Billeder på siden

"Mr. Hill became house surgeon in 1835; and it will be seen by the table already given, that the amount of restraint, which in consequence of Dr. Charlesworth's exertions had so much decreased, became less and less under the united efforts of these gentlemen, until the close of the year 1837, when restraint was entirely abolished; and while on the one hand, as Mr. Hill frankly acknowledges, 'to his (Dr. Charlesworth's) steady support under many difficulties, I owe chiefly the success which has attended my plans and labours;' while Dr. C.'s great merit, both before and after Mr. Hill's appointment, must never be overlooked-it is only due to the latter gentleman to admit that he was the first to assert the principle of the entire abolition of mechanical restraint—as is stated in the paragraph quoted from the fourteenth annual report; which report is signed by Dr. Charlesworth himself.


The experiment then commenced by Dr. Charlesworth, and completed by Mr. Hill, had resulted in establishing the possibility of the discontinuance of mechanical restraint, even for a longer period than at the York Retreat. And it led to the adoption on the part of not a few, devoted to the subject of insanity, of what is now so well known as the non-restraint system. However much it was practically discontinued at York, it was now for the first time laid down as a principle that in no case was mechanical restraint necessary. 'I assert then, in plain and distinct terms, that in a properly constructed building, with a sufficient number of suitable attendants, restraint is never neccssary, never justifiable, and always injurious, in all cases of lunacy whatever.' [Hill on Lunatic Asylums, 1838.]

"This we repeat was a principle never laid down in this unqualified manner before; and never before was it accompanied by the practical exhibition of the principle in the total abolition of all personal restraint throughout an asylum."

The measure of desert of Mr. Hill and Dr. Charlesworth has been the subject of acrimonious discussion, the more painful because, all the facts being known, it was perfectly unnecessary. It is not denied that the whole proceedings at Lincoln were animated by Dr. Charlesworth, and that, being first in command there, he was the systematic promoter of all efforts to improve the condition of the lunatic. Nor is it possible to doubt that with Mr. Hill originated the conception of the total abolition of restraint, and that he first put it into practice; that he was not only the first man to think the thing possible, and to express that belief, but the first man also to make it an accomplished fact. On what substantial point, therefore, is dispute possible.

There is actually no standing ground for disputants. As well might one stimulate the animosities of human nature, upon the question whether Pope Leo or Buonarotti had the best claim to be the builder of the noble edifice which perpetuates the fame of both.

The physician who on the basis of non-restraint has constructed the new English system, has acted towards his predecessors in a manner very different to the one which Pinel observed, affording them praise and thanks in such terms as to prove him a single minded advocate for the insane, forgetful of his own claims in the earnestness of his demands for them.

Dr. Tuke concludes his chapter on Lincoln, with the observation that—

"For a time there were certainly some drawbacks to the success of the Lincoln experiment, from the serious physical effects (such as broken ribs, &c.) which occasionally resulted from the struggles between attendants and patients, and it is highly probable that had not the experiment been carried out on a large scale at Hanwell by Dr. Conolly, with much greater success, that a reaction would have ensued of infinite injury to the cause of the insane."

The sixth chapter is made up of quotations from reports, and the seventh is devoted to the contrivances adopted instead of mechanical restraint; a task imposed upon him by the subject of his Essay, a task which we think he would have done wisely to have repudiated, for restraint has not been replaced by any contrivances whatever.

We must now take leave of Dr. Tuke's interesting book without mentioning that it is an Essay to which a prize was adjudged by the Society for Improving the Condition of the Insane.

The Secretary informs us in the dedication that the Society is a private one, we may therefore fairly hold ourselves excused for ignorance of its existence, and of the legitimate objects of its utility. We are told however that it is an old friend with a new name, namely, the quondam Alleged Lunatic's Friend Society. It has done good public service in the publication of Dr. Tuke's book, the merits of which are intrinsic and genuine.

J. C. B.

[We insert the following letter with readiness; although our readers will observe from Dr. Conolly's valuable communication to our present number that as far as the correction of his mistake is concerned it was unnecessary. That Gentleman must indeed be rejoiced to find that the system which owes its establishment to his exertions, is the subject of contention for the priority of its employment; an honorable contention affording homage to the merits of the system.-ED.]

To the Editor of the Asylum Journal.

Sir,-In Dr. Conolly's 'Notice of the Eighth Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy,' inserted in your last number, there is a paragraph which contains an inaccuracy. It is in reference to the introduction of the non-restraint system into the Northampton General Lunatic Asylum. I will quote the passage.-"I may myself add, as respects the female side of the Hanwell Asylum, under the successive superintendence of my valued friends, Dr. Davey, Dr. Nesbitt, Dr. Hitchman, and Mr. Denne, mechanical restraint was never resorted to; and that the first three of these physicians have since shewed their unqualified approval of the non-restraint system by introducing it at the Colney Hatch Asylum, the Northampton Asylum, and the Asylum for the County of Derby."

