The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-11 00:00:00

TH' SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY MORNING„JUL ir

amilies were obliged to keep their afflicted relatives at home,
who thus became wholly incurable, though, if treated in
time, they might have been recovered and restored. It was
to obviate these evils that the present asylum was proposed ;
and, in an humble hope to further its °Vets, he had con-
sented to second the resolution before the chair.
The resolution having been put from the chair, was car-
ried unanimously.
Mr. S. SOLLY, in moving the next resolution, said that
the meeting had already had the imports.nce of this subject
impressed upon them in such forcible and eloquent terms
by the speakers who had preceded him, that he
should content himself with simply moving the re-
solution, which was "that there should be established,
in connexion with the asylum, a charitable fund raised
by means of donations, subscriptions, and bequests ; which
shall be funded in the names of trustees specially ap-
pointed, and the interest applied to the relief of a cer-
tain number of persons to be elected from the pa-
tients who have been one year or more in the
asylum, and placed on the list of patients received for
a lower payment or even without any payment whatever."
He could corroborate all that had been said by his medical
friends as to the necessity of such an institution for the cure of
the insane and not merely for their reception. There was
ne period at which insanity might not be cured, and the estab-
lishment of this charitable fund would enable parties to remain
in the asylum a sufficient length of time to have a cure
effected. Were •it not for this fund, it might happen that
persons whose resources were exhausted, might be dismissed
from the asylum just as reason was about to dawn.
Dr. BEVAN seconded the resolution, which was carried
unanimously.
Dr. CONNOLLY, who came forward to propose the next re-
solution, was received with loud cheering from all parts of the
room. He had to move "that the grateful and cordial thanks
of the meeting be given to Earl Spencer and Lord Ashley—
(Cheers)—for their kind patronage of the proposed asylum,
and to Lord Ashley fur having given his valuable
assistance en the present occasion, and for his zealous,
benevolent and efficient exertions on all occasions affecting
the protection and welfare of those afflicted with insanity."
There was a debt of gratitude due from all of them to the
two Noble Lords who were named in the resolution. The com-
mittee had not courted noble patronage, had they done so he
doubted not but that they might have had hr.lf the nobility
of the kingdom as patrons, but they bad thought that it
would be impossible to have a greater guarantee of the cha-,
racter of the institution for humanity, and kindness, and
efficiency than the names of the two Noble Lords to
whom the resolution referred.—(Cheers.) Those Noble
Lords had been consulted, and approved of the ar-
rangements which the Committee had proposed, and
Lord Spencer would have been present but that he was at
present occupied in arranging the affairs of an institution of
a somewhat similar character in the neighbourhood of
Northampton. They had great reason to be grateful for the
prompt and valuable assistance which had been rendered them
by Lord Ashley.—(Cheers.) From his own experience at
Hanwell he was aware how great was the necessity for the
establishment of some such institution as the present. The
want was one which was acknowledged by all, and from the
manner in which the subject was now taken up he did not
entertain a doubt of their success.
Dr. WEBSTER, in seconding the resolution, passed a high
eulogium on the character of Lord Ashley, who was de-
scended from a stock that had always been forward in sup-
porting the great cause of humanity.—(Cheers.)
The resolution was carried by acclamation.
Lord ASHLEY, in returning thanks, said he would not
detain them any great length of time at that very late
hour. Indeed, it would be impossible for him to do so, as
he should be obliged to be in attendance in the
House of Commons in a very short time. He deeply
estimated the thanks of his fellow-citizens which
were offered to him in that resolution ; but there was
no expression of their thanks that was half so grateful to his
mind as their assembling together as they had done that day,
to promote the success of this institution.—(Cheers.) It was
most gratifying to him to see such an assemblage, for he
knew the necessity of such an institution to the welfare of
the classes for whom it was destined. They e were many persons
to whom the establishment of such an institution as this would
be the greatest blessing that could be conferred upon them.
It would secure to them a comfortable retreat, where their
cure might be effected, and where they would be protected
against cruelty, if their affliction was beyond the reach of
human care. He denied that they were trenching upon the
province of the large hospitals but even if they were
he would not admit that as a valid reason against the esta •
blishment of the institution. He believed great advantage
