University of Virginia Library

Search this document 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

collapse section1. 
collapse section 
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
collapse section 
 3. 
 4. 
 5. 
 6. 
 7. 
 8. 
 9. 
collapse section 
 10. 
 11. 
 12. 
 13. 
 14. 
 15. 
 16. 
 17. 
 18. 
 19. 
 20. 
 21. 
collapse section 
collapse section 
 22. 
 23. 
 24. 
 25. 
 26. 
 27. 
 28. 
 29. 
 30. 
 31. 
 32. 
 33. 
collapse section 
 34. 
collapse section2. 
collapse section 
collapse section 
 35. 
 36. 
 37. 
 38. 
 39. 
 40. 
 41. 
 42. 
 43. 
collapse section 
 44. 
collapse section 
 45. 
collapse section 
 46. 
 47. 
 48. 
 49. 
collapse section 
 50. 
collapse section 
 51. 
Section 51.
 52. 
 53. 
 54. 
 55. 
 56. 
collapse section 
 57. 
collapse section 
 58. 
collapse section 
 59. 
 60. 
 61. 
 62. 
collapse section 
collapse section 
 63. 
 64. 
 65. 
 66. 
 67. 
 68. 
 69. 
 70. 
 71. 
 72. 
 73. 
 74. 
 75. 
 76. 
 77. 
 78. 
 79. 
 80. 
 81. 
 82. 
 83. 
 84. 
 85. 
 86. 
 87. 
 88. 
 89. 
 90. 
collapse section 
 91. 
 92. 
 93. 
 94. 
 95. 
 96. 
 97. 
collapse section 
 98. 
 99. 
 100. 
 101. 
 102. 
 103. 
 104. 
 105. 
 106. 
 107. 
 108. 
 109. 
collapse section 
 110. 
 111. 
 112. 

  
  
  

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.


259

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.