The Brattleboro reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1907-1912, 1909-10-08
INSANE PATIENTS
ILLEGALLY HELD
Important Decision by Vermont
Supreme Court.
CERTIFICATE NOT SUFFICIENT
Commitments Made Simply on State
ment of Two Doctors Are Illegal
Decision Upholds Contention Recent
ly Made by States Attorney Will
1iamS

Decision Upholds Contention Recent
ly Made by States Attorney Will
liams.
AS intimated by the Reformer in it,
recent interviews with State s Attor
ney Charles H. Williams of Bellows
Falls concerning the commitments Of
; state patients to the Brattleboro Re
treat, the supreme court of Vermont il
decision handed down by Judge Wat
son at Montpelier Tuesday upholds the
contention made by Mr.. Williams that
the committing of patients upon simply
the statement of two physicians is lille
gal. For over two years it has been
known among the legal fraternity of the
state that commitments were being
made contrary to law but until law
could be framed to remedy the matter
no attempt was made to make test
| case.
Though there will probably be no
attempt made to liberate any great
number of inmates at the two institu-
tions at Waterbury and Brattleboro it
| is likely that more than one next
friend or relative. - of persons confined
| in such institutions will take an appeal
from such commitments as have been
made upon the certificate of two ply
sicians under the old law and demand
a writ of habeas corpus for the release
of friends or relatives. Judge of Pro
bate A. F. Schwenk says that his court
has never received a petition for a
Jury trial as permitted under the act of
1908.
In the case of future commitments
made to the Retreat from this county
the states attorney will probably insist
through his rights under the law to
trials by jury where he has reason to
believe that persons to be committed
are not insane under the definition of
the statute. Mr.. Williams has been
decidedly outspoken during the past
persons simply upon the certificate of
two physicians and it will be remem-
bered asked the supervisors to make
special observations in certain eases.
1t becomes apparent by the decision
handed down by Judge Watson Tuesday
that Mr.. Williams or any next friend
or relativeD may take an appeal from
cases which the state Is attorney inter
ested himself some weeks ago DR..
George S. Foster Of Putney, a member
of the state board of supervisors for
the inspne, told a Refc~nler renorter
some weeks ago that t6Yse particular
despite the law which states plainly |
that any "friend may take an appeal
in such cases from the orders of the |
probate court.
According to the decision of Judge |
Watson Tuesday, fully 100 inmates of
the state insane asylum at Waterbury
and at the Brattleboro Retreat have
been committed illegally, as the supreme
court holds that the law under which
were made was defec-
tive.
Although the commitments OF all OF
the 500 patients at Waterbury and up,
ward of $50 at the Retreat are void
further legal proceedings will be nee
,ssary before any patient not cured can
De set at liberty.
MANY claims have been made that com
nittments were illegal, and rather than
nave extended litigation follow, the
lsylum authorities have occasionally re-
eased persons when habeas corpus pro
.eedings have been instituted without
the case.
Last wear the state Legislature passed
law in an attempt to meet some OF
he objections made against the com
nittments. The new law provided that
persons supposed to be insane shall nave
he right of a trial by jury.
The new law. however, could not be
made retroactive and therefore did not
lirectly affect those already in the asy-
ums. The last legislature gave the
tate the right to collect from any es-
ate in which a patient is interested Ior !
nee of the patient while under the
tate s care.
Under this provision proceedings were
nstituted by the state to collect money {
or the support of Mrs. Lydia Anna Al
en- of johnson. who was commltteu on I
Jet. L. 1906 The husband of Mrs. A. /
on. who is well-to-do. objected on the t
,round that his wife had not been /
ommitted legally, inasmuch that the {
woman had no notice of her commit, |
nent and was deprived of the right OF 9
hearing. -.
Allen brought a petition for writ t
{ habeas corpus in an attempt 10 nave
is wife returned to her home. The pc v
ition was made test ease ana nhaliS v
cached the supreme court. v
The court in its decision held that t
he certificate of commitment in the
lien ease was void, as the law did
of give person supposed to be IN
ane a right to be heard. The law pro-
ided that two doctors by signing ,
stating that person is IN
ane could send the patient to an asy-
I'm. . |
There is a provision. however, that G
he probate court shall grant hear :
no TO determine if property owned by &
he person can be used to defray his j,
r her expenses while in the state S s
are. n
The court ordered Mrs. Allen to be I
laced in the care of the superintend- q
nj of the insane for 80 days from Tues
ay until further legal proceedings can =
e taken. If the state takes no action y
uring this period Mrs. Allen is to be ,
ischarged. The decision leaves way a
pen for similar proceedings by the rel 7
tives of more than 700 persons con- =
ned in the state asylum at Waterbury :
nd in the BrattleborO Retreat.
The supreme court IS decision is based X
non secs. 37-6, 3717 and 1871. The court u
Dlds that all persons are entitled to be q
Dtified, and have right to hearing y
desired. The court holds that doc o.
RS certificates are simply prlma faele n
vidence. y
While the law is invalid, that court u
dds that it is effective in certain di VI
ctions, and the decision does not mean u
wholesale delivery of patients from Is
le asylums. ',
All persons will be considered legally dl
,mmitted at Waterbury, it is believed, Sc
ntil habeas corpus proceedings are II
-ought and their release demanded h
he decision does not affect those per HI
ms who were committed to the asylum &c
ter the passage of the new law pro al
ding for hearings. by the last legisla- fe
re, and will have no effect on future Sc
W