The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-23 00:00:00

cases be would not place the appointment in the hands
of the Treasury, but would divide the country into dis-
tricts, under commissioners, who should receive instruc-
tions from the Board of Inland Revenue to require secu-
rity from the collectors. By these means real responsi-
bility in the collectors would be secured. He had stated
the case briefly, but he hoped he bad said enough to
show the house the necessity for inquiry and some
change—(hear, hear) —and with these observations he
begged to move "that in the opinion of this house the
assessors and collectors of taxes, both assessed and in.
come, should be appointed by the Commissioners of In-
land Revenue."
Mr. WILLIAMS seconded the motion. In two
parishes of the borough which he represented very seri-
ous losses had been sustained through the defalcations
of collectors. He thought the responsibility of collect-
ing ought to be thrown on the Crown.
Sir J. TROLLOPE thought there would be great
difficulty in carrying out the views of the hon. member
for Tynemouth. In a large number of districts the re-
muneration was so small that no man would for it sub-
ject himself to the inconvenience of giving security to
the Government. He had been a local commissioner
for many years, and never knew a case of defalcation in
any officer appointed by him. He would suggest to the
hon, member that the best course would be to propose
the repeal of the statute of George Hl.—(hear, hear)—
which enacted that in case of any defalcation the
amount should be re-assessed on the parish ; that was
a hardship. With taxes, as with anything el,e, if a
person paid his money to the duly qualified officer the
receipt ought to be a discharge under all circumstances.
(Hear.) If the hon. gentleman pressed the subject to a
division he must oppose it, although he admitted the
law required amendment.
Mr. RIDLEY contended the matter complained of
was a great grievance. There could not be a greater
hardship than that a man having once paid a tax to the
proper officEr should be compelled to pay it over again.
He understood the matter had lately been under the
consideration ef the Board of Island Revenue, and he
trusted the Government would bs able to provide a
remedy. If something was not done the effect on the
revenue might be very serious.
Mr. INGHAM considered the suggestion of the hon.
baronet (Sir J. Trollope) a very good one, and if adopted,
it would go far to remedy the grievance complained of ;
but if the Inland Revenue Commissioners were respon-
sible for the collection of the revenue, they ought to
have the appointment cf their own officers. If that
were done a much smaller number of collectors would
do the work.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
hon. member for Tynemouth was fully justified in bring-
ing the matter before the house. No doubt what was
complained of was a grievance. Ho knew nothing more
severe than to have to pay taxes under any circum-
stances; but to have to pay them twice, and that
because a person of whom you never heard had run
away with-the money, was a combination of grievances.
He still wished, however, the hon. gentleman would
not press his motion. The question was really under
the consideration of the Government at the present
time. He did not use this as a mere phrase to meet a
motion from the opposite side. He could refer to the
report of the Inland Revenue Commissioners just laid
on the table. The Commissioners say, "The mode of
assessing and collecting the taxes by officers appointed
by the parish must before lung demand your lordships'
consideration ; the subject is in a most unsatis-
factory state." The honourable baronet (Sir J. Trol-
lope) had made a suggestion well worthy of atten-
tion; but the matter was ono which could not be imme-
diately settled. It required grave consideration and con-
trivance before a satisfactory state of affairs could be
arrived at. It was not an easy matter to raise a large
revenue at a slight cost, and, moreover, there was a
local jealousy (sot to be discouraged) which must be
taken into account, and it was not advisable to increase
the patronage "and power of the Crown beyond what the
neces-ity of the case required. The hon. gentleman bad
done his duty in bringing the subject before the house,
and he trusted he would be content with the expression
of opinion on the sul jsct. (Hear.)
Mr. LINDSAY, atter the clear and express statement
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer' would ask leave to
withdraw his motion—(hear, bear)--but he hoped no
time would be lost in dealing with the subject.
The motion was then withdrawn.
LUNATICS UNDER THE COURT OF
CHANCERY,
Mr. TITE, in moving for a select committee on this
subject, said the matter was so foreign to his usual pur-
suits, that be would not have moved for it, but a case of
great hardship having recently been laid before him, he
felt compelled by a sense of duty to bring the matter be-
fore the house. He regretted to hear that his motion was
to be opposed—he would have thought that the feelings
of every member would lead him to support it. It ap-
peared from recent returns that there were now 29,000
lunatics in England, the increase last year having been
1,000. There wore 15,054 in the county asylums, and
7,000 pauper lunatics in the workhouses. The number of
county asylums was 38, and it was gratifying to learn that
last year the cares in them were 14 per cent. There were
551 lunatics under the control of the Court of Chancery,
possessing property to the amount of 240,000/. a-year.
The amount allowed for their support was 160,0001., or an
average of about 3001. a-year each, It might be supposed
that having such large funds for their support, those luna-
tics would be in a much better state than any other, but
in point of fact it was amongst this class that the greater
number of complaints of hardship were found to exist.
Tee proportion of cures did not exceed 2 per cent. The act
ef 1853, though drawn with much It gal acumen, did not
work. In the first pleas, only two medical visitors were
appointed to look after these 530 persons, and they were
only paid 5001. a year each, an amount of remuneration
for which it was impossible ti expect gentlemen of their
eminence to devote the whole of their time. The result
was, that although the patients were required to be
visited once a year, the visitation was not efficient, and
without constant supervision the lunatic was sure to be
neglecied. Lunacy was tiresome and harassing ; and
without constent vigilance humanity itself would cease
to be humane with regard to this unfortunate class. In
a recent return to the House of Lords he saw a case
mentioned in which no less than 1,100/. a year was
allowed for the maintenance of the lunatic—a sum that
must make the fortune of the asylum id which he hap-
pened to be placed. In another case, a chrgyman, sub-
ject to pal tial hi:Declinations, and fit to move in society,
was placed, with an allowance of 4001. a year, in the
care of an .ex-sergeant of police, whose other income only
amounted to 30:. He did not mean to nay that the
lunatics in these cases were unkindly treated, but he
maintained that they were not treated quite fairly. With
regard to ether patients, the reports of the commis-
sioners were regelatly laid on the table ; so that if there
was any csmplaint it could easily be investigated ; but
the reports relating to the class to which be was calling
the attention of the house were kept secret. He would
not detain the house while be voted to them the cases
ef hardship which had come within his knowledge, but
hoped the government would take into consideration the
great importance of the subjece and grant him the com-
mittee for which he moved. (Hear, hear.)
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL had no objection to
have the subject investigated ; but he thought if
an inquiry were undertaken at all, it should be a
thorough one, and one of a character which at that
period of the session it would be impossible to carry
out. If the subject were renewed next year and a
committee were appointed, every assistance would be
afforded by the government, and, he might add,
by the Lord Chancellor. The hon. gentleman bad re•
ferred to the small per centage of cures amongst patients
of this class ; but in point of fact commissions of lunacy
were never taken out except in the last resort. Re-
ferring to the list for a single year (1852) he found that
the shortest period during which the lunatic was found
to have been suffering from mental infirmity previous to
the proceedings being taken was two years. In one oc-
casion it was 50 years ; and some of the lunatics were
returned as having been idiots from their infancy, so
that in point of fact these persons might be considered as
having been all but incurable before any steps were
taken. The hon. gentleman stated thas the act would
not work. No doubt it was susceptible of improvement,
bnt it had worked admirably. One great object of the
measure was to reduce the cost of proceedings in lunacy.
Formerly in the most ordinary cases the expenses up to
the appointment of the committee amounted to 200/
now they were between 50/. and 701., besides which all
the subsequert business was transacted befsre a Master
in chambers and was attended with scarcely any addi-
tional cost at all, With regard to the visitors, he had
first to observe, that half the patients were in private
asylums, and bad the advantage of the habitual visits
of the commiseioners, presided over by Lord Shaftes-
bury. With regard to the rest, it would no doubt be
very desirable that they should be more frequently seen
by the two medical gentlemen appointed for that pur-
pose ; but it was unnecessary to say that if they insisted
on their visits being made oftener they must increase
tht salaries. At the same Vine it must be borne in mind
that the pa les? ere under telregular medical supervi-
sion which was provided by the scheme in each case ;
and the visitors, when they did see them, were in-

