The Sun.
London, England, 1858-08-28 00:00:00

THE WEATHER—SUN OFFICE, AUGUST :28.
THERMOMETER, IN THE SHADE.
66—highest since noon yesterday.
53—lowest this morning and daring the night.
62—this day at noon.

BAROMETER, 29.83.
WIND, W.N.W. ; light and fine.

THE SUN.
SATURDAY, AUGUST 28, 185 s.

The verdict of an independent and intelligent
jury has, so. far as Mr. LAWRENCE RUCK is con-
cerned, removed the bolts and bars of Moorcroft
house, and restored the unfortunate gentleman to
his friends and relatives, to the position he formerly
occupied in society, and the enjoyment of his pro-
perty, of which he had been so unjustly and impro-
perly deprived. But who shall compensate him for
the false imprisonment of nearly ten months, which
he has endured in the most miserable of all prisons—
a licensed lunatic asylum—for the sacrifice of his
farming stock, which was sold for £1,300, and a
considerable part of the proceeds applied to carrying
out the commission against him—for the lease of his
favourite farm, and the enormous costs of the inves-

tigation, instituted against the will of his mother and
nearest relatives—and the exposure, vexation, and
annoyance which he has experienced during the pro-
tracted inquiry, the result whereof was of such vital
importance to himself, his children, and blood re-
lations ?
It is manifest that the gross and palpable igno-
rance ofaNir. RICHARD BARNETT was the chief cause
of all the mischief. He knew nothing whatsoever of
the Act, or of the safeguards provided for the
security of the alleged lunatic. Indeed, he
had "never read it," and yet he took upon
himself to sign a document which deprived
an unfortunate gentleman of his liberty and
property, and to put forward reasons so ridi-
culous, that risibility must be excited, if tragedy
were not so largely mingled with the farce.
Every reason assigned was proved to be fallacious.
That there was a hereditary predisposition to in-
sanity was proved to be an impudent and wicked
falsehood, adopted by Mr. BARNETT without ade-
quate evidence. The "profligate expenditure," toned
down by Mr. M. CHAMBERS, in his reply, to " pro-
digal expenditure," w 33 equally erroneous. Indeed,
Mr. BARNETT admitted that he was " wrong in put- i
ting that down, and that he did so without sufficient
knowledge on the point." Ile had, however, heard
him say that " his expenses had been very great, and
had exceeded his income," and that induced the acute
and candid Mr. BARNETT to include " profligate ex-
penditure" as one of the symptoms of insanity, in the
certificate authorising Mr. RUCK'S reception into the
asylum.

He could, however, speak more confidently in re-
spect to the other symptom, " indulgence in intem-
perance." He has explained his meaning with respect
thereto. He had never seen Mr. Ruex intoxicated !
He merely meant that he was addicted to the undue
taking of stimulants!! As an instance whereof, he saw
him (Mr. RucK) drink a quart bottle of porter at
Shrewsbury, and two glasses of ale at Stafford ! ! !
Verily, our liberties rest on a very slender basis,
when a gentleman can be deprived of his liberty for
ten months, and only restored after an expensive,
vexatious, and prolonged inquiry, on such grounds
as those assigned by Mr. BARNETT in his certificate,
and subsequently in his evidence before the jury.
It was admitted on every side that Mr. RUCK had
been greatly excited by an undue indulgence in
stimulants, after protracted abstinence. While in
that state he was guilty of many foolish " sayings and
doings ;" but it was palpably a drunken mania only
under which he was labouring, and a brief term of
rest and quietness would have quite restored his
mind to its usual state of tranquillity. But Mr.

I3ARNETT would not sanction such a course. The

madhouse was the only proper place for one who
could drink " a bottle of porter at Shrewsbury and

two glasses of ale at Stafford !" although such pro-
ceeding was calculated to retard, and perhaps prevent
recovery. Indeed, it was clear from the evidence of the
many eminent professionalgentlemen examined ou be-
half of the defendant, that the judicious course would

have been to have treated him " with gentle care at
home." Many persons of weak or sensitive minds
would have sunk under the ordeal through which
Mr. Rucx has so triumphantly passed.
We have only alluded to this melancholy case as
a powerful illustration to the arguments which
we have from time to time put for-
ward during a series of years. It shows
that there is no security for any person
who indulges in the slightest degree of eccentricity,
if his fortune be sufficiently large to afford a hand-
Nome stipend to the keeper of an asylum, and leave
something worth managing over and above the per_
tonal demand. Had it not been for the devotion of
his friends, the skill of his professional advisers, and
the possession of ample means, which were not, how-
ever, made available until an order from the Lord
Chancellor had been obtained for the purpose,
he might have languished for the remainder
of his existence in the prison-house, surrounded
tither by real lunatics or other victims like himself.
It seems strange that there should have been no
difficulty in procuring the funds to work the Com-
mission against him. His own farming stock,
illegally disposed
of, provided abundant resources for
feeing counsel and doctors against him. Those who
desired to establish his insanity
nau easy access.
They could see him at any time could subject him
to the most stringent cross-examinations without
any person on his behalf being present to protect
him if unfairly treated, and to take an accurate note
to be available on a
of the proceeflinr", future occa-
sion. Not so with friendly parties. His brother-in-
law and legal adviser were refused an interview, and
it was not until after a long detention, and when an
application to the Lord Chancellor was threatene
obtaid,
d to n
that Mr. WAINWRIGHT could be permitte
an interview. He was not even permitted to have
his letters posted to anyone except his wife, at whose
instance he was originally captured, and subse-
quently detained, and who seems to have cut off all
correspondence.
The moral of the sad tale is, that more care must
be taken before a party is deprived of his liberty,
and subjected to such grievous restrictions. There
is not so much danger in public establishments,
although we believe that instances of abuse may be
cited in respect to some generally well-managed in-
stitutions,—but the medical attendants have no
temptation to go astray. Their interests are not
antagonistic to their duties.
d 9 not` coil fcr the suppressio4 9f ptiyatc

~ i
,a, f 0
.! .t;''• .1 %
:**•!.-4,t14-..- ,
~, 's-', ,-.Z.' ,` "T / .' ' :RA.-
•, ~,,i, s , ~. # r ,11.•,, ;4, :•,,..
_.,Aviiii
..a. Aggo,,,i4
ts "%.,;,, :O'..I44FTEM P'