The Sun.
London, England, 1837-04-18 00:00:00

PAUPER LUNATIC ASYLUM FOR
THE COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, AT HANWELL.

Sessions House, Clerkenwell, April 6, 1837.
Sir,—l am directed by the Committee of Justices appointed
to superintend the management of the County Lunatic Asy-
lum at Hanwell, to transmit you a copy of a letter, laid before
them at a meeting held on the 3d instant, from Sir William
Ellis, the Resident Physician and Superintendent of that
Institution.

I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your most obedient servant,
C. WRIGHT, Clerk to the Committee.
...

" Pauper Lunatic Asylum, Hanwell, March 29, 1837.
" Sir—Having been requested by the Committee of Vi-
siting Justices of the Pauper Lunatic Asylum, to explain
the cause of the apparent paucity of the numbers cured in
the Asylum at Hanwell, in comparison with those cured in
other institutions, I beg to forward to you the following
statement :
" The total number of patients received into the Asylum,
from its opening to the 31st of December, 1836, is 1,296. Out
of this number 1,066 appear, from the documents received
with them on their admission, and from inquiries of their
friends, to have been insane upwards of twelve months pre-
viously. The duration of their insanity varying from two to
thirty years, and being on the average upwards of five years.
Only 230 are alleged to have been insane for a period less
than twelve months, and there is great reason to believe that
many out of the 230 have been really insane for a considera-
bly longer period : out of the number admitted 160 have had
previous attacks. The total number of patients cured out of
the 1,226, has been 260. It appears from an investigation of
the documents relating to the year 1831, and from the subse-
quent annual reports, that independently of those cured, who
on their admission had had previous attacks, 133, or nearly
58 out of every one hundred admitted, who are said
not to have been insane longer than 12 months have been
discharged cured. Now 50 out of every 100 is considered a
fair number of cures in those hospitals where none are admit-
ted who have been insane longer than 12 months, and where
consequently all are recent cases. The hospitals to which I
allude have a very great additional advantage in not receiving
any epileptic cases, or a single patient subject to any dis-
ease tending to shorten life ; epileptic patients it is to be
remarked are almost invariably incurable. In this Institu-
tion, even amongst the recent cases, many have been epi-
leptic, and many have been labouring under fatal diseases
at the time of their admission, but still the proportion
of cures amongst them has been 58 out of every 10A ad-
mitted. The average number of cures therefore, as far as
regards this class of patients, is considerably in favour of this
institution. Again, from the opening of the Asylum to the
31st of December, 1836, 64 have been cured, who according
to the theory and practice of the previously referred to hospi-
tals, are considered and dealt with as incurables, that is, who
have been insane more than twelve months.
" I would beg leave to add one observation with respect to
the number of deaths : the proportion is not greater than that
of any other merely Pauper Lunatic Asylum, where all, as is
the case here, must either be discharged cured, or by desire of
their friends, in consequence of their being able to maintain
them, or else must remain until they die. The patients now
in the ir use are almost entirely old cases, and the proportion
of cures fi mil this class only being 64 out of 1,066, whilst dur-
ing the same period there are 133 cures out of 230 recent
cases, forbids the hope that with the present inmates there will
be any diminution in the deaths, or increase in the proportion
of cures; and as the Asylum is now, and has been for some time
past, completely filled, vacancies occur so rarely, that unless
some means be adopted for the reception of the recent cases,
these will, before they can, according to rotation, be received
into the institution, have become cases of confirmed insanity
and comparatively incurable.
I remain, Sir, your very obedient servant,
" W. C. ELLIS, M.D.
" To the Chairman of the Committee of the

Visiting Justices of the Pauper Lunatic
Avylum for the County of Middlesex."

