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

reception of lunatics, and to appoint visitors," we '
have no such confidence in the wisdom or sagacity of
our assize jurisprudence, as not to deprecate this
wholesale delegation of a most dangerous and delicate
authority to the uncontrolled exercise of those who
so frequently astonish mankind in their administration
of that jurisprudence. Great care is taken to enact
that "every visitor, being a physician, surgeon, or
apothecary, shall be remunerated," but it is loosely
enough declared that so important an office as that
of the " clerk to the visitor"—technically speaking,
but virtually and practically, assessor to the whole
Commission,—shall be discharged by " the clerk of
the peace or some other person." We must again
remark on the heedless manner in which clause 24
has been drawn. "No licence to include more than
one house, but detached buildings, in certain cases,
to be considered part of a house." Everybody who
knows any thing of the interior management of pri-
vate lunatic reception houses must know, that where
a detestable tyranny is to be exercised, a cruel system
of coercion to be practised, a refractory patient to be
punished, in short, any abuse or illegality to be prac-
tised, it is in these " detached buildings," from a
laundry to a dog-kennel, that those offences against
humanity and the law have hitherto been practised by
the native, or the paid brutality of masters and
keepers. What is to secure the fact that such " build-
ings" will all be faithfully described, or noticed at all,
in the " notice, plan, and statement" required by the
terms of this clause to be given ?
But we pass on at once to clause 44, which is in
these terms :

" And be it enacted, that no person (not a pauper),
whether represented to be a lunatic, or to be only a
boarder or lodger, or otherwise, shall be received into or
or detained in any licensed house, and no person (not a
pauper) shall be received into or detained as a lunatic
in any hospital, without an order under the hand of some
person, according to the form, and stating the particu-
lars required in schedule (B) annexed to this Act, nor
without the medieal certificates, according to the form in
schedule (C) annexed to this Act, of two physicians,
surgeons or apothecaries, who shall not be in partner-
ship, and each of whom shall separately from the other
have personally examined the person to whom it relates,
not more than seven clear days previously to the recep-
tion of such person into such house or hospital, and
shall have signed and dated the same on the day on
which such person shall have been so examined ; and
every person who shall receive or detain any person in
any such house or hospital as aforesaid without such
order and medical certificates as aforesaid shall be guilty
of a misdemeanour."

If the framers of this Bill imagine that these terms
provide any security for the sane against the disabili-
ties and penalties enforced against the insane; any
protection of rightful heirs against grasping guar-
dians, expectants in reversion, and those other rela-
tions and connexions of husbands, wives, &c., to
whom we alluded in our last article on this Bill ;
they must have strangely forgotten the past history
of these " asylums," in the occasional disclosures that
have been made to the public of the manner in which
they are supplied, sometimes, with their best, that is,
their heavily paid-for patients. They must have for-
gotten the frequent experiences we have of snapped-
up commissions " De Lunatico," granted OR purely
" exparte statements" in the Court of Chancery.
They must be willing to continue that frightful
liability to sudden seizure, to the being dragged,
under circumstances calculated to " drive wise men
mad," before magistrates at any unexpected moment,
to be examined on allegations of insanity in their
conduct at no moment expected by them, and com-
mitted, without opportunity of disproof of charges, or
cross-examination of witnesses, to the horrors of a

lunatic " asylum." When Sir JAMES GRAHAM'S
Bill for the regulation of the practice of General
Practitioners came before the House of Commons, we
denounced it as unjust and injurious to a very meri-
torious body of men. But if it be supposed that
the certificates of two of the body, not connected in
partnership, and each of whom shall have separately
examined the patient, be. any mutual or universal
security against the malpractices, the collusions, and
conspiracies, that have been practised under the exist-
ing state of the law; they who can believe in such a
result must be imbued with a simplicity of good
faith, and an easiness of credulity, that should qualify
them for the very first order of committal to be made
out by the new Commissioners.

