University of Virginia Library

CHAPTER XVI.

MR. RANDOLPH'S SANITY DISCUSSED.

IN his Biography of John Randolph of Roanoke, Mr. Sawyer
has this observation: "It might be expected of him to
decide the important question of Mr. Randolph's sanity."
We must confess that we, at least, expected this of him.
Nor are our expectations, we think, unreasonable. A writer
who devotes more than a hundred pages to a particular subject
should certainly inform his readers whether his hero be
in his senses. But Mr. Sawyer, we are sorry to say, confesses
himself incompetent to judge. But, he adds, "on the
main point, that on which the happiness of our whole lives
in this world depends, the promotion of his self-interest and
pecuniary independence, if perfect success is the test of
sanity, he must stand acquitted on the charge of insanity."
Mr. Bouldin, it appears, agrees with Mr. Sawyer that Mr.
Randolph's practical skill and judgment in business ought
to be made a test. For, we remember, when Mr. Wickham
remarked that he thought "there was always a vein of
madness in him," he asked him, "how he accounted for his
paying off those mortgages and interest and buying as
much more property during thirty years, with negroes and
overseers only."

"Some," says Mr. Baldwin, "set Mr. Randolph down as a
madman, whose sagacity was only the cunning of a lunatic,
and his brilliancy only the occasional gleamings of light
which are fitfully emitted from the darkness of a mad-house.

But that others viewed him as a man eccentric indeed, but
whose acuteness of thought, deep insight into the motives of
men and the affairs of government, and whose perspicuity
and prudence were nearly miraculous."

The Hon. James W. Bouldin, from whose manuscript we
have so often quoted, says he once asked Rev. John Robinson:
How is it that you all have found out at last that Mr.
Randolph is a fool? He replied: "I am ashamed of that; I
know some of us say so; I wish he had less sense; he never
makes one of his great speeches but it shakes the whole
continent—every man, woman and child can repeat some of
it. Some of his conceptions, however, though vast and
powerful, are such, I think, as no mind entirely sane would
have."

The learned judges to whom was referred the question of
his sanity, after the most thorough and patient investigation
of the whole subject, decided that he was of sound and disposing
mind when he wrote his will in 1821, but insane
when he wrote the will of 1832. The reader will remember
the testimony of Mr. Daniel, one of the witnesses in that
celebrated cause. He represents Mr. Randolph as acting on
some occasions, in the most singular manner; but frequently
making use of the most striking language, full of meaning
and consistent. When asked the direct question, did he
think he was in a fit state of mind to make the acknowledgments
to his will, he replied: "He was excited by drinking,
but capable, in his estimation, of transacting business."
This truthful witness had the very best opportunity of forming
a correct opinion, as he lived very near him and had a
great deal to do with him.

Mr. Benton said, "his opinion was fixed of occasional
temporary aberrations of mind; and during such periods he
would do and say strange things, but always in his own

way—not only method, but genius in his fantasies; nothing
to bespeak a bad heart; only exaltation and excitement."
"The most brilliant talks," continued he, "that I ever heard
from him came forth on such occasions—a flow for hours (at
one time seven hours) of copious wit and classic allusion—
a perfect scattering of the diamonds of the mind."

He tells us that he once sounded Mr. Randolph to discover
what he thought of his own case. He heard him
repeating those lines of Johnson on "Senility and Imbecility."

"Mr. Randolph," said Mr. Benton, "I have several times
heard you repeat those lines, as if they could have an application
to yourself, while no person can have less reason to
fear the fate of Swift." "I have lived in dread of insanity,"
replied Mr. Randolph.

Many a man with fewer mental troubles and mental diseases
than Mr. Randolph has lived in dread of the same
thing, but whose apprehensions were never realized. We
are not at all surprised that a man of peculiar genius, especially
one who looks narrowly into the machinery of his
own mind, should live in dread of insanity. It is no wonder
that those who think "long and darkly," whose feelings are
morbidly active, who are so constituted as to dwell upon
a particular subject with intense interest, should be fearful of
the effects of overaction.