Now as respects the Northampton Asylum, I cannot understand how Dr. Conolly could have fallen into such an error. Dr. Conolly may point to Col

ney Hatch and Derby as instances where the non-restraint system has been successfully introduced by officers of his own training, but the great principles involved in this system, and which, undoubtedly, Dr. Conolly by his writings aud exertions, has done much to uphold, were practised at Northampton long before Dr. Nesbitt's time, and were derived neither from Hanwell nor Lincoln.

The Northampton Asylum was opened in Aug. 1838. Within twelve months of that date, the system of non-restraint existed and was in full operation there. Indeed I may assert that from the very first it was adopted in spirit, and would have been carried out to the very letter, had circumstances permitted. Dr. Nesbitt was appointed superintendent in 1845, upon the resignation of the late Dr. Prichard, who had organized and opened the institution in 1838.

"Oct. 13, 1839. I have visited this establishment with much satisfaction. The entire absence of restraint with the general prevalence of order and quiet are very striking. SAMUEL TUKE."

"March 4, 1840. I have derived very great gratification from my visits to the asylum. The entire absence of restraint is a very remarkable feature, and this circumstance as well as great cleanliness of the house, reflects the greatest credit, &c., &c. FITZWILLIAM."

"Feby. 16, 1841. Visited the house, nothing can exceed the cleanliness and order that prevail, &c., &c. I did not find one patient under restraint.

ROBERT WEALE, Asst. Poor Law Commissr." "Feb. 28, 1842. The entire abolition of restraint in this asylum, as regards the higher as well as the lower classes of patients, practically demonstrates that which some speculators have theoretically doubted, &c. JOHN ADAMS."

Oct. 10, 1843. We have been particularly struck by the judicious classification and the ample attendance, by means of which, the superintendent has been enabled to carry into successful operation, the principle of non-coercion, &c., &c.

R. W. S. LUTWIDGE, Commissrs. in Lunacy."

The reports are all in the above style to Sept., 1845.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

The exertions of the late Dr. Prichard and the condition of the Northampton Asylum at the time the question of non-restraint was being so fully agitated, have not often been adverted to in the discussions that have since taken place. They were known, however, and appreciated by some who took a deep interest in the movement. The opposition both at Hanwell and Lincoln was violent and determined, and it is not impossible that the example set by Northampton at that time, may have contributed to the successful issue of the question at both these Institutions. I feel, therefore, that it is only due to the memory of those passed Abington Abbey, Northampton, Nov. 17, 1854. away from amongst us, not to permit such an error as that of Dr. Conolly's to remain uncorrected; and to substantiate what I have advanced, I shall add extracts from the Visitors' book of the Northampton Asylum, proving that the non-restraint system existed there previously to 1845, the year of Dr. Nesbitt's accession to office.

Died at Hanwell, 27th December, MR. WILLIAM CLIFT, for many years the Steward of that Asylum. The state of his health had been for some time such as to alarm his friends; they were however not altogether prepared for the ultimate rapidity of his decease.


CHARLES ROOPE & SON, 144 SLOANE STREET, LONDON, Have always on hand a great variety of Material, specially adapted for the above purposes; and invite the attention of Medical Superintendents and Governors of Asylums thereto. Tenders given from a single item to the furnishing of an Establishment throughout.

Reference kindly permitted to the Hanwell and Colney Hatch Asylums, Which they have supplied since their foundation.

Private Asylums treated with on favorable terms.

Highley's Microscopical Collections. Adapted for Christmas Gifts. PROFESSOR QUEKETT's POCKET DISSECTING MICROSCOPE, with 1-inch. 1-inch, and 4-inch lenses, Mirror, &c. Size, 53 inches square by 1 deep, when packed; price 31s 6d. COMPOUND BODY for the above, in box, to render it a Travelling Microscope, 42s.

HIGHLEY'S HOSPITAL MICROSCOPE, on Tripod Stand, inclinable body, large double sliding stage with diaphragm, plain and concave mirror, fine and sliding coarse adjustments to body, Huyghenian eye-piece, with adapting piece for Ross's, Smith and Beck's, or Powell and Lealand's object-glasses, 84s. With Rackwork coarse adjustment, 100s. work moveable stage, &c. 147s.

With Rack

** This instrument combines economy with simplicity, elegance of form, and excellence of workmanship. UPRIGHT MAHOGANY CABINET, with fittings for Highley's Hospital Microscope, 16s and 25s. ACHROMATIC OBJECT GLASSES for Highley's Hospital Microscope and Quekett's Travelling Microscope, in brass boxes, 1-inch, 218; -inch, 25s; -inch, 31s.