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Anal 17.
The Earl of SEIAFTESBURY, in the absence of the Lord
Chancellor, took his seat on the Woolsack at a quarter
before Five o'clock.
Several Private Bills on the table were advanced a stage.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented two petitions
in favour of Church-rates, from parishes in Staffordshire.
Lord DACRE presented a petition against Church-
rates from Malden, in Essex.
Lord STRAFFORD presented a petition from the
county of Stafford against Church-rates.
The Duke of WELLINGTON presented petitions in
favour of Church-rates from places in Banff.
Earl riTzw ILIA Am presented petitions in favour
of Church-rates from parishes in Durham.
The Bishop of HEREFORD presented a petition from
a parish in Hereford, in favour of Church-rates.
The Bishop of ST. ASAP H presented similar peti-
tions from St. Asaph, and from several parishes in the county
of Montgomery. He also presented a petition from the
laity of the County of Montgomery, agreed to at a meet-
' ing of the inhabitants convened by the High Sheriff, against
the abstraction of Church property in Wales for any
other purposes than the augmentation of small livings.
The Bishop of CARLISLE presented petitions in
favour of Churcl.-rates from Carlisle, and from other
places in Cumberland : also a petition from a parish in
Cumberland against the extension of the Poor Law to that
part of the kingdom.
Lord TANKERVILLE presented a petition in favour
of Church-rates.
The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition from
the clerks and sextons of several parishes in the metropolis,
praying that some means may be adopted to afford them
compensation for the losses sustained by them, in con-
sequence of the establishment of new cemeteries ; the
Right Rev. Prelate also presented a petition from a place in
Suffolk, praying that measures might be adopted to procure
a better observance of the Lord's Day ; and several peti-
tions from operatives in Manchester and other places, pray-
ing for a Ten Hours' Factory Bill for all persons under the
age of 21 ; also from several places in his diocese, in favour
of Church-rates. _ .

The Bishop of WINCHESTER presented several peti-
tions in favour of Church-rates, from places in Louth,
Hants, and Surrey.
Lord COLVILLE presented similar petitions from
Leamington, and other places.
The Duke of BUCCLEUGH and the Earl of HARE-
WOOD presented petitions to the same effect.
POOR-LAWS.

The Earl of HARE WOOD presented a petition from
Galthorp, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, against the
Poor-law Amendment Act ; in doing so he would observe
that he was not hostile to the measure, but to the ex-
tremes to' which its provisions were carried, especially as
regarded the prevention of out door relief, and the com-
pelling persons to go into the workhouses, before they
could be relieved. He concluded by moving that the pe-
tition be read.
The Clerk accordingly read the petition at great length,
which prayed that their Lordships would take steps to pre-
vent the Act being extended to petitioners' parish, and leave
them to collect and distribute their rates as they had
hitherto done, under the control of a vestry.
Lord MALMESBURY said that instructions had been
given to the Commissioners to make unions as extensive as
possible, which he objected to, as in rural districts it was
attended with inconvenience alike to those claiming relief,
and to the Guardians, in consequence of the distance they
had to go to the central point. He had opposed the Act
in amine, because he thought too much power was given to
the Commissioners, and too little discretion to the Guardians ;
and perhaps he was of the same opinion still, although he
did not wish to excite any prejudice against the Act.
Another point to which he would refer was the medical
relief, and he considered that ten miles was too far for a
medical man-to go, and in consequence he thought suffi-
cient medical relief was not afforded.
Earl F ITZ WI LLIAM said it was obvious when this
Bill passed, that it would confer the greatest boon on some
parts of the kingdom, and he did not think that elsewhere
it would act so inconveniently as was anticipated. None of
the rules of the Commissioners were in his opinion unconsti-
tutional, but they would require caution in the application of
them, especially in some of the manufacturing towns, where the
population was very dense. He thought those rules
could not be strictly applied, and were he one of a Board
of Guardians, he would very reluctantly refuse out-door
relief in all instances to the able-bodied labourer. It would
be not only contrary to humanity, but to the selfish and
pecuniary interests of the rate-payers themselves to do so,
and he thought the regulation should be managed, not by
rules, but by the judgment of the Guardians.
Viscount MELBOURNE defended the operation of the
Act. There was no doubt that strong opinions were enter-
tained on the subject of the petitions presented by the Noble
Lord. It was impossible to deny this, but it was impossible
to deny also that over-statements had been made—unions
were said to be too large and the medical relief too small ;
but he thought that the proper consideration had been given
to these subjects, and it was in order to adapt the law
to different parts of the country, that the large discretionary
powers bad been vested in the Commissioners.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said that the system of
medical relief under the new Act was superior to that under
the old law. He would call the attention of the House to the
condition of persons just above the condition of paupers ; a Me-
dical Club had been established in the union in which he lived,
which worked admirably well, and in two months consisted
of 850 members. In regard to able-bodied labourers, many
of them could not live on their wages, but they were objects
for private charity, and by the exercise of this there had
not been a single able-bodied labourer in the workhouse, in
the union where he lived, since the Act came into opera-
tion.—( Hear.) As to the extent of the discretionary
powers vested in the Commissioners they were large,
but they were not larger than those under the old system,
or than they should be ; and the exercise of them now, in
promoting private charity, restored the bond of union which
should exist between rich and poor.
Lord MALMESBURY explained.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, APRIL 17.

