DRUNKENNESS. In Medical Juris prudence. The condition of a man whose mind is affected by the immediate use of in toxicating drinks.
2. This condition presents various degrees of in tensity, ranging from a simple exhilaration to a state of utter unconsciousness and insensibility. In the popular phrase, the term drunkenness is applied only to those degrees of it is which the mind is manifestly disturbed in its operations. In the earlier stages it frequently happens that the mind is not only not disturbed, but acts with ex traordinary clearness, promptitude, and vigor. In the latter the thoughts obviously succeed one another without much relevance or coherence, tho perceptive faculties are active, but the impressions are misconceived, as if they passed through a dis torting medium, and the reflective powers cease to act with any degree of efficiency. Some of the in termediate stages may be easily recognized; but it is not always possible to fix upon the exact mo ment when they succeed one another. In some persona peculiarly ennstitnted; a fit of intoxication presents few if any of these successive stages, and the mind rapidly loses its self-control, and for tho time is actually frenzied, as if is a maniacal par oxysm, though the amount of the drink may be comparatively small. The same phenomenon is observed sometimes in persona who have had some injury of the bead, who are deprived of their rea son by the slightest indulgence.
3. The habitual abuse of intoxicating drinks is usually followed by a pathological condition of the brain, which is manifested by a degree of intellect ual obtuseness, end some insensibility to moral distinctions once readily discerned. The mind is more exposed to the force of foreign influences, and more readily induced to regard things in the light to which others have directed them. In others it produces a permanent mental derange ment, which, if the person continues to indulge, is easily mistaken by common observers for the im mediate effects of hard drinking. These two re sults—the mediate and the immediate effects of drinking—may coexist; but it is no less necessary to distinguish them from each other, because their legal consequences may be very different. Moved by the latter, a person goes into the street and abuses or assaults his neighbors • moved by the former, the same person makes his will, and cuts off those who have the strongest claims upon his bounty with a shilling. In a judicial investigation,
one class of witnesses *R1 attribute all his extra vagances to drink, while another will see nothing in them hut the effect of insanity. The medical jurist should not be misled by either party, hut be able to refer each particular act to its proper source.
4. Another remarkable form of drunkenness is called dipsomania. Rather suddenly, and perhaps without much preliminary indulgence, a person manifests an insatiable thirst for strong drink, which no considerations of propriety or prudence can induce him to control. He generally retires to some secluded place, and there, during a period of a few days or weeks. he swallows enormous quan tities of liquor, until his stomach refuses to bear any more. Vomiting succeeds, followed by sick ness, depression, and disgust lor all intoxicating drinks. This affection is often periodical, the par oxysms recurring at periods varying from three months to several years. Sometimes the indul gence is more continuous and limited, sufficient, however, to derange the mind, without producing sickness, and equally beyond control. Dipsomania may result from moral causes, such as anxiety, di, appointment, grief, sense of responsibility ; or phy skull, consisting chiefly of some anomalous condi tion of the stomach. Esquirol, Mal. Men. ii. 73; Marc, de la Folie, ii. 605; Ray, Med. Jur. 497; Macnish, Anatomy of Drunkenness, chap. 14.
5. The common law shows but little dis position to afford relief, either in civil or criminal cases, from the immediate effects of drunkenness. It has never considered mere drunkenness alone as a sufficient reason for invalidating any act. When carried so far as to deprive the party of all consciousness, strong presumption of fraud is raised; and on that ground courts may interfere. 1 Yes. Ch. 19 ; 18 id. 12. Drunkenness in such a degree as to render the testator unconscious of what he is about, or less capable of resist ing the influence of others, avoids a will. Shelford, Lun. 274, 304. In actions for torts, drunkenness is not regarded as a reason for mitigating damages. Coke,. Litt. 247 a. Courts of equity, too, have declined to inter fere in favor of parties pleading intoxication in the performance of some civil act,. 1 Story, Eq:i 232.