Star.
London, England, 1815-09-14 00:00:00

MAD KOMI:
sirrinitm HOSPITAL.

=TRACTS FROM TRI !MIMS OIVIV MOIR A ROM-
SUTTER OF 'me ROMS OF COMMONS.
Conthmotion of the evidence of Mr. John Harkos, Ato•

:hairy is the Ifeeftital.

Can you state what were the circumstances that
led to the alteration in Norris's restraint t—lt was
mentioned to me by the servant, that the iron which
encompassed him did not answer the purpose, for lie
could get his hands out of it, and immediately on such
representation, 1 desired it might be taken off; and
that there might be no doubt of the order being
giver., T wrote it down ; and a copy of that order
written by me forms a part of the record in the report
I have mentioned.
Did that arise entirely from the representation of a
keeper only ?—Certainly, the thing being inefficient,
of course WAS taken off.

Then, in point of fact, the alteration in the restraint
upon Norris, arose from the restraint being insuffi-
cient?—lt having been represented to me, by the
keeper who had the care of Norris, that he could get I
his arms out, it no longer became a security, I accor-
dingly gave him an order to take it off immediately.
Then you are understood to say he had been under
that inefficient restraint for twelve years t—l do not
say that by any means.
Then how long had Norris been under that ineffi-
cient degree of restraint t—That I cannot tell.
Can you form any recollection of the time : was it
a year ?—More than one, two, three, or four years,
certainly. You will be able to collect the precise
time from the date of the resolution of the Commune-
that he should be so secured, connected with the or
der for the release from it, that will give the time,
but that time I do net recollect.

Then your answer is, that Norris had been under
the same degree of restraint from which he was re-
leased for several years ?—Certainly.
And the discovery that it was insufficient was not
made till a noise was made about his case ?—No, I
did not say that ; I say, the meeting to inquire into it
was the result of reports that had gone abroad, and
appeared in the Papers.
What do you conceive to be the object of a prac-
titioner in Lunatic cases ?—He must have various
objects.
Do you conceive k to be the object of the practi-
tioner in Lunatic cases, rather to remove the disease
than to irritate the sufferer?—Certainly.
In what light do you conceive that coercion should
be considered ?—As a salutary and protecting re-
straint.

Are you of opinion that no protecting restraint
against the violence to be apprehended from Norris,
could have been invented more salutary and less irri•
tating to the patient, than that which was inflicted ?
The two cells.

No other have no genius for such contrivances
myself.
You are simply asked, whether you believe that the
confinement in which Norris was placed was the least
irritating and the most salutary which could be de-
vised atter the rejection of the two cells ?—Perhaps
this was the second best.
Do you believe that it was the second best ?—Ac•
cording to my present knowledge it was.
How long was Norris confined in that irons ?
Nine yeArs.
Do you mean that he was never out of those irons
for the whole nine years ?—They were never taken
off I believe ; I do not know that they were ever
taken off ; if the keeper took them off, it was un-
known to me.

Did you during that period ever make a second at-
tempt to have Norris confined in a different manner
—No.

Were yon then satisfied with that mode of confine-
ment for that period of time ?—Yes.
Do you recollect at what time the collar was put
round his neck ?—No; it would appear from the re•
port, that the whole apparatus was put together ; but
I said at my last examination, that I hail something
floating in my mind that the collar was put on first,
and the body iron afterwards.
Do you acquiesce in the truth of the statement of
the report, that the neck collar was put on at the
Lime time with the other irons ?-1 cannot say to the
contrary; I have merely floating in my mind, but
without any reference to particular circumstances,
that they were imposed at different dates.
Do you doubt the statement in the report ?—I do
not doubt the truth of it.
You have stated in a former part of your evidence,
that the collar was put round his neck to prevent his
darting forward to the injury of other persons; is that
mode of annoying others unusual ?..--13y no means
unusual.
Have not you stated, that a patient foot-locked and
manacled is an innoxious animal have, where he
can be handcuffed.
Did not the belt round the body, to which Norris's
arms were attached, answer the purpose of hand-
cuffs ?—They did not secure his hands, because his
hands were at liberty, but they prevented him from
throwing out the arm; they confined the aim above
the elbow.
For what purpose then was the neck-collar Mid
'chain added ?—lc appears by the report that they
were put on together ; I cannot answer that question ;
the report makes it the act of others and not of me.
I3id you remonstrate against this additional mode
of confinement ?—I do not know that it was addi-
tional.

