Finally, it is necessary to observe that insanity may be counterfeited by the criminal, in order to defeat the progress of justice;—and with this view, may attempt to impose on the medical practitioner. During the course of my experience I have witnessed only two attempts of such imposture, and in both instances the deception was so clumsily executed, that it required but little knowledge of the disorder to detect it. To sustain the character of a paroxysm of active insanity would require a continuity of exertion beyond the power of a sane person;—they do not keep up the deception when they suppose themselves alone and unwatched;—the assumed malady then disappears, and the imposture is re-commenced when they are in the society of others. They are likewise unable to prevent sleep. If they endeavour to imitate the passive form of this malady, which is an attempt of considerably greater difficulty, they are deficient in the presiding principles, the ruling delusion, the unfounded aversions, and causeless attachments which characterize insanity—they are unable to mimic the solemn dignity of systematic madness, nor recur to those associations which mark this disorder; and they will want the peculiarity of look, which so strongly impresses an experienced observer. * * * * * It now remains to treat of that morbid condition of intellect which requires the interposition of the law to protect the person and property of the party so affected.[61:A] The general reasoning which has been adopted concerning insanity, in criminal cases, will equally apply to the present subject; but there are some particular considerations deserving attention in this part of the enquiry. The members of the medical profession have long and anxiously endeavoured to frame a definition of insanity, which is an attempt in a few words to exhibit the essential character of this disorder; so that it may be recognized when it exists;—these efforts have been hitherto fruitless, nor is there any rational expectation that this desideratum will be speedily accomplished. The Lawyer has taken a different view of the subject: he has been little solicitous to become acquainted with the physiological distinctions of disordered intellect, or the causes producing such state:—these he has confided to the medical evidence to explain. His enquiry has been directed to ascertain if such state of mind prevails, as actually disqualifies the particular person from conducting himself, or managing his affairs, and he expects from the medical evidence sufficient proofs of such incompetence. To this condition of intellect, when satisfactorily demonstrated, the law applies its remedy and protection. This incapacity of conducting himself, or of managing his affairs, arising from a morbid state of intellect;—whether it be from perversion of mind or imbecility, is in the estimation of the lawyer equivalent to a definition of insanity,