would be derived from the multiplication of asylums of this
character, inasmuch as a multiplication of asylums was at-
tended by a multiplication of students of the science of
insanity, and he thought it a thing most desirable that well-
educated medical men, whose standing in the profession
was a guarantee for their knowledge and talent,
should be induced to devote their attention to the
investigation and study of mental disease.—(Hear, hear.)
Those persons for whom this institution was instituted
could live in comparative comfort under ordinary circum-
stances, but were unable to meet the outlay required
when any of the members of the family became afflicted
by insanity—they were not prepared for such a blow.
There were many small tradespeople, most worthy per-
sons, who, if one of the members of their family became
afflicted with mental disease, shrunk from the expense of
applying proper methods of cure—they could not afford
it they treated the patient themselves, hoping
that nature would do her work, and restore the
patient. They resorted to expedients, and the malady be-
came incurable. He knew the working of the private lunatic
asylums. There were some few of them admirably conducted;
but in by far the greater portion patients paying two, orthree,
or four, or even five guineas a week, did not receive that
care and attention which was bestowed upon the pauper
lunatics at Hauwell by his friend Dr. Connolly—(Cheers)—
and upon those at Wandsworth by Mr. Hill—(Cheers)—and
he would repeat, what he had already said twice in the
House of Commons, that if it should please Providence to afflict
him with insanity, and he should, under such circumstances,
have any power of choice left, he would prefer going as a
pauper to Hanwell, or to the Lunatic Asylum of Surrey, to
being placed in a private asylum at five guineas a-
week, for he was convinced that nine-tenths of
the patients in private asylums were not as well
attended to as the paupers were at Hanwell.—(Cheers.)
On this account he ardently desired the establishment of
such an institution as the present, which would tend
to promote a more accurate knowledge of the science
of insanity. For sixteen years he had paid attention
to this subject, and for twelve years he had been
Chairman of the Board of Commissioners of Lunacy. The
progress of improvement was very slow—the subject
was a difficult one—but though the progress was slow
it was certain, and comparing asylums now with
what they were sixteen years ago, it was in
many instances almost impossible to recognise them
as the same places. A vast deal yet remained to be done,
but still these asylums were much improved when compared
with what they had been, and they no longer now
exhibited those scenes of horror which were then
of hourly occurrence. The establishment of such an
institution as the present would be the means of introducing
improvements into their private asylums. For the rich, pro
vats asylums would always exist, where they could ob-
tain every comfort and attention that their cases re-
quired, from medical gentlemen of talent and com-
petent acquirements. But these cases at present were
rather the exception. He should wish to see medical
gentlemen, distinguished for scientific attainments, entering
more largely into this career, and the establishment of insti-
tutions like the present would induce them to do so. He had
received a letter from Mr. Samuel Tuke, of York, expressing
approval of the Institute.—(Loud cheers.) He would not
delay them by detailing to them any facts in which they
were all agreed. He believed that the exhibition of sym-
pathy and kindness towards those whom Providence
had afflicted was always followed by the blessings of
the Almighty. That was a truth that could be
proved from experience and from the words of Holy Writ.
He, therefore, bade them God speed. Let them go on heartily
with this undertaking, and they would receive the reward of
a more than ordinary sympathy.—(Cheers.)
Themeeting then broke up.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, July 10.
The.r Lordships assembled at five o'clo.:k. -
ARRESTMENT OF WAGES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
On the motion of Lord CAMPBELL, this Bill was
read a third time and passed.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from
3,130 of the inhabitants of a place i 4 the county of
Sussex, praying for the repeal of the malt-tax. He also
presented a petition from the farmers of Burt, county
Donegal, against the Irish Tenants' Bill.
Lord LYTTLETON presented a petition from the
Rev. Charles Miller, incumbent of Marlborough, praying
for a dissolution of the Tithe Commission, and an alter-
ation in the tithe commutation.
Several Bills were brought up from the House of
Commons, principally connected with railways, and were
sew rally read a first time.
Lord CLIVE presented a petition in favour of the
Oxford and Rugby Railway Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from a gen-
tleman of the bar, complaining that he had been
seriously injured by the late accident on the Great
Western Railway, and praying their Lordships to in-
stitute an inquiry into the cause of it.