The handcuffs are stated as the usual mode; it is
stated that the handcuffs were not applicable to this
person, and for this reason, the belt round the body
to which the arms were attached was used ; why then
was the neck-collar and chain added ?—1 can give no
reason for the contrivance at all, not having con-
trived it.
You have stated what you think to be sufficient;
why did you acquiesce -for nine years, in what, by
your own account, you did not think necessary
have never given such answer, that 1 did not consider
the confinement necessary. "
Did you acquiesce in that extraordinary mode of
confinement as a sufficient substitution for the hand-
cuffs ?—lt does not appear from the report tlutt I did
so acquiesce.
You were asked, is when you applied that specie,
of confinement which answered the purpose of the
manacle, which you have stated Joni; with foodocks,

to be ittfneient to beep in subjection the Most
Irageous Maniac, rendering hint an innoxious animal,
why did you not remove the chain which was fast-
ened .to the neck of Norris, it then, by your own
statement, being no longer necessary ;" to which you
answered, 44 the priority of one being put on before
the other I think explains it.?"—lt appearing- from
the report, that the neck-collar and body-irons were
put on at the same time, there was a necessity for it,
and no reason why any part of the apparatus should
be removed as long as he continued in that violent
state.
Do you mean to say, that in your opinion there was
a necessity for it ?-1 have said so before, always un-
derstanding the two cells not having been adopted.
Do you remember any thing respecting the chain
by which the neck-collar was fastened to the bar or
staunchion t--1 recollect it was so fastened.

Do you recollect its being at any time lengthened ?
—No ; I do not.
‘Vould any person order that chain to be length-
ened without your knowledge ?—That I cannot tell ;
I do not know the fact that it was lengthened; I can-
not tell how far any other person might venture.
Did it ever occur before ?—Such a case never hap-
pened before.
Do you know what the length of that chain was ?
I do not ; I never measured it.
Nor do you know whether it was atone time longer
than at another ?—I do not.
Do you think that when a man was confined in the
manner already alluded to, it was no part of y our
duty to be minutely acquainted with the particulars
of that confinement ?=Certainly.
Do you think it an unimportant particular of that
confinement whether the man was able with ease to
stand up by the side of his bed or not ?—I always
understood that he could.

Did you understand that from personal inspection
or not ?—I have made him stand up a hundred times
to :hew the manner in which he was confined, to
many persons, even to members of this House.
Do you mean to say you do not know that the
chain was lengthened in order to enable him to do so?
I do not know it, at least 1 do not recollect it, and
I therefore 1 do nat kaow it.
Do' you know, that during the first years of his
confinement he was able to stand up by the bed-side
without inconvenience ?—That I cannot recollect.

Can you recollect when you first ordered him to
stand up ?—No, that I cannot, but a long time ago.
Will you state what were the particular circum-
stances attending Norris which rendered it necessary
so to confine him ? —When first admitted into the hos-
pital, he appeared perfectly trane.uil, and it was in-
tended shortly to discharge him as cured. When he
had been there perhaps a few months, I cannot tell
how long, Sir Joseph Banks wrote me a note, reques-
ting I would walk round the h, spitat with some
friends of his, a foreigner of distinction and others
I took them, after seeing the hespital, into the airing.
ground, and as they spoke no English, I was obliged
either in French or German to Teak to them. I
said, here is a man who will shortly he discharged,
and pointed to him ; at that very moment he gave
me a most malignant look, and tut ned off extremely
sulky. I saw him waiting for me at the gate, for at
that time 1 resided in the hospital ; he was watchin7,
and he had something in his breeches-pocket, and the
_malignity of his look prevented- my gang through
the centre of the hospital, and I went round by the
street. I mentioned it to the keeper ;he said he ap-
peared very quiet, but would I like him confined ? T
said, no, GOD forbid on my account. On the fellow-
iag day he attacked the keeper ; he drew a knife upon
him, and he wounded the keeper in two or three
places in the belly. Another patient of the nante of
Bacon assisted the keeper, and he received a stab,
and I think another patieut, but of that I will not be
certain. He was then confined, but he contrived to
get this confinement off, the handcuffs; arid for a
very considerable time every day produced some sort
of explosion or violence. The keepers were tired out
with him. When I came to him, to assure him he
shotild be put at liberty, if he conducted himself pro.
perly ; he said, it was intended for you, for by GOD
you wanted to sell me to those infernal brutes you
had round the other day ; you were making a bargain
to sell me. Then, at the expiration of his time as a
curable patient, he was retained as an incurable and
dangerous patient. All modes of confinement were
tried in vain. A very unoffending man, to whom it
appeared he had taken a sort of liking, went to him
one day, and he Lit his finger off, I believe, or nearly so;
he lost the use of it. He called the keeper, on one oc-
casion, having fouled his room, to take it up, with
the most opprobrious epithets ; and while he was
taking it up, he snatched the shovel, and if another
patient had not drawn him out by the legs, he would
certainly have killed him ; and he said nothing would
have given him so Much pleasure alto have destroyed
him. I was coming in on one occasion to give hint
medicine, and he had contrived to preserve all the
fat from his broth for several days, with which he
smeared the bottom of the floor; I came in in the
.usual way, and, from the grease, was thrown back-
wards immediately, and a shower of bowls came at
me. I carmen particularize the constant and repeated
acts of violence of this man, but he was, stating it
generally, the most malignant and the most mischie-
vouslunatic I ever saw in my life; and he had been
equally so, by his own confession, when he was in
the army, and his back bore many records of the whip.
Are there any other circumstances to be added to
theie ?—I do not immediately recollect others. If
were to sit down to study, and bring the thing more
in my own mind, I might coolly perhaps recollect
more, but these appear to me sufficient. He was the
most ingenious plaiter I ever saw; he made whip-
cord by which he would have escaped; he made the
finest whip cord I ever saw, by tearing a sheet, and
made a great quantity of rope.with it.
Was lie handcuffed at the time he made that at-
tack on the keeper with the shovel ?—No, we never
put his handcuffs on, they were of no use, he took
them off immediately.
Were you a witness of the attack on the keeper, or
do you know any thing more of it than from the ac-
count which the keeper gave of it?-1 was not present.
Or at either of the other attacks of which you have
spoken ?—No : the only evidence I have is seeing the
stabs in the man's belly, and the wounds in the man's
head.