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1837•

The Duke of RICHMOND defended the conduct of
the Guardians in the appointment of medical relief ; in do-
ing so they were not actuated by the low tenders, but by
the ability of the parties who offered themselves as medical
officers.
Lord WH ARNCLIFFE said, that the question
was, if suitable payment were given to the officer, which
would insure good medicines ; and he defied the Guardians
to ascertain whether good medicines were given under the
low tenders. He thought these discussions would prove
serviceable, but he protested against the present conversa-
tion being continued.
Earl FITZWILLIAM said that the tenders had no-
thing to do with the new system.
The Marquis of SALISBURY approved of the present
system of medical relief.
The Marquis of BUTE was of the same opinion, the
rules of the Commissioners had been too strict, however,
in many cases ; for instance—be regretted that the
paupers in the workhouses had not been allowed to go to

the parish church.
Lord TEYNHAM then gave notice that on Monday
next he would move for returns connected with the admi-
nistration of the Pcor-laws.
Earl FITZWILLIAM presented a petition from
Bradford, for a revision of the Poor-law Act, complaining of
the operations of the bastardy clause. He was, however,
totally opposed to the opinion of the petitioners in this
respect.

IRISH FISHERIES.
Lord DUNCANNON laid on the table the second re-
port of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the
fisheries in Ireland.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented several petitions in
favour of Church-rates from places in Yorkshire.
PETITION OF THE PROTESTANTS OF
IRELAND.
The Marquis of DO WNS HI RE postponed the petition
he had to present from the Protestants of Ireland to Friday
se'nnight, in consequence of the absence of a Noble and
Learned Friend of his.
Lord BRADFORD presented a petition from certain
County Magistrates, complaining of the provisions in the
statutes for keeping in repair turnpike roads. The peti-
tioners stated that the funds collected were not sufficient for
the repair of the roads.
After a few observations from the Marquis of SALISBURY
and Lord DUNCANNON, the petition was laid on the table.
Lord ABINGER presented several petitions against
the abolition of Church-rates, from parishes in Norwich and
other places. The same Noble and Learned Lord pro-
posed that the second reading of the English Municipal
Corporation Amendment Bill should be fixed for Friday,
the 28th instant, to suit the convenience of a Noble and
Learned Lord (Lyndhurst), who was absent in consequence
of a domestic affliction.

Lord MELBOURNE acquiesced.
Lord HOLLAND presented several petitions in favour
of the abolition of Church-rates from parishes and congre-
gations in Wales.
Lord BROUGIIAM presented similar petitions from
Carmarthen, Ely, Bradford, and Leicester : and also a pe-
tition from Leith, against the erection of another harbour
at their port.
Viscount MELBOURNE presented petitions for the
abolition of Church-rates, fro% Colchester, Glamorgan,
St. Ncots, and Newport, in the Isle of Wight.
Lord DENM AN presented a similar petition from
Portsea.
The Mutiny Bill, and the Marine Mutiny Bill, severally
passed through a Committee.
The Trial by Jury Bill (Scotland) passed through a Com-
mittee.
The Provision for taking Affidavits (Scotland and Ire-
land) Bill passed through a Committee, and was ordered to
be reported to-morrow. .
The House adjourned at a Quarter-past Seven o'Clock
•

The SPEAKER. took the Chair shorty before Four
o'Clock.
On the motion of Mr. ENV A IIT the Great North of Eng-
land (Clarence and Hartlepool) Junction Railway was read a
second time and ordered to be committed. The Hon. Mem-
ber presented a petition from individeds residing at Liver-
pool, praying that their rights might be considered, and re-
muneration afforded them under the Liverpool Improve-
ment Bill.
On the motion of Mr. CHAP MAN the Lords
Amendments to the Liverpool Improvement Bill were
agreed to.
Mr. PALMER brought up the Report of the Streatley
and Goring Bridge Bill.
Mr. E. TENNENT presented a petition against the
Belfast Harbour Bill ; also a petition from the shipowners
of Belfast, against the North American Steam Navigation
Company's Bill.
Sir E. WILMOT presented a petition from Birming-
ham in favour of the Equitable Gas Bill ; also a petition
from Bordesley against the Bill.
On the motion of Mr. FINCH the Stamford Water-
works Bill was read a third time and passed.
Mr. J. MAXWELL presented two petitions against the
Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway.
Mr. BROTH mum N presented a petition against the
Holme Reservoir Bill.
Mr. KIRK presented a petition from the shipowners of
Belfast against the Belfast Dock Bill.
WEST CORK MINING COMPANY.