PRIVILEGE.
The. Duke of RICHMOND begged to call their Lord-
ships' attention to a matter of privilege. lie held in his
hand the petition of Mr. Thomas Baker, who had been
superintendent of the C division of the metropolimn po-
lice force from the year 1829 down to August in the
last year. The petitioner stated that on the 26th day of
April, he attended before the Committee of that souse,
appointed to inquire into the law respecting gaming,
when he was examined by such Committee, and gave
evidence before them ; that Mr. John Harlow, a person
mimed in that evidence commenced at action on the case,
in the Court of Queen's Bench against him, wherein he
sought to recover damages from the petitioner for in-
jury alleged to have been done to him in consequence of
such evidence ; that petitioner had not pleaded to such
action, and, therefore, he prayed the House to take the
premises into their consideration, and to grant him pro-
tection against the action. He (the Duke of Richmond)
begged to remind their Lordships that this individual
did not voluntarily give his evidence before the Select
Committee, but that the Committee called upon him to
appear before them in consequence of his being the in-
spector of that division of the metropolitan police,
whose duty it was to watch and know about gambling
houses. Ihe man was examined upon oath, and he be-
lieved he spoke the truth to the best of his belief. He
had known him a great many years, having known him
when he was in the army, in the Peninsula and Water-
loo, and he believed a more honourable man did not
exist. He wished, therefore, to a,k the Noble Lord the
course that ought to be pursued in the case?
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, if a witness who
gave sworn evidence before their Lordships committed
perjury, an indictment might be preferred against him,
but he did not know that a witness could be indicted for
what he had spoken in a court of justice ; but the ques-
tion was, whether they should, ur der the circumstances
detail, d in the petition, protect the defendant. He under-
stood that the declaration alleged that the evidence was
given before a Committee of that House.
Lord BROUGHAM—In the presence and hearing of
your Lordships.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—It was possible that
he might have repeated the words not in his capacity as
a witness. He should recommend the appointment of a
Committee to search for precedents on the subject—a
course which would be rendered necessary, as the case,
in the ordinary course of justice, might come before their
Lordships as the last court of resort. The Noble and
Learned Lord concluded by proposing the motion.
Lord C IMPBELL moved, as an amendment, that
the plaintiff and his attorney be summoned to appear at
the bar of that House. He considered that there was
no necessity for a Committee. He agreed with his Noble
Friend on the Woolsack that no action could be main-
tained against a witness for evidence which he had given
before their Lordships. He called on Creir Lordships to
protect their privileges, and referred to the case in
which an action was brought against one of the officers
of their Lordships' House for taking an umbrella which
had been left by a witness in his possession. In that
case their Lordships threatened to commit the plaintiff
to prison if he proceeded with the action.
Lord BROUGHAM considered that the question
was a new one, and that the one before the House did
not involve a breach of privilege. They had only a
quarter of an hour to decide what course they should
adopt, and he thought the best course was to adopt the
proposition of the Noble and Learned Lord to search
for precedents. Their Lordships were not like the House
of Commons. They were a court of justice, and to de-
clare that to be a breach of privilege which, perhaps,
they would have in future to decide upon in their
judicial capacity was so extraordinary a proceeding,
that he was sure they would not attempt it.
To call upon the plaintiff to disclose his case—
such a proceeding would be an extraordinary, if not an
extreme case. To call upon the plaintiff to come before
them and tell them his case at the mere request of the
defendant, was a course which he was sure they would
not sanction. He believed that the Houses of Parlia-
ment had their privileges best secured by trusting their
privileges to the courts of justice.
Lord COTTENHAM said that the petitioner alleged
that the action was brought for words which were spoken
before a Committee of that House. He then said that
he did not speak the words in the declaration. And
also that what he did say was not spoken in malice.
There might not be a word of truth in the petition, but if
it was true there could be no doubt that the action which
was instituted for that evidence was a breach of the
privileges of the House. If they did not proceed imme-
diately, but stayed proceedings till Monday, mischief
might de econe in the interim ; and they had the ex-
ample of the other Howe before them to warn them of
the consequences of procrastination in a question of that
kind.

