Report of the proceedings under a brieve of idiotry, Peter Duncan against David Yoolow, tried at Coupar-Angus, 28-30 Jan., 1837 : with an appendix of relative documents, and an introduction / by Ludovic Colquhoun.

  • Duncan, Peter, active 1837.
Date:
1837
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Report of the proceedings under a brieve of idiotry, Peter Duncan against David Yoolow, tried at Coupar-Angus, 28-30 Jan., 1837 : with an appendix of relative documents, and an introduction / by Ludovic Colquhoun. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the University of Massachusetts Medical School, Lamar Soutter Library, through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the Lamar Soutter Library at the University of Massachusetts Medical School.

    163/190 (page 113)
    was a person of weak intellect, by which I mean of unsound mind. Mr. George Anderson : A weak intellect, and imbecile mind, and not capable of buying and selling. Mr. William Purves : His mind imbecile, not capable of •' buying or selling, or of transacting business or managing his affairs. Dr. James Anderson : He is decidedly imbecile, but ca- pable of answering a simple question, but not an abstract one. In the literal sense of the word, he is not of sound mind, but in the medical sense of the word as meaning insanity, it has no application to Yoolow except when in a state of excitement; fatuity is applicable to him. Even supposing that this was the whole of the medical evi- dence, you will ask yourselves whether it amounts to a proof of fatuity and idiocy against Yoolow, or only to a partial derange- ment of the intellect, to which the brieve of fatuity and idiocy does not apply. You will also keep in your recollection the grounds from which those conclusions have been drawn, and judge whether some of the questions put, as observed by Yoolow's counsel, were or were not applicable to his limited state of knowledge and acquire- ments, considering the secluded manner in which he had lived since he was a child of ten years of age, and to the deficiency in his education, considering that the Bible seems to have been the only book almost which he read, or was possessed of. But the medical evidence does not rest there. Professional men, of equally high character, drew very opposite inferences. Dr. John Argyle Robertson, who was first examined for Yoolow, said, From Yoolow's want of experience, his attain- ments are limited. Did the conclusion you came to, lead you to think that he was fatuous or an idiot? Quite the reverse. By fatuity and idiocy, I understand the want of power to ac- quire knowledge. And the Doctor said that Yoolow possess- ed the power of acquiring knowledge. Dr. Nimmo was decidedly of opinion that David Yoolow is neither an idiot, fatuous, nor non compos mentis. Mr. Alexander Bell concurred with Dr. Nimmo. Dr. Carruthers says, I did not find him in a state of fatuity or idiocy, but quite the reverse. He has a mind ca- i