_
Mr. RUTH VEN brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee on the West Cork Mining Company Bill.
Mr. PEASE presented petitions against the Scarbo-
rough Harbour Bill, the Trinity Harbour Bill, and the
Clarence and Hartlepool Railway Bill.
LONDON AND BRIGHTON RAILWAY
(STEVENSON'S LINE.)
Lord E. LENNOX presented a petition from the pro-
motors of Stevenson's Line, denying, in the strongest
terms, the allegations contained in the petition of Mr.
Mills.
Mr. CURTEIS moved the Order of the Day for re-
suming the adjourned debate on Mr. Mills's petition
against Stevenson's line. He had on the former oc-
casion moved for the appointment of a Seleet Committee
to ascertain whether any false evidence had been knowingly
and wilfully given before the London and Brighton Rail-
way Committee, and to report the same to the House.
He regretted that the question had not been decided on
Thursday last, and he trusted now that no opposition
would be given to the appointment of the Committee, in-
asmuch as it would place the Directors of Stevenson's line
in this dilemma, that if they opposed the motion, it would
be said that they had shrunk from meeting the charges.
He (Mr. C.) had no doubt that Mr. Mills would be able
to prove that false statements had been knowingly and
wilfully made before the Committee, in more than a hun-
dred cases.
The gallery was then cleared ; but the question was
negatived without a division.
On the motion of Mr. ORD, the Newcastle Improve-
ment Bill was read a second time.
Sir J. GRAHAM presented two petitions from Cum-
berland in favour of the Carlisle Railway.
Mr. CHALMERS presented a petition in favour of the
Glasgow Railway.
Sir G. CLERK presented petitions from Edinburgh
and Dundee, against the Glasgow Railway Bill.
Mr. C. BARCLAY believed the House would be doing
justice to both parties if it refused the investigation now
sought for.
Mr. S. LEFEVRE coincided in what had fallen from
the last speaker.
Mr. P. THOMSON knew nothing whatever of these rail-
ways, but his attention had been called to the circumstances re-
lated in the different petitions before the House, and he
had endeavoured to make himself master of the statements
contained in them. In his opinion the House should pause
before it established a precedent of such a nature, because,
if the House acceded to the present motion, there was nothing
whatever to prevent a party trumping up a case on any
future occasion. lt was in vain to say that the proceedings
of the Committee on this Bill would not be in-
fluenced by such an inquiry. If the precedent
were once established, allegation after allegation
would be made by which the time of the House would be
most unnecessarily occupied, and by which he was satis-
fied much injustice would be done to the parties. It
might be said that if the House was deceived, why had it
not vindicated its own character ?—but it did not ap-
pear that even the petitioner himself admitted that
to be the case, because he bad not shown that be was
unaware of the fraud at the time the Bill was
before the Sub-Committee, and that was the proper tri-
bunal before which he should have made his charges. On
these grounds he should oppose the present motion. .
Lord G. LENNOX said, Mr. Mills having always failed
in getting his Bill before the House, as a forlorn hope he
attacked Stevenson's Line. After .the many defeats of
the gentleman, he hoped the House would only add one
more.
After a few words from Mr. Greene, Lord G. Somer-
set, and Colonel Wood,
Captain PEC HELL was determined to resist the Bill
in every shape. He thought the House ought to encourage
the investigation.
Mr. H UME thought this was a fit subject for enquiry
without reference to any particular line of railway.
He thought the House ought to allow the inquiry if it was
only for the purpose of supporting its own authority.
Mr. TOOKE thought the allegations of the petition
ought to be supported by far better evidence before the
House granted an inquiry,
Sir G. STRICKLAND thought the case ought not to
be passed over without some inquiry.
Mr. NICHOLL brought up the Reports of the Com-
mittees on ihe Cardiff Gas and Cardiff Improvement Bills.