HIGHLEY'S ACHROMATIC GAS MICROSCOPE LAMP, with reading shade and mounting apparatus. Constructed to correct the yellow, glaring, and injurious light of the ordinary gas lamp, as described in the “Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science," Part II, p. 142; and "Quekett on the Microscope," p. 489. In Bronze, 42s.

All Communications for the forthcoming Number should | Published by SAMUEL HIGHLEY, of 32, Fleet Street, be addressed to the Editor, DR. BUCKNILL, Devon County Lunatic Asylum, near Exeter, before the 1st day of February next.

in the Parish of Saint Dunstan-in-the-West, in the City of London, at No. 32, Fleet Street aforesaid; and Printed by WILLIAM AND HENRY POLLARD, of No. 86, North Street, in the Parish of Saint Kerrian, in the City of Exeter. Monday, January 1, 1855.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Life in Lunatic Asylums.-The London
Quarterly Review.

have proved weaker, than those of the more ignoble parts of the body, and have been the first to fall into disorder, why should not such an one imitate Sir There are few subjects on which a book could be E. L. Bulwer's example, and give to the world an written more interesting to thoughtful men than the accredited account of his sensations and his perexperiences and confessions of a recovered lunatic. If ceptions, his sorrows and his joys, his pleasures and such an one could remember with distinctness, and his pains, during his residence in a phrenopathic relate with perspicuity, the various phases of intel- institution? A difficulty does indeed exist in the lectual aberration and of emotional perversion through fact that phrenopathy is not so fashionable as homoeowhich he had passed, he might produce a work pathy; and we are indeed the slaves of fashion, the capable of competing for public favor with the con- frightened devotees of appearances. fessions of an English Opium Eater. And if he had The last number of the London Quarterly Review accelerated his own progress towards convalescence contains an article, written under the circumstances by energetic attempts to regain self-control, he might we have supposed. The author admits very candidrival the lesson of self-victory taught in that astonish- ly, "It is not [our experience shews] an easy thing ing production. to get out of an asylum unless there be complete If during his mental illness he had been a resident restoration to health." From this passage we must in one or more of those institutions devoted to the infer that, unless the article has been penned within care and cure of such patients; institutions at the the actual precincts of an asylum, the writer is in the present day regarded by the public with much interest full possession of his mental faculties. And it is not not unmixed with awe; he might record the authentic without reason that he makes this assertion, and details of his life there in a manner certainly not less claims for his writings the authority of sane authorinstructive and amusing than the details of the sailor's ship. This passage may also explain why mind-cure life, given in Dana's popular book, "Two Years institutions are not often painted by their late inmates before the Mast." A few years since the public were in such uniformly roseate colors, as the water-cure amused by the "Confessions of a Water Patient," institutions above referred to. At the latter places, from the pen of no less eminent an author than Sir when the exhausted victim of business or pleasure is E. L. Bulwer. Why should not some other literary tired of mental quietude, regular exercise, moderate invalid, in whose organization the cerebral functions diet, mountain air, and pure water, he pays his bill (there

are no bad debts in fashionable medicine), and takes comments on the difficulty of obtaining release from his leave whenever he pleases; without the formality an asylum, are we justified in estimating it at a high of an official exeat, and notwithstanding Dr. G.'s opinion, that further residence may be of the utmost benefit. Not so with our friend in the other place: though he may be the proudest man in existence, he is generally compelled to remain, until "there be a complete restoration to mental health." Hinc illæ lacrymæ!

We are sorry to confess to great disappointment in the perusal of "Life in Lunatic Asylums." It is by no means the simple trustworthy narrative which would have commanded our deepest interest; it is a gossiping review article, apropos of nothing, except the doggrel verses of the insane, and a collection of cases, related not for instruction but for effect. And here we should take leave of the London Quarterly and its contents, had not our author rushed headlong into the discussion of a subject, which needs no small degree of discrimination and special knowledge. Of course we allude to the employment of seclusion and restraint. The reviewer pronounces boldly in favor of the latter, and when a physician who condemns its employment makes use of seclusion, he exclaims, "Thus it is that common sense triumphs in acts over sentimentality in words." He says that lunatic patients must be punished, and that they are punished even by those "who take credit to themselves for superior benevolence and skill." He designates the belief which many Superintendents entertain, that their patients are not subjected to restraint, as an illusion; because Superintendents are unlike Mr. Boyle Rochesbird, and are incapable of being in several places at the same time, and that they cannot know what takes place behind their backs. If the writer knows from his own experience that in any asylum restraint is made use of by attendants without the knowledge of the medical officers, it is his bounden duty without delay to inform the latter of the particulars. Or if he is cognizant of any acts of deception on this head by medical Superintendents, it is equally his duty to inform the Commissioners in Lunacy, who would without doubt institute a prosecution against the offender, as they did against Dr. Maddock. If he speaks from experience, we are not in a position to gainsay his facts; but if he merely makes use of an argument, we must assure him, that it is one which could only emanate from a mind weakened by recent illness. If a man having no other duties or cares than the superintendence of an asylum, in which he constantly resides, cannot ascertain the fact of the unauthorized imposition of restraint and seclusion by his servants because "he eats, drinks, and sleeps like other men," and must sometimes turn his back, what must be the condition of the patients in a private asylum, the medical officer of which is not resident therein? If the argument is good for anything in the case of a public asylum with resident medical officers, it must apply with far greater force to private asylums under the charge of matrons or even of medical men with private practice.

