The Sun.
London, England, 1831-02-24 00:00:00

LUNATICS.

Mr. GORDON, in making his motion on this subject,
observed, that the present laws relating to the treatment
of lunatics bad secured to them considerable advanttge,
and-that these laws chiefly owed their efficacy and sum ss
to the honourable exertion of the Noble Chairman of the
Bard of Commissioners. After stating that the laws now
in force would shortly expire, and urging the claims of
lunatics to the compassionate attention of the House, he
moved for leave to bring in it Bill to amend and conso.
Hate the provisions of the 9th of George IV. c. 41., and
10 George IV., c. 18, relating to the treatment of lunatics
Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET, after adverting to
the of for which the Metropolitan Lunatic Commis_
sion had been appointed, and to the manner in which
those objects had been accomplished, proceeded to notice
the manner in which the Commissioners had received the
kindest support and assistance from the late Lord Chancel..
lor. Until within the last few days, they had great reason
to think that they should receive equal courtesy and appro-
bation front the Nuhle Lord with whom at present the
Great Seal was deposited. Within the last week, however,
an occurrence had taken place, which induced the Corn..
misssioners to believe that their labours were not now
viewed in a light by any means so favourable. He
was aware that this was not the fittest place
fur adverting to the conduct of an individual in
so high a station, and for arraigning the proceedings
of a Noble Judge at the head of the law establish-
ments of the kingdom ; and nothing but the neces-
sity he felt of vindicating himself, and those with whom
he had acted, from an unfounded imputation, should
have induced him (Lord G. Somerset) to call the atten-
tion of the House to the subject. It appeared that in the
course of last week a case regarding the lunacy of a per-
son of the name of Houston was Irmght on in the Court

of Chancery, and on that occasion the Lord Chancellor '

had used expressions which amounted to a charge against
the Metropolitan Lunatic Commission, that it had been
meddling and interfering most improperly with the prero-
pgastLvres ofw were
ee
naCorroewonr.
leas
sThinking.a t thati.,
:y (r.,e,pr
roeretts, i na
ntilh et news.
papers
at his
Lordship, had he been lulls acquainted with the fac!si,
would not have employed he terms he hail used, the Com-
mi,sioners considered that it would not be disrespectful to
his Lordship individually, nor improperly infringing oit
the respect they owed to his station, to request him to re-
lieve them from the imputation he had cast upon them.--
They accordingly addressed a letter to the Lord Chan-
cellor, which, as it had been severely characterised by the
Noble Lord, he hoped the House would permit him to
read. He would introduce it only by the remark, that it
was not written under the expectation that it would be ex-
posed to any severity of criticism, although it was to be
looked upon as an official communication from a body au-
thorised by Act of Parliament. It ran thus--
" Mr Loan,—The report, such as it appeared in the Times
and Morning Herald papers of Tuesday last, of the cue of Mr.
Houston, a lunatic, gives us reason to fear that from a misap-
prehension of the way in which the Metropolitan Commissioners
in Lunacy had acted with regard to that individual, your Lord.
ship adopted and expressed an erroneous opinion of our disposi-
tion, and our conduct in reference to this as well as to other eases
of persons confined tinder commissions of lunacy.
We are anxious to state that wo neither directly nor indi-
rectly have ever interfered with any patient tinder the juristiii.-
tion &the Lord Chancellor, unless In pursuance of the suggestion
of the Lord Chancellor himself; We have ever studiously re.
spected his high authority • but we have felt it our duty, when-
ever circumstances connected with persons confined under hi,.
jurisdiction have come to our knowledge which seemed to re-
quire his attention, to submit them to his Lordship, and your
Lordship's predecessor never intimated that lie considered such
a course an undue interference with the functions of the indivi-
dual to whom his Majesty entrusted his jurisdiction in matters
connected with lunatics ; but, on the contrary, he unifornth
sanctioned and approved of it.
.` In this particular case some of our body, when officially Ai.
siting Mr. Stilwell's house, found the lunatic Houston in great
agitation, and much distressed at the idea of being removed
thence to some other place of confinement ; and having ascer-
tained, as far as an ex-parte inquiry could inform them, that
there was no apparently good reasuo, to justify his removal, ou--
of them wrote a private letter la Mr. Loudham, that he might
acquaint the then Lord Chancellor with these circumstances, add
Mr. Loudham expressed his Lordship's thanks for the informa-
tion which was thus afforded him. The visitors stated these fact.;
to the next general meeting of the Commissioners, who decided
that their clerk, Mr. Brown, should in a snore official inannes•
communicate them to Mr. Loudhain, for Lord Lyndhurst's
formation, so that Mr. Houston might not be removed from, )lt:
Stilwell's house without an investigation as to the fitness and ne-
cessity of his removal. In consequence of this, Lord Lysididirst
directed Dr. Bright, Dr. Southey, Dr, Turner, and Dr. Hume,
the four medical Commissioners, to proceed to Mr, Stilwell's, 'o,
examine Mr. Houston particularly on this point, and to make-
a special report to him. Tiiis they accordingly did, ays.s
his Lordship gave orders, through Mr, Loudham and NT.
Brown, that Mr. Houston should continue to be contimsi se
Mr. Stilwell's, until his Lordship gave (hither directions, Since
that period various applications have been made to the Commis-
sioners on the subject, as well IA Mr. Stilwell a, by the othei.-
party, and our invariable reply his beets that Avcs could no, fur-
ther interfere, and we have every reason to believe that ;Ise re,
plies of our clerk to similar applications hale been to 1-,'.o* value
effect.