Then you know only from the account of the
keeper himself, whether those attacks were made with
or without provocation t—l was not present. •

StAtkiktkt.
Thntstirt, at ttaddington, by the Reif. Antire* ttnimsim,
St. Georges Chuitch, Edinburgh, William Gn:reon, i•pq.
Baitford, inetchatit in Dumfries, to Helen, eldest thug. tit or
the Rev. William Sibbald, Minister of liaddington.
Tuesday, at St James's Church, the Rev. John °tilei 1„„ir
of NVinelade, in the county of Southampton, to Mary,-Anti,..l,:. st
clatterer of Geo. liorley, of lAncein's Inn, Esq.
Friday, at S'O're, Suffolk, George Dashwoud, Esq. M.P. to ra,
rianne, dau;kter Of Sir Wm. Rowley, Bart.

. .
Lately, in the Isle of Thane, Wm. l3utler, Esq. to F.up;,,.
mia, • lik‘t daught r f he late Henry Kent, Esq. RN.

DIED.

Tuesday se'noight, at his house in Gloucester, after a :or
nets, aged 77, Richard Brown Cheston, M.D. F.K.S. one
Majery's Justices of the Peace, and a Deputy Lieutenvot 4.4
County of Gloucester.
Sept. 4, the Rev. I'. Lloyd, of Petrilty-house,
Rector of Avon, Subc4e...Gloucestershhe.

- -
Sept. 7, at Plymouth, Mr. I. Cartwriglu, surgetin, of his hi,:
jesty's ship Pactolus.
Sept. 7, at Dart: Reentry% near Hastings, suddenly, the kee
Reet of
or f that place.
i.evdson,
.tpt. at the scat of R. u
Six. hot it:, Selina Metcalfe, widow ;if the late 4T
I Theophilus etcat'e,

0 7 HE PU MAC:
'rIWENTY Years' experience has pnved
A. SI IlLY's SOLAR TINCTURE to be the Jong er
kletlic'ce ever offered to the Public, in D;seases of the Ilr,a,t
and Lungs, Asthma, Dropsy, Consumption, Novo:is
plaints, Armes, Convulsion-, and as violent Monier, of
St•macti and Rowels It i, pleasant to the taste, pitatelul
Strrnach, so milt in it, effecV that tt any be given to w0r.1..
with di11.% or is fan!. in the month.

Sold in I;ortlet, at 1,. 7.. G I and I 4s. at the War4up. e,
6, Albion-street„ Blackfrlamrsaa I; Sur on and Cu. How Caul •!,.
yard; Newberg au:l Son, St. Pairs; Barclay 1.,.1
market; Butler, Cheap. ide; Stradhug, Royal Eseti.inL:.gr•
Brenand, 1.16, Iliduvigato Without ; Ward, 3.24, Hon,..en
by mom Venders in Kintsluenr-11. IS. 'flit &mane in; L,
W. Suffell written upon the outside wrapper.

rrHE celvhritted ANTI.' M rETIOINES, ots
SOLOMON'S DROPS, (without mercury, or :ay ckit.
terious preparation) which stand in the higlisstestimattiw. or 5,
cure of the Scurvy, Scrofula, Leprosy. and all tll‘..rders
gloating is Iln impure state of the bl :od ; being gradual,
and almost imperceptible, in their operation—the hest sufstitiri
that has ever been discovered for that dangerous mineral Men
cury, sweetening the blood, and stimulating it to expel all nonsai
end Impure juices, giving strength and tont to the nerves, enh.
vening and invigorating both body and mi:l4l.—Price I is.
bottle, or four In one family bottle for 33,. on which (1,1 t: antsy
bottle is saved. '11,! words ‘• Sand. Solomon, Livtrpol,":aer3
graved on the stamp a each bottle, wit hour which none are grcullit
Sold by Samuel Leigh. 18, Strand; Bacon and Co. 1.:0, (lx!fire,.
street; opposite New Bond.street, London, and all Nit:thrifty
p enders.

p. Dr. Solomon experts, when consulted by letter, the twaal
compliment of a out i uund note to be inclosed, ztidress.._
" Money Letter. Dr. zioloruun, Gilead House, near I.iv r:.
Paid dtetble postage "