Lord DENMAN hoped that they would not prevent
the plaintiff in this case from proceeding with his action
in a court of justice. He thought that the matter would
perhaps have to come before them in their judicial ca-
pacity, and he did not consider that they would be up-
h )Icling their high dignity, by resorting to the summary
proceeding proposed. It would not be in his power to
speak on the case at a future time, and he was therefore
desirous to record his sentiments on the subject, before
his judicial duties earns on. The Noble Lord said that
the precedents were all on one side. There was only
one ease in point— the umbrella ca se, which was so called,
from a party wh ) attended the House on one occasion,
when it sat as a judicial tribunal, and while there lost
his umbrella. He accused one of the officers of the
House of having taken it, and summoned him to the
Court of Requests for the offence. The House asserted
its privileges, and quashed the proceedings. He thought
it a most pernicious thing for them to interfere, and pre-
vent the law from taking its course. He thought if they
proceeded in that high-handed way they would not
raise their Lordships' character in the estimation of the
country. It could not be supposed for a single moment
that any court of justice in England would give coun-
tenance to the plaintiff, if the evidence which was de-
posed to respecting him was based on truth. There bad
been nothing in the conduct of any court of justice which
would entitle any party to say they had not discouraged
an action of this nature, but on the other hand it was
not to be said that a
.party could take advantage with
impunity of his being in a Committee of either House of
Parliament, to slander or libel another. The judges
had always to perform their duty without fear and with-
out favour, and it was necessary they should do so, for
the protection, not of one class of individuals, but for
the protection of all, and to do equal justice to those
who were found to have been injured, and to assist those
in seeking the truth who complained of injury. Upon
these general grounds he ventured to ask the House to
pause before they adopted the amendment of his Noble
and Learned Friend (Lord Campbell).
After a few words from Lord CAMPBELL and Lord
BROUGHAM, the House divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
For the amendment
Majority
On our admission to the gallery, we found
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE blaming the House
for carrying the motion.
Lord STANLEY considered that, by adopting the
motion, they would not sacrifice one jot or one tittle of
their power or authority. They had adopted the proper
course in taking a short time to deliberate as to the
course they should pursue. By inquiring into the steps
which were taken on former occasions, that they might
be guided in the course which they should pursue in re
gard to the case before the House, would not in the
smallest degree detract from their dignity.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH considered witnesses
ought to have the protection of the House extended to
them; if by giving evidence they were liable to have ac-
tions brought against them, truth would with difficulty
be elicited.
Lord COTTENHAM considered that they ought to
know whether it was a breach of privilege or not with-
out searching for precedents.
The Duke of RICHMOND produced tmh,aespriedevi-
deuce of the Committee,Chairman.
of which he
usually were.
erceiv
a Ltesclses
The petitioner was examineadtwosulvva they
perceive
When it was considered that
that blackguards i
it
was
at to
laugh)—they deal with—(A lau
very difficult to obtain information from any persons ex-
cept the police.
The Committee was then appointed,o and eleven o'clock
(this day) fixed for its first meeting.
FRAUDS BY A RAILWAY COMPANY.
The Duke of RICHMOND then called the attentionthe
on of the House to two petitions which he had placed
a
table of that House. One of the petitions made a direct
chargeect
charge against the Directorste of rail way company—
that they had committed or fifteen cases of forgery.
He thought it would not be right that such an allegation
should be made, and that no inquiry should be instituted
into it. If forgery had taken place, it ought to be in-
quired into, and he should, therefore,_ move that a Select
Committee should be appointde.d to_t
ur,eapsort on the
petit
e that there
tions to which he had referred.
It
eobtaini theatru attendance
was great difficulty'
of Peers, but it would
_t havewn stated
badc effect
on the public, when
nadi been committed
in a
petition that forgery h nutted by
a Railway Company, that no attention should be paid to
Committee on
ought not to
it. He considered that the repolntmofmtohe
the Bill, which had passed the U
The par.ty_slteaetned in the peti-
tion received until the Committee he had proposed should
have made their report.
tion that he could bring forward fifteen people, whose
names were put to the contract without their consent or
knowledge. He himself knew neoptthiwnhgaatthaell
hoafdth
setaniteadtl
exe Orders C2narnittee that
ter, from beginning to end,
Parties stated to the Standing
the deed
they had seen the persona
sign
said it "ctontract.
The Marquis of CLANRI I was a very
serious forgery, and was punishable in a court of law.
I But he saw no reason why the Bill should be deferred in
I consequence, as it appeared that there would remain a
I large surplus, which, without the sums set down to the
-
parties in the deed of contract, would be enough to carry
the Bill. The names might be scratched out.