" Having thus siated, as concisely as possible, the ,Iniy con-
nexion we have had with the circumstances of Nlir. Houston',
confinement at air. Stilwell's. we trust your Lordship will pub _
licly relieve us from the charge of presumptiou and undue ill.
terterence with the authority' of the Crownswhich your Load-
ship is reported to have preferred against us. 1-or we be to ob-
serve, in conclusion, that in the performance of its irksome
duty, we arc not conscious of eet.r having evili,d3m.., disp„,i_
tion to exceed the authority ei,ofraTed on us by the Statute j.,,,je,
which we act, and we dottLA slot that your Lervistrip will feo that
the obsi!rvations which brave been attributed to your Leirdsbior
are calculated to dep,z;ve the Commission or that public cstina__
tion which is es..4,titial to the proper discharge t:,t its ohicial
duties. 0 We have tt,e honour, &c.
" Office of,"'Metrorailitan Commissioners in Lunacy,. rlt',,
Margaret-street, Cavendish-square, Feb. lc"
The House would observe, that in this coninit,,ii,,,tion
the Commissioners in no way it.opag-ned the d,e6.,ion or
decree of the Lord Chancellor in any case brow ht belbre
him : they only endeavoured to correct a misapprehension
which had led to on unjust and tintott:,,ded aspersion ,ii,„;,
thetnselve!, The Noble Lord lit i;l3 in a tuaraler stepped
out of, 4i.,i way to inflict a se:vere wound ; awl lie (Lord
Cc, Somerset), for one, did, not think that they were treat-
log with any disrespect the character oe office of Lord
Chancellor, in ceasing forward, not angrily or evrn pet-
tishly, to request him, as he had publicly wounded, pub-
licly tt-:, heal the wounds of those he had injured. What
had been the mode of proceeding adopted on the n,casiou -
'by the Noble Lord ? He had not openly read tl;e cow-
munication, but without giving anybody the means of
yudgiog of its contents, be characterised it as a most in-
decent letter. After having reflected upon the stilije•ct, lie
(Lord G. Somerset) cold not see that, either in its el.,
sect or expression% :lie letter deserved le he terme.,l inde-
cent. The Lotd Chancellor had. wade it a ground of
corm:l4lA that the Commissioners had not distrusted the
z.couracy of newspaper rkports. In Parliament it was
not regular to advert either to the correctness or incor-
rectness of 4ports of speeches, but, their gtneral autien-
tieity was acknowledged ; and the Commlssioners ton..
etnied that the accontits of proceedings in the Couth
.01 Justice were equally
credible. If thoy lucre wl,,lir
in, concluding hastily that them was no error izi,
f the report, why did not the 1,,.4d Chancellor the-
reporterseapall.,3.,,Ba,,,,t he had
Lordship
hadinentioie(iiio
ttv,oartsl,:e Judi
before him, awl punish them for their
permed the let-
Wills who had committed pa,:;;,ies for a moth lighter
fl it and
Wills
schourliedeueentt ?,
offence; and had added that lie should consult with the
[ Chief Justice what 's.'.,rul of visitation ought to f011,,w the
transmission of such a letter. If suck a stater Ilt, were
to go all over England, that for a calm temperate letter
to the Lord Chancellor, those who sent it, acting und,r
the authority of an Act of Parliament, were to ba sent to,
'prison, and that the. Lord Chancelit,r was so great a man;
that eve?, in matters of fact he must not he set right by
lei cg told that he was wri,;.g, there was no knowing It,
what extreme matters might not he carried. lle (Lord
(L Somerset) did not wish to derogate from the dig it ity
of any danige, and. however lie might lament the net:ieia7
aity of bringing the subject before the House,
indiscretion
in not help thinking that he was not acting
.wirt,l:l illn..uotri':,.
in thus endeavouring to rescue himsel. and l
east upon
Commissioners from the aspersion
heor":4l.l-17ai he had said,
them. He alone was respo.9l . .
benefitof the -
trusted that all would share the eN -
but he