structed to ascertain that the scheme was carried out in
its minute,t details. The bon. gentleman had referred
to a case where he sail 1,1001. was paid for the lunatic's
maintenance; but his "maintenance" included not only
what was paid for his board, but an allowance on
account of his family.
Mr. TITE said that in the report to the House of
Lords (which was dated the 21st of February) the sums
were placed under separate beads, and the 1,1001. was
returned as "maintenance of the lunatic."

The SOLICI f OR-GENERAL said from his know-
ledge of the manner in which transactions of this kind
were conducted, he had no doubt the thing occurred in
the way be had stated. The hon. member said the re-
parts of the commissioners were kept secret, it could
not be supposed that it would be agreeable to the friends
of these unbrtunate persors to have them laid 'on the
table of that house. (Hear, hear.) He (the inciter-
General) thought the c untry was greatly indeb'ed to the
Lord Chancellor, and more especially to the Lords
Justices, in whose (leper ment the matter lay, for the
attention which was beaow( d on these subject-. He
knew that in many cases the Lords Justices had made
a personal examination of lunatics, and, generally speak-
ing, they bad manifested the most lively interest in the
treatment and welfare of those who were under their
special care. (Hi ar.) He was desirous that whenever
a complaint was made it should be fully investiga'eo, in
order that the house might see Low the act of 1853, re-
lating to this sulject, worked. He did not objet to
inquiry, but it was impossible that it could be properly
conducted in the present section, and if the hon. gentle-
man would withdraw his motion then, and renew it next
session, he would have the support of the Government
in his attempt to obtain a full and complete inquiry.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND thought it would have been
best. r, if, instead of proposing an inquiry into "the laws
ielatin; to lunatics," the hon. member had proposed an
kciniry into the care and treatment of lunatics. Every
ODe ytho had studied the matter knew perfectly well