Mr. Baldwin thought him insane at times. Mr. Garland,
on the contrary, speaking of his conduct on the occasion of
the funeral of Commodore Decatur, says: "The cold and
heartless world, that is unconscious of anything else but a

selfish motive, and the ignorant multitude that followed the
funeral pageant with gaping mouth, agreed on a common
explanation of his extravagance by proclaiming, `the man
is mad.' "

There seems to be a great difference of opinion both as to
Mr. Randolph's sanity and his habit of drinking to excess.
Mr. Benton says, he "never saw him affected by wine." The
reader will remember what the Hon. James W. Bouldin said
on this subject. He emphatically states, that from the first
time he ever saw him to the last, say from 1808 or '9 till his
death, he drank very hard, great quantities of intoxicating
drink."

The reader will also remember the manner in which Mr.
Bouldin attempts to account for the fact that it was not
generally believed that Mr. Randolph drank to excess. He
said: "Although he drank much in public, he drank still
more in private; and although the public and private drinking
was known to so many, yet it is a matter of great surprise
to nine-tenths of persons to be told that he drank to
excess. He had the power of fascination and charm to such
an extent on most men that, though he drank much, they
thought it had no effect on him." Mr. Bouldin was of a
different opinion, however.

The testimony of Mr. Benton and Mr. Bouldin differs;
both may be true. But if the question were submitted to a
judge on the bench upon the evidence of these two witnesses,
he would be bound to decide, according to settled
principles of law, that the fact of drunkenness was proved.

He was in a drunken, prostrate condition when he made
Mr. R. B. put the paper in the box and seal it with the sign
of the cross; when he unconsciously bid the same person
adieu.

He was intoxicated when he took that cold ride in his

carriage from his house to Watkins's store—the time he offered
his friend the bottle of hot water, and put his cloak
over one of his horses. He was inflamed by drink when he
stormed and raged at his servant Queen about the bank
note—the time he raised himself up in his bed with the
pantaloons in his hands and swore they had been boiled.
Nor was he at all sober when he displayed the clothes he
wore before the Emperor of Russia, when he said, they
were rich but not gaudy, and thereupon commenced to read
a volume of Skakespeare, saying he would read the whole
story; and he was in a drunken stupor when he pressed the
hand of his friend, and closing his eyes, whispered, "I am
dying."

He was surely drunk when he did a thousand things
which some attributed to madness. True, they had seen
other men drinking vast quantities of intoxicating liquors,
and then acting strangely and talking strangely; and they
had no hesitation in pronouncing such, not mad, but drunk.
But when they saw Mr. Randolph drinking to the same extent,
and talking and acting strangely, they could not believe
it was drunkenness, but madness.

The main question now comes up for decision—was Mr.
Randolph a sane man?

There are some who attribute, in a great measure, those
strange things, of which so much has been said, in the life
of Mr. Randolph, to his intemperate habits. Of this number
is one of our most reliable witnesses. If the reader
will recollect, in a conversation upon this very subject with
Mr. Wickham, Mr. Bouldin said, "he was drunk." Mr.
Wickham replied, "he did not know whether the intoxication
came first, or the madness came first, but they came
together."

We have no doubt that this is the correct opinion. He

was no more mad than some other men under the influence
of ardent spirits. He lost his senses from the same cause,
and to no greater extent.

If he were living, he might so fascinate and charm us that
we might not believe he was intemperate; or we might be
afraid to say so, as thousands were. But, now that he is
dead, and has been for some time, we think we can form an
unprejudiced opinion, and may safely express it.

There is not a shadow of a doubt resting upon our mind,
of Mr. Randolph's sanity. We repeat, his nerves were of
the finest texture of any man almost that ever lived, and his
brain had become morbid from inordinate exercise upon
particular subjects.

His nerves were strained to the highest pitch, but he was
not mad. To a state of high natural excitement was added
artificial excitement, and it was while under the combined
influence of both, that he said and did those strange things
which induced the belief in many, that he was mad.