LUCRE1. Gain, profit. Cl. des Lois Rom. h. t.
LUCRI CAUSA. This is a Latin expression, which signifies that the thing to which it applies is done for the sake of gain.
2. It was supposed that when a larceny2 was committed the taking should have been lucri causa; but it has been considered that it is not necessary the taking should be lucri causa, if it be fraudulenter, with intent to wholly deprive the owner of the property. Russ. & Ry. 292; 2 RUSS.' on Cr. 92. 1 Car. & K. 532. Vide Inst. lib. 4, t. 1, s. 1.
LUGGAGE. Such things as are carried by a traveller, generally for his personal accommodation; baggage. In England this word is generally used in the same sense that baggage is used in the United States. See Baggage.
LUNACY, med. jur. A disease of the mind, which is differently defined as it applies to a class of disorders3, or only to one species of them. As a general term it includes all the varieties of mental, disorders, not fatuous4.
2. Lunacy is adopted as a general term, on account of its general use as such in various legislative5 acts and legal proceedings6, as commissions of lunacy, and in this sense it seems to be synonymous with non compos mentis, or of unsound mind.
3. In a more restricted sense, lunacy is the state of one who has bad understanding, but by discase, grief, or other accident, has lost the use of reason. 1 Bl. Com. 304.
4. The following extract from a late work, Stock on the Law of Non Compotes Mentis, will show the difficulties of discovering what is and what is not lunacy. "If it be difficult to find an appropriate definition or comprehensive name for the various species of lunacy," says this author, page 9, "it is quite as difficult to find anything approximating to a positive evidence of its presence. There are not in lunacy, as in fatuity7, external signs not to be mistaken, neither is there that similarity of manner and conduct which enables any one, who has observed instances of idiocy8 or imbecility, to detect their presence in all subsequent cases, by the feebleness of perception and dullness of sensibility common to them all. The varieties of lunacy are as numerous as the varieties of human nature, its excesses commensurate with the force of human passion, its phantasies coextensive with the range of human intellect. It may exhibit every mood from the most serious to the most gay, and take every tone from the most sublime9 to the most ridiculous. It may confine itself to any trifling10 feeling or opinion, or overcast11 the whole moral and mental conformation. It may surround its victim with unreal persons and events, or merely cause him to regard real persons and events with an irrational12 favor or dislike, admiration13 or contempt. It may find satisfaction in the most innocent folly14, or draw delight from the most atrocious crime. It may lurk15 so deeply as to elude16 the keenest search, or obtrude17 so openly as to attract the most careless notice. It may be the fancy of an hour, or the distraction18 of a whole life. Such being the fact, it is not surprising that many scientific and philosophical19 men have vainly exhausted20 their observation and ingenuity21 to find out some special quality, some peculiar22 mark or characteristic common to all cases of lunacy, which might serve at least as a guide in deciding on its absence or presence in individual instances. Being hopeless of a definition, they would willingly have contented23 themselves with a test, but even this the obscurity and difficulty of the subject seem to forbid.
5. Lord Erskine, who, in his practice at the bar, had his attention drawn24 this way, from being engaged in some of the most remarkable25 trials of his time involving questions of lunacy, has given as his test, "a delusive26 image, the inseparable companion of real insanity27," (Ersk. Misc. Speeches) and Dr. Haslam, whose opportunities of observation have surpassed most other persons, has proposed nearly the same, by saying that "false belief is the essence of insanity." (Haslam on Insanity.) Sir John Nicholl, in his admirable judgment29 in the case of Dew v. Clark, thus expresses himself: "The true criterion is, where there is delusion30 of mind there is insanity; that is, when persons believe things to exist, which exist only, or at least, in that degree exist only in their own imagimation, and of the non-existence of which neither argment nor proof can convince them; they are of unsound mind; or as one of the counsel accurately31 expressed it, it is only the belief of facts, which no rational person could have believed, that is insane delusion." (Report by Haggard, p. 7.) Useful as these several remarks are, they are not absolutely true. It is indeed beyond all question that the great majority of lunatics indulge in some "delusive image," entertain some "false belief." They assume the existence of things or persons which do not exist, and so yield to a delusive image, or they come to wrong conclusions about persons and things which do exist, and so fall into a false belief. But there is a class of cases where lunacy is the result of exclusive indulgence in particular trains of thought or feeling, where these tests are sometimes wholly wanting, and yet where the entire absorption of the faculties32 in one pedominant idea, the devotion of all the bodily and mental powers to one useless or injurious purpose, prove that the mind has lost its equilibrium33. With some passions, indeed, such as self-esteem and fear, what was at first an engrossing34 sentiment, will often go on to a positive delusion; the self-adoring egotist grows to fancy himself a sovereign or a deity35; the timid valetudinarian36 becomes the prey37 of imaginary diseases, the victim of unreal persecutions. But with many other passions, such as desire, avarice38 or revenge, the neglect and forgetfulness of all things save one, the insensibility to all restraints of reason, morality, or prudence39, often proceed to such an extent as to justify40 holding an individual as a lunatic, incapable41 of all self-restraint, although, strictly42 speaking, not possessed43 by any delusive image or false belief. Much less do these tests apply to many cases of irresistible44 propensity45 to acts wholly irrational, such as to murder or to steal without the smallest assignable motive46, which, rare as they are, certainly occur from time to time, and cannot but be held as an example of at least partial and temporary lunacy. It is to cases where no false belief or image can be detected, that the remark of Lord Erskine is more particularly applicable; "they frequently mock the wisdom of the wisest in judicial47 trials," (Ersk. Misc. Speeches,) and were not the paramount48 object of all legal punishment the benefit of the community, which makes it inexpedient to spare offenders49 against the law, if insanity be the ground of their de-fence, except upon the clearest proof, lest skilful50 dissemblers should thereby51 be led to hope for impunity52, very subtle questions might no doubt be raised as to the degree of moral responsibility and mental sanity28 attaching to the perpetrators of many atrocious acts, seeing that they often commit them tinder temptations quite inadequate53 to allure54 men of common prudence, or under passions so violent as to suspend altogether the operations of reason or free will. For as it is impossible to obtain an accurate definition of lunacy, so it is manifestly so, to draw the line correctly between it and its opposite rationality, or, to borrow the words of Chief Justice Hale, (1 Hale's P. C. p. 30,) "Doubtless most persons that are felons55, of themselves and others, are under a degree of partial insanity when they commit those offences. It is very difficult to define the indivisible line that divides perfect and partial, insanity; but it must rest on circumstances duly to be weighed and considered both by the judge and jury, lest on one side there be a kind of inhumanity towards the defects of human nature, or on the other side too great an indulgence given to great crimes."