The trial of Ernest Greatrex for the murder of his father, at Leamington, was of more than usual medico-legal interest on account of the clear ruling by Mr. Justice Wright that the mere recognition of the nature and quality of the act of murder as a punishable offence was not enough to insure that a prisoner was responsible for the act done. The outlines of the case are as follows:—The prisoner belongs to a family in which there are both insanity and epilepsy in several members. There are neuroses on both sides of the family, and the prisoner's brother is at present in an asylum suffering from delusional insanity. Nothing very peculiar was noticed till the prisoner had left school, when he was placed in his father's business; there he seemed to be discontented with his position, and thought that he was not paid sufficiently, though he had really a good salary for his position. He was then sent to New Zealand as traveller for the firm, and later started a business in connection with his father there, but he managed to lose altogether about £16,000, and then returned to England not in the least seeming to take blame to himself, but rather thinking it was his father's fault for sending him to the colony just when there was trade depression; in fact, he had begun already to attribute to his father a wish to injure him and treat him unjustly. After some time in England he was again started in life, with a capital of over £5,000, on a ranche in America, but here he took to lying in bed and neglecting all business. He quarrelled with his partner and his wife, and thought that his father had poisoned their minds against him. He thought, too, that his father had advanced the money only to get 8 per cent. for it. He accused people in the neighbourhood of hinting things about him; matters got from bad to worse, so that in the end he lost his money and returned to England once more full of his grievances. He was allowed enough money to keep him, but he complained that he had less than younger members of his family, and he accused both mother and father of acting unjustly towards him, and neglecting his interests for those of their daughters who had contracted what he called disgraceful marriages, the only disgrace being that they had married doctors who were then not in large practice, and who received from the fathers of the wives money support.