Section 51.
In direct connection with the association of ideas is our recollection
and memory, which are only next to perception in legal
importance in the knowledge of the witness. Whether the witness
wants to tell the truth is, of course, a question
which depends upon
other matters; but whether he can tell the truth
depends upon
perception and memory. Now the latter is a highly complicated
and variously organized function which is difficult to understand,
even in the daily life, and much more so when everything depends
upon whether the witness has noticed anything, how, how long, what
part of the impression has sunk more deeply into his mind, and in
what direction his defects of memory are to be sought. It would be
inexcusable in the lawyer not to think about this and to make
equivalent use of all the phenomena that are presented to him. To
overlook the rich literature and enormous work that has been devoted
to this subject is to raise involuntarily the question, for
whom was it all done? Nobody needs a thorough-going knowledge
of the essence of memory more than the lawyer.
I advise every criminalist to study the literature of memory
and recommend the works of Münsterberg, Ribot, Ebbinghaus,
Cattell, Kräpelin, Lasson, Nicolai Lange, Arreat, Richet, Forel,
Galton, Biervliet, Paneth, Fauth, Sander, Koch, Lehmann, Féré,
Jodl,[1] etc.
[[ id="n51.1"]]
H. Münsterberg: Beiträge II, IV.
H. Ebbinghaus: Über das Gedächtnis. Leipzig 1885.
J. M. Cattell: Mind, Vols. 11-15. (Articles.)
J. Bourdon: Influence de l'Age sur la Memoire Immédiate. Revue
Philosophique, Vol. 38.
Kräpelin: Über Erinnerungstäusehungen. Archiv. f. Psychiatrie,
XVII, 3.
Lasson: Das Gedächtnis. Berlin 1894,
Diehl Zum Studium der Merkfähigkeit. Beitr. z. Psychol. d. Aussage,
II. 1903.