The apathy with which the House of Commons
has hitherto regarded the rapid progress of the
" Wastes and Commons" Inclosure Bill, supplies a
most instructive lesson to the people. It is a signal
evidence of the utter selfishness which actuates a
vast proportion of those who call themselves their re-
presentatives—but who, in truth, consider only the
local interests by which they are immediately re-
turned—not the general community of which those
interests are but one element. Now, generally
speaking, the constituents of those who are returned
to Parliament are not the class of people to whom the
reservation of waste lands in waste, and commons in
common, is of the vital importance and even necessity
which we have so often been called upon to demon-
strate. The poor labourer in husbandry and
agriculture, the toil-spent artizan in towns, the
factory child, who even in its tender infancy is
harnessed,to that ponderous machine of human labour
which in some shape or other, but in general at a
maturer period of existence, it is the lot of nine-
tenths of our race to be compelled to draw—the in-
digent sick, whose only chance of recovery is the
moving about in the fresh air in quiet and undis-
turbed liberty ; it is to these that the unrestrained
ramble, the manly exercise, the pure invigorating
atmosphere, the tranquil excitement, and the healthful
ramble "far away," are "dear as the ruddy drops
that visit their sad hearts" at ail other times. But
they, poor creatures, have no Member to return
whom they can bind, by pledges, to the advocacy of
this measure, or the rejection of that. They have
no immediate representative whom they can keep
straight in the path of his duty, or hold to compliance
with their wishes, by the controlling prospects of
an approaching or a pending election. And for this
very reason their remonstrances, their protests against
the present Bill are feebly heard within the walls of
the House of Commons. The " returned Member"
pays attention only to the particular views and ob-
jects of his own supporters in the borough or county
which he may happen to represent; and between the
comparative competency of its electoral body—their
connexion with mercantile pursuits, or with some
local staple or manufacture—and the proverbial disin-
clination of any body to put himself forward in look-
ing after that which is every body's business; the
rights of the poor to their ancient enjoyment of com-
mon and waste stand little chance of being vindi-
cated or even remembered. The fourteen or fifteen
Members who, last week, in common with Mr. HUME,
made a manful stand against the Earl of Lisicous's
Bill (for such we hold ourselves at liberty to con-
sider it)—that crafty, uncalled-for, and most iniquit-
able Bill—cannot long make head against such
a majority as that which disposed of the
amendment for postponing the going into Commit-
tee on the Bill for three months. On the
occasion to which we refer, Lord WORSLEY appeared
to act as sponsor for this ill-favoured bantling ; and
this was no matter of surprise to us, who had, about this
time last year, pointed out the repulsive features of its
predecessor and very near kinsman, Lord WORSLEY'S
own progeny. But that Lord WORSLEY, who is a
man of considerable Parliamentary experience and
judgment, should have so committed himself to the
cause of a Bill which is a pet measure with Lord
LINCOLN, who has not yet acquired the former, and
never possessed the latter, surpasses our comprehen-
sion. We might marvel at finding a man like Lord
WORSLEY countenancing such a scheme as that
really one-sided one which is provided for the work-
ing of the measure. It throws all opportunities
into the way of the landed proprietor fo cheaply ex-
tending his domain, but professes to be especially
intended for the benefit of the poor; ( ! ) and
Lord LINCOLK afterwards boasted that there
was no other inclosure measure, under
which the poor man (being minded, in the
first place, observe, to part with or exchange his com-
mon right in one locality for some allotment in an-
other) could do so at so trifling an expense. But this
is not the question. We ask, why is the poor man to
be subjected to this needless interference with his
comforts—this total bereavement of the limited means
still left him and his family for innocent relaxation
from his incessant toils, for renovating and renewing,
as it were, his exhausted spirits and strength ; and
in the contemplation of those scenes in which even
he can commune with the ever freshening beauties
and the peaceful aspect of nature, derive pleasure,
health, and moral improvement, even from the contrast