Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:44:45.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Origin of Insanity as a Special Verdict: The Trial for Treason of James Hadfield (1800)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2024

Richard Moran
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The pivotal case in the history of the plea of insanity occurred in London during the reign of George III. In the year 1800, James Hadfield discharged a horse pistol at the king as he entered the royal box at Drury Lane Theatre. Hadfield pleaded insanity to a charge of high treason and was acquitted. The verdict caused much judicial concern, for the law's power over him was at best unclear. Hadfield was taken to Newgate Prison while Parliament hastily passed the Criminal Lunatics Act of 1800, which enabled the government to detain Hadfield for the rest of his life. No longer was a defendant found not guilty on the grounds of insanity entitled to a general acquittal. Insanity became a special verdict linked with automatic confinement for an indefinite period of time. Three other provisions of the act called for the detention of mentally ill persons who were arrested for criminal offenses or found in circumstances that suggested criminal activity.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 19 , Issue 3 , 1985 , pp. 487 - 519
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 by The Law and Society Association

Footnotes

*

Research for this article was conducted while I was a Visiting Scholar at the Institute of Criminology, Cambridge University. Revisions were undertaken while I was a Fellow at Harvard Law School. Special thanks to Nigel Walker, Institute of Criminology, and Stephen White, University College, Cardiff, for their helpful comments.

References

References

ALLDERIDGE, Patricia (1977) “Why Was McNaughtan Sent to Bethlem?” in West, P.J. and Walk, A. (eds.), Daniel McNaughtan: His Trials and the Aftermath. London: Gaskell Books.Google Scholar
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (1983) “Report of Conclusions and Recommendations Regarding the Insanity Defense.” Report G (1-83).Google Scholar
ANONYMOUS (1823) Sketches in Bedlam. London: Sherwood, Jones, & Co.Google Scholar
ASPINALL, Arthur (1962-70) The Later Correspondence of George III, 5 vols. Hatherton MSS., Diary of George III.Google Scholar
BETHLEM HOSPITAL CASE NOTES.Google Scholar
BETHLEM ROYAL HOSPITAL ARCHIVES. Sub Committee Minutes, April 3, 1802; June 15, 1826. Case Book, December 1816.Google Scholar
BRIGGS, Asa (1983) The Age of Improvement 1783-1867. London: Longman.Google Scholar
BRINTON, Crane (1938) The Anatomy of a Revolution. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CLARK, G. K. and Sidney, ROBERTS (1967) The Critical Historian. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
COHN, Norman (1957) The Pursuit of the Millennium. London: Secker & Warburg.Google Scholar
DERSHOWITZ, Alan (1974) “The Origins of Preventive Confinement in Anglo-American Law—Part I: The English Experience,” 43 Cincinnati Law Review 1.Google Scholar
EIGEN, Joel Peter (1983) “Historical Developments in Psychiatric Forensic Evidence: The British Experience,” 6 International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 423.Google Scholar
EIGEN, Joel Peter (1984) “Intentionality and Insanity: What the Eighteenth Century Juror Heard.” Unpublished.Google Scholar
HARRISON, J. F. C. (1979) The Second Coming: Popular Millenarianism 1780-1850. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
HOME OFFICE PAPERS (20/13).Google Scholar
HOWELL, T. B. (1794) “Trial of Thomas Hardy for High Treason,” 24 Howell's State Trials 199. London: T. C. Hansard.Google Scholar
HOWELL, T. B. (1800) “Trial of James Hadfield For High Treason,” 27 Howell's State Trials 1281. London: T. C. Hansard.Google Scholar
HOWELL, T. B. (1809-1826) Complete Collection of State Trials and Proceedings for High Treason and Other Crimes and Misdemeanors from the Earliest Period, 33 Vols. London: T. C. Hansard.Google Scholar
HOWITT, W. (1864) Cassell's Illustrated History of England. London: Cassell, Peter and Galpin.Google Scholar
KING'S BENCH PAPERS (33/8/3/29).Google Scholar
LANGBEIN, John H. (1978) “The Criminal Trial before the Lawyers,” 45 The University of Chicago Law Review 263.Google Scholar
MACALPINE, Ida and Richard, HUNTER (1969) George III and the Mad-Business. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
MORAN, Richard (1981) Knowing Right from Wrong: The Insanity Defense of Daniel McNaughtan. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
MUDDIMAN, Joseph George (1930) State Trials: The Need for a New and Revised Edition of State Trials. Edinburgh: William Hodges & Co.Google Scholar
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH (1974) Competency to Stand Trial and Mental Illness. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY OF ENGLAND… (1819), Vol. 35. London: T.C. Hansard.Google Scholar
PLATT, Anthony M. (1965) “The Origins and Development of the ‘Wild Beast’ Concept of Mental Illness and Its Relation to Theories of Criminal Responsibility,” 1 Issues in Criminology 1.Google Scholar
ROWLEY, Harold Henry (1944) The Relevance of the Apocalyptic: A Study of Jewish and Christian Apocalypses from Daniel to the Revelation. London: Lutterworth Press.Google Scholar
SECOND REPORT FROM HIS MAJESTY'S COMMISSIONER ON CRIMINAL LAW (1836) “Defence of Prisoner by Counsel.”.Google Scholar
SMITH, Roger (1981) Trial by Medicine. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
STATUTES OF THE REALM (1820), Vol 7.Google Scholar
SMITH, Roger (1822), STATUTES OF THE REALM (1820) Vol. 9.Google Scholar
STEPHEN, STEPHEN Sir James (1883) A History of the Criminal Law of England. London: Macmillan and Company.Google Scholar
STRYKER, Lloyd Paul (1947) For the Defense: Thomas Erskine, the Most Enlightened Liberal of His Times, 1750-1823. Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, Inc.Google Scholar
THOMPSON, E. P. (1963) The Making of the English Working Class. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
TREASURY SOLICITOR'S PAPERS (11/223/030250).Google Scholar
WALKER, Nigel (1968) Crime and Insanity in England, Vol. 1. The Historical Perspective. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
WALKER, Nigel (1985) “The Insanity Defense before 1800,” 477 The Annals 25.Google Scholar
WATSON, John Steven (1960) The Reign of George III 1760-1815. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Y.B. Mich. 21 Hen. 7, pl. 16 (1506).Google Scholar

Statutes Cited

Treason Act, 1695, 7 Will. 3, c. 3 (1695).Google Scholar
Treason Act, 1708, 7 Ann., c. 21 (1708).Google Scholar
Vagrancy Act, 1744, 17 Geo. 2, c. 5 (1743).Google Scholar
Criminal Lunatics Act, 1800, 39 and 40 Geo. 3, c. 94 (1800).Google Scholar