Give Me Poverty, Lest I Steal1The Judges sat Grave and Mute, gave me an easy [meaning 'indifferent'] Hearing, and Pronounc'd Sentence of Death, Moll Flanders recounts. Convicted of one of 200 offenses punishable by death, in her case stealing £46 of silk cloth-919 shillings more than one shilling threshold for felony theft-Daniel Defoe's heroine had tried to mitigate her sentence with speech that mov'd to Tears that heard [her].2 This confrontation between legal subject and human messinese of motives, emotions, and especially mental impairment is subject of Dana Rabin's Identity, Crime, and Legal Responsibility in Eighteenth-Century England (Palgrave Macmillan, 2004). Rabin explains that legal system was equipped to deal with a coherent and cohesive punishable body, and with total, unmistakable, perfect insanity, not with pitiable human beings who insisted that temporary states of mind resulting from starvation, pain, passion, and suffering explained (and excused) their crimes, especially in age of sensibility.This important book tells story of law's confrontation with major change in larger culture: privileging of sensibility. The language of mind that accompanied this movement, Rabin argues, destabilized the definition and determination of mens rea, criminal intent, basis of all criminal law (8). Sensibility is no easy term to define, and major studies of it, including John Mullan's Sentiment and Sociability: The Language of Feeling in Eighteenth Century (1988), Jerome McGann's The Poetics of Sensibility: A Revolution in Literary Style (1996, which she does not cite), and especially G. J. Barker-Benfield's The Culture of Sensibility: Sex and Society in Eighteenth-Century Britain (1992), have expanded our understanding of term, but also our awareness of its complicated and complicating impact on every facet of British life. Rabin, following Barker-Benfield, defines it as component of identity and faculty of susceptibility to one's own feelings and feelings of others (11). She usefully summarizes opinions about human nature and proliferation of theories of self and moral sense by, among others, Anthony Ashley Cooper, earl of Shaftesbury, David Hume, and Adam Smith, and then weaves together legal, social, and cultural history to tell story of juries, judges, and legal theorists grappling with new demand that they possess sensibility.The story begins and ends with James Hadfield, former soldier and silversmith who shot George III in crowded theatre. After brilliant defense by Thomas Erskine, he was found Not guilty; he being under influence of insanity act was (1). Before reading this book, phrase at time slides by unnoticed; after reading it, words glow with significance. Rabin slowly develops context in which this verdict was rendered in four chapters. After introductory one, chapter 2 clearly explains mechanics of eighteenth-century trials and major changes in century, such as evolution of lawyerized courtroom from accused speaks trial that Moll Flanders portrays. It introduces types of insanity pleas and summarizes pertinent legal opinions of such major figures as Matthew Hale, author of The History of Pleas of Crown, and William Blackstone, who wrote Commentaries on Laws of England. Chapter 3 turns to moral philosophy, history of conceptions of self, and ideas of self and responsibility that were circulating in popular literature. Rabin works with pleas involving clouded judgment, such as drunkenness and necessity, and briefly with several novels, including Moll Flanders and Henry Mackenzie's Man of Feeling. Chapter 4 uses cases of infanticide committed by unmarried women to widen discussion of influence of sensibility and sources of opinion to those of trial judges and juries. …