Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-27gpq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-27T19:38:41.665Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Nowell v. Williams

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2018

Extract

It is astonishing how a medical case, simple in its character, obvious in its nature, and of which the diagnosis does not present serious difficulty to a mental physician, may become lost in a fog, and obscured by a number of irrelevant questions, when it comes into a Court of Law. Conflicting interests, the contention of lawyers, the technicalities which bar the admission of this or that particular fact in evidence, which is important in a scientific investigation—in which truth alone is the object of the inquirer—the mass of details which are crowded into the case, the probable ignorance and obtuseness of some of those who have to form a judgment; the necessarily imperfect medical knowledge of counsel, and also of the Judge himself; the prejudice of the public in regard to asylums for the insane—all these circumstances combine to prevent a dispassionate and scientific inquiry into a case of alleged lunacy. Under such circumstances, the wonder perhaps is not that juries often blunder on questions of lunacy, but that they manage, as often as they do, to blunder on the right side. So has it been in the action of Nowell v. Williams—in which the plaintiff sought to recover damages for false imprisonment on the ground that he had been confined in Northumberland House, he being at the time sane. He was in medical practice in Cornwall Road, London. He passed the College of Surgeons and the Hall in 1860–61, and became L.R.C.P. (Edin.) in 1865. His age is 43.

Type
Part I.—Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1880 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.