The Sun.
London, England, 1859-06-23 00:00:00

:-L-AW -INTEL,LIp,ENCE.-(THIS _DAY.)
.•

- - COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
(Sittings at Nisi Pr!us, at Westminster, before Mr. Justice
Hill and a Special Jury.)
RUCK V. STILWELL AND ANOTHER.

The further hearing of this part-heard trial, which has
already occupied the attention of the court two days, was
resumed this morning.
His lordship ruled that if the jury found either that Dr.
Conoly was part proprietor of the asylum, or that he was a
regular medical attendant, then the certificate was not in
terms of the•statute— leaving Mr. James to move, as was
mentioned yesterday, on leave reserved.
Mr. James, Q.C., addressed the jury for the plaintiff on
the evidence.
The defendants did not lead evidence.
The learned counsel submitted that there was prima facie
evidence to show that the plaintiff was not a lunatic, and
most, decidedly not a dangerous lunatic, and that he was
not a proper inmate of an asylum, but, in defiance of the
evidence of that fact, he was illegally and
improperly subjected to the treatment of a lunatic.
lip could not be removed by a writ of habeas
corpus, because the certificates appear regular. And
he could not be removed by the commissioners
Without the consent of the private party, because it was a
private confinement. He could only recover his liberty by
the legal proceedings adopted by his agents. He was no
lunatic, but suffering from the effects of intemperance—the
delusions of delirium tremens—but the defendants did not
attempt to cure him, but kept him there as a lunatic while
he was suffering from these temporary delusions. Mr. Bar-
net and Mr. Ruck knew that he was not insane, and Mr.
Bkrnet had no right falsely to charge him with reckless-
ness and cruelty, and with a profligate expenditure of money,
or going about with loaded pistols threatening to shoot every-
body with whom he was formerly on terms of friendship ;
pulling,down and building up walls, and engaging in Jan-
geroits speculations. Dr. Conoly said that he had a delu-
sion of the inconstancy of his wife. Why, there is not a
mad doctor in England, if he was locked up with the wisest
• man in it, when he came out, who would not give a certifi-
cate that he entertained exaggerated notions of his ability
and wisdom, but that would be no ground for committing
him, as a lunatic, to a lunatic asylum. The same obser-
vation applied to theproduce of his farm. Extravagance
in expenditure was also alleged, but not proved.
The same observation -applied to the charge of his
being a dangerous lunatic. They were not proved.
The whole charges seemed to be a complete fabrication for
sordid gain, by keeping him in their Lunatic Asylum. And
after he was discharged the defendant repeated his asser-
tions in 'a letter in the public newspapers, that he still en-
tertained the opinion that he was a dangerous lunatic. The
keepers said he was not so, and Dr. Stilwell said there was
nothing the matter with him, and forbids them to post letters
for him. To leave a man; as he was, to be taken from such a
pleasant mountain country as Wales, to confine him
in an asylum with lunatics, where the keepers
were forbidden to speak to him, or to cure him, was
enough to' make a wise man mad. The learned course;
concluded by asking for exemplary damages for such con.
duct.

• At the conclusion of his argument he was loudly ap-
plauded by the audience in court.
_ _ _

