible being, and knew theconsequences of that act, and was capable of distinguishing be-tween right and wrong. The learned counsel then went throughthe evidence with great force and ability, urging on the jury themedical evidence of Mr. Burton, the surgeon, who had prescribedfor the prisoner, the absence of all motive for the commission ofthe act, and the strange wildness of the manner in which it wascommitted, as all being calculated to show that at the time theprisoner could not have been a responsible agent.Lord DENMAN proceeded to sum up the evidence, which he

recapitulated, at length, with great minuteness, and stated thatthe question was one of fact, and entirely for the jury. The

question was, whether the prisoner, at the time she committedthe fatal act, was not responsible for it, by reason of a derangedstate of mind. It was for them to decide that question on theevidence adduced.The jury retired at half-past one o’clock, and after an absence

of half an hour, came into court, when the foreman delivered thefollowing verdict.-" That from the derangement of the system,which led to great excitement in the prisoner at the time shecommitted the act, we are of opinion that she was not responsiblefor her actions."Lord DENMAN.—That is, in fact, a verdict of Not Guilty, on

the ground of insanity. Let it be so entered.The prisoner, who was ordered by the Court to be detained

during her Majesty’s pleasure, was then removed from the bar.

THE GOVERNMENT MEDICAL BILLAND

ENFRANCHISEMENT IN THE ROYAL COLLEGEOF SURGEONS.

THE OLD APOTHECARIES’ HALL AND THENEW GALLIPOT LODGE.

THE TREACHEROUS COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION.

To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SiR,—The medical political events of the day are replete withinterest, and pregnant with the most momentous consequences toevery individual connected with our profession. And I must be

permitted to say that I have admired and respected your con-sistency and decision, in the midst of the most trying events.Your conduct has raised your character and reputation as a

medical reformer, and gained for you the renewed approbationof your professional brethren. In the midst of the chaotic massof private struggles and professional jealousies, the provincialmedical men look alone to you to direct them aright, and to pro-tect their interests. Surrounded though you are by the most foul.and bitter calumnies, your principles have triumphed over everyother consideration, and you have manifested to the world a mindequal to the emergency, and capable of resisting alike friends andfoes, when they would compromise those interests which, through-out your life, you have shown to be so dear to you.Can you tell me, Sir, whence arises the great love and affinity

which now appears to exist between the Apothecaries’ Companyand the General Practitioners ? Or, what produces the indecentand headstrong conduct of the self-nominated committee? Or,whence arises the desire-the sudden desire-of the Apothecaries’Company to obtain a representative government?

While passing through my studies in London, what was thegeneral cry of " pures," of lecturers, of general practitioners, andof students-a cry which was echoed and re-echoed throughoutthe length and breadth of the land ? Was it not that the Apothe-caries’ Company were most overbearing, most tyrannical, andmost disgusting in their insolence to the poor students, and to theprofession generally? The general voice of complaint was an-swered by contemptuous silence. Secured in their existence,they smiled at the drawn dagger, and defied its point." Did theythen attempt to conciliate ? Did they then offer to join the

profession for its benefit? Did they then offer to forego theircorporate powers? Did they then offer to give a representa-tive government? No: it was only when they could no longerexist, it was only when they found that they were drowning,that they caught at the straw, in the hope that a few of them mighthave the chance of some of the loaves and fishes in the anticipatedCollege.The medical students have been treated as stones by the com-

pany. When we went to register, we were kept, like porters,crowded together in the street outside their door, or if permittedinside, it was, to vegetate, until our time came, in an open yard,unsheltered and uncovered. As medical students, we were sub-jected to the caprice and insolence of their domestics. Theirgeneral conduct to the medical students, men of as good pro-perty as, perhaps, and with a better education than, themselves,was universally felt to be dishonouring, and more haughty thanis usually shown by a commanding officer to the soldiery underhis command.

Again, what has ever been the character of their examina-tions ? Have they universally been considered partial, or havethey not? Those students who have been with an experienced" grinder" know well that they had to give different answers tothe same question to different men, or they stood a chance ofbeing " plucked." What chance did a gentleman stand who hap-pened unfortunately to be an "M.D." of any College? Werenot the names of some of the examiners used almost in the shape