1815.

Lord ASHBURTON considered the Committee was
the proper tribunal to investigate the matter.
The Duke of RICHMOND was not of that opinion ;
he consid red the Committee had no power to do so. It
was the dutyof the Standing Orders Committee to decide
on the matter when the Bill was befr re them.

Lord ASHBURTON considered that they might
throw out a Bill which contained names which had been
forged to the deed of contnct.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said they could not
then determine whether forgery had been committed or
not. It was a very serious fraud.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY was understood to say
that the subject had been mentioned in the Standing
Orders Committee, but that the party IA ho made the
allegation could not point out the fraudulent names
amongst those subset ibed to the de• d.

The Duke of RICHMOND-did not wish to delay the
Bill. All he wanted was that it should not be read a
third time until the subject had been cleared np. A
100,0001. clause was struck out of the Bill in Committee.
If an existing railway required fresh powers, they were
obliged to advertise their intention in the newspapers
and the London Gazette, that every shareholder might
know what was going on. This was under the " Wharn-
eliffe" claus9.

Lord STANLEY—It is a standing order.
The Earl of DEVON moved, as an amendment, that
the Committee should report specially whether the cir-
cumstances detailed to the House ought not to delay
the passing of the Bill.
The Duke of RICHMOND said that was in direct
opposition to the standing orders.
Lord MONTE AG LE thought that a searching inquiry
should be instituted. In the other House of Parliament
a Member had been made liable for a sum of 30,0001 by
a forgery of that kind. He thought that the public
were entitled to have some protection with regard to
these schemes, and he should therefore support the ap-
pointment of a Committee.
After a few words from Lord CHARLEVILLE,
The Duke of RICHMOND moved that a Committee.
be appointed to investigate the allegations.—Agreed to.
GAMES AND WAGERS BILL.

On the motion of Lord WHARNCLIFFE, the
Wagers and Gaming Bill was read a third time, with
amendments, and passed.

DOCUMEN'TARY EVIDENCE BILL.
Lord BROUGHAM moved that this Bill should be
printed as amended, and recommitted. He thought that
there should be a •provision to enable the journals of
either House of Parliament to be given in evidence.
The LORD CHANCELLOR approved of the gene-
ral provisions of the Bill, but had doubts as to the pro-
priety of that clause relating to the journals of the
House.

Lord CAMPBELL approved of the Bill. He thought
would save a great deal of expense.

IRISH JURORS BILL.

On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, this
Bill was read a third time and passed.
Lord BROUGHAM postponed the resolution of which
he had given notice regarding the standing orders till
to-morrow.