"Although, therefore, the subject of criminal responsibility has been considered and treated exhaustively, by Sir FitzJames Stephen, from the point of view of the professional lawyer who was in psychology an amateur, it seems that its treatment is not complete until it has been considered anew by a professional psychologist. Sir FitzJames Stephen was hampered by an insufficient knowledge of the working of the mind in health and disease. That he was so hampered he formally admits, and the admission is no disparagement to him. He made the best use of the knowledge of his time, and he obtained a singular degree of mastery over the knowledge of insanity that was then available. But in twenty years our knowledge has advanced; and I think the time is ripe to complement his work by another, written from the complementary point of view. This is the task that I have essayed"--Preface. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved).
Includes index. Reproduction of original from Harvard Law School Library.
Formatted Contents Note
Responsibility Voluntary action Wrong-doing Insanity Mind Conditions of responsibility The answers of the judges Procedure and practice.
Digital File Characteristics
System Details Note
Master and use copy. Digital master created according to Benchmark for Faithful Digital Reproductions of Monographs and Serials, Version 1. Digital Library Federation, December 2002. (http://purl.oclc.org/DLF/benchrepro0212)
Source of Description
Description based on print version record.
Available in Other Form
Print version: Mercier, Charles Arthur, 1852-1919. Criminal responsibility. Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1905