Mr. Chambers, Q.C.,
.addressed the jury for the de-
fendants. The learned counsel observed that he was glad
'to hear the applause given to his learned friend, because
he was satisfied that it arose from a misapprehension of the
true state of the case, by enlisting their prejudices in his
favour, instead of consulting their better judgment, but the
• jury would not be led away by such voluntary expressions.
The state of the law was such as would prevent the incar-
ceration. of any person in a lunatic asylum without good
foundation for so doing, because the Lord Chancellor and the
Lunacy Commissioners have power to admit attorneys and
doctors on the application of friends who are able to prove
that there is an illegal detention. His learned friend's
observations might have been applied to the state of asy-
lums during the last century, before tho Bastile in France
was destroyed by the French Revolution, but the improved
state of society, and the daily improvements made in lunatic
asylums in this country,and inparticular the improvements
introduced into the defendants'—balls, entertainmentsond
attendance at church, if they pleased—all of which pre-
vents'' the application of his learned friend's observa-
tions. He is a public benefactor. He does not treat
them by .whipping them or putting them on straw
—in holes Or corners as formerly. lie was the first to
combat medical prejudiced and introducedinild and lenient
treatment in the cure of lunatics, and there is no charge of
cruelty or bad treatment made against him—the contrary
is proved. The learned counsel having disposed of the law
end3helreatment in the asylum, then adverted to the state
orthe partiesrand• contended that en the sth of November
,ke irasin a state of dflirium tremens and acute mania, and
ift•fitsubjeet for a lututtieasylum, and to be taken care of by
a doctor and a' keeper;ta a- dangerous lunatic. The learned
counsel then adVertecilo the'eprtitibatea—the onus probaiidi
Jay nisorithe prcr6 that theywere false with the,
knoWledge' of the'-doctors, hilt the contrary has been
-proved both-in a moral and-legal point of view. Dr. Barnet
ianas a.regular practitioner -In Reading, and he stated the
facts upon Which the certificate was granted—false charges
e'rirelty against otherti, complicity of purpose and deter-
- Miziation and unprofitable expenditure of money, and taxing
hiti-wife with infidel 4, and extravagant value of his mines
and farms ; -all of which came under his own observation,
besidekinformitioireceived from others—not one of which
isAisproved,nll which showed that he was a proper object
to be confined in a lunatic asylum. He accused his wife
before the police and public inspector of infidelity, and said
they could still live happily together. He had de-
pressions, and said he would bestroy himself—all of
which has not been disproved, besides Mrs. Ruck's own
statement to the same effect, which showed a strong reason
for committing him. He was then a dangerous madman,
had his delusions, and required to be cured. Besides, on
7th November, when Mr. Fisher, the barrister, and Mr.
Wainwright, the attorney, visited him, they must have in•
quired about his cause of detention, and found that he was
properly detained on account of vicious habits of intem-
perance ; and Mr. Ackworth saw him in March, and could
do nothing to relieve him. On the 24th or 28th April he
goes down with Dr. Seymour, who had been a Commis-
sioner, and saw and conversed with him, but they did not
call to examine him to say that it was dangerous to let
him out. He would have said he was as mad as a man
could be, but he said that he should be sent
to a private cottage. That was matter of opinion
of which the jury would judge when the doctors dis-
agree, but it is not proved that they did disagree, about his
delusions—ho believed that Dr. Barnet was his wife's
paramour, besides the other suspicions sworn to by the
witnesses, and moreover accused Dr. Barnet with poison-
ing his wine. Besides the jury must look to the facts of
the case—the plaintiff must prove his case. The defendant
gave hire air, exercise, and amusements, and society, but
no spirits and no stimulants, which was proper treatment,
and he was justly kept there until there was a recovery
from his delusions.
The jury then retired, but had not returned their verdict
up till the time of our going to press.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Goulburn.)
IN RE PARKINS-TIME BARGAINS ON 'CHANGE

This bankrupt was described as an autioneer in Grocer-
hall-court, and now applied for his certificate, supported by
Mr. Downing, of the firm of George and Downing, Size-
lane, and Mr. Pook, from the office of Mr. Riches.
The bankrupt, although described as an auctioneer, was
in fact a speculator on the Stock Exchange. He had been
bankrupt twice and insolvent once before. Under the first
bankruptcy be paid 7s. in the pound, on the others small
dividends. He now owes to creditors unsecured £751, and
the property is small, a large amount having been settled
on the bankrupt's wife, and the trade and personal expenses
and losses very far exceed the "profits," which accountants
persist in putting as an item in the accounts.
His Honour said that, looking at the case altogether, he
could not come to any other conclusion than that it had
been a reckless and improvident trading, and he must mark
it' by the censure of the Court, by suspending the certificate
for 12 months, and when granted to be of the third class.
Mr. Downing applied for protection, which was granted.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-(THIS DA7.)

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

Andrew Smith, an elderly xaan, the inventor of an electric
gun capable of discharging 60 shots per minute, described
as an engineer, of 9, Vine-cottages, Lambeth, was charged
with. breaking nine squares of glass at the house of his son,
Mr. Archibald Smith, engineer, of 69, Prince's-street,
Leicester-square.
Mr. Edward Lewis, of Great Marlborough.street, ap-
peared for the complainant, and said the defendant was
charged, as on a former' occasion, with annoying the com-
plainant, his son, who carried on a.very respectable busi-
ness. There was no desire to punish him, all that was re-
quired being protection.

The complainant having stated that his father came to
his house that morning and broke his windows with a
stick,

Mr. Beadon asked the defendant why he did so, and he
replied that it was his own property ; but Mr. Beadon in-
formed him that the property was proved to be his son's;
and that he had no business to break the windows, and
that if there was any dispute he had better try the case in
the proper way. He must pay the damage and enter into
his recognisance to keep the peace for 12 months.
The defendant said he was quite willing to pay the da-
mage.