Now, presuming that the reviewer expresses his opinion on the subject of restraint and seclusion on the same authority of experience with which he

value? The question is of some importance, for it has frequently been urged as an argument for the use of restraints, that patients like it, that they ask for it, and are never satisfied until they get it: ergo it is good for them, and humane to impose it upon them. But granting for the sake of argument, and in opposition to our observations that patients do occasionally make use of these solicitations; are they not insane, and are not such solicitations unequivocal proofs of the fact? Do they not also seek for other things which it would be madness itself to grant them? Do they not seek self-destruction?

This reviewer's appeal for restraints, 'accompanied by his plea for the necessity of punishment, and by his generally harsh picture of the insane character, confirms us in an observation we have long since made, but for which we still seek a satisfactory explanation. It is that men's judgments are most harsh towards those with whose nature they are best acquainted? The sternest martinet is always an officer who has risen from the ranks; advancing years convert the unscrupulous coquet into the most bilious of prudes; and no fanaticism glows with such lurid intensity as that of a convert. As often as we have made an attendant upon the insane of a cured patient, so often have we had cause for regret. Those who have been insane themselves are generally harsh in their judgments of the insane. It is a singular and a painful fact, the explanation of which is not very obvious.

As a singular exemplification of this fact, so far as it relates to the insane, I may mention the earnest opinions of Mr. D-n, for many years a patient in the asylum for the county of Cornwall. D-n, who is well known for his quaint wit and originality, on a recent visit to his old friend, the Superintendent of the asylum, said: “So you have not pulled this nest of idlers down yet, to build workshops and cottages? They did these things easier in old times, when the walls of Jericho fell to the sound of rams' horns. If blowing on rams' horns would do the business, I'd blow till I burst. I've offered the coachman a pound a head to take the lazy, skulking chaps up to Dartemoor, to cultivate the waste ground there. If that wont do, and I had my way, I'd take 'em down to navy dock [Devonport] and sell 'em aboard a man of war, for each sailor to have a slavey: leastwise, I'd take 'em to the Breakwater, and souse 'em in the salt sea ocean, to wash the confounded nonsense out of 'em; and, if that wouldn't do, I'd send 'em to 'Merica, and swap 'em for balk."

Such are the authentic opinions of Mr. D-n, respecting his late fellow-patients, of whom he thinks that, like the monkeys, they wont talk [reasonably] lest they should be made to work. The opinions of Mr. D-n bear a striking resemblance to those of the reviewer; like the latter, they are wholly free from "mawkish sentimentality," and, if an excuse is needed for their apparent cruelty, it is to be found in the fact that poor D-n is still of unsound mind. Whether the same excuse can be made for our reviewer, we are unable to say.

The reviewer does not appear to have formed a very


favorable opinion of Superintendents also. He im- more indulgently with his article than we should have putes to the writings of all of them the qualities of felt it our bounden duty to have done had it been cant and false sentimentality;" and although he pays written under other circumstances. Had not its tento his friend, the Superintendent of the North and dency been most mischievous, we should have passed East Ridings Asylum, the somewhat dubious com- it by altogether. We entreat him to study and to pliment of being lowest in the list of these sentimen-profit by the interesting letter he has inserted from tal canting writers, it appears that he cannot find Southey. The Laureate's cautions will apply to prose one of them who, in his estimation, is not tainted with as well as to poetry. It needs a firm mind to write this snivelling infirmity. safely and truthfully in either on the subject of insanity.


The Psychological Journal.

The last number of the Psychological Journal contains an article on the Asylum Journal, dictated by so much liberality of spirit and such entire absence of the petty rivalries which too often influence journalists, that we cannot satisfy our conscience without tendering our thanks to the learned Editor, and assuring him of our appreciation of that generosity which sees a fellowlaborer in the great field of mental science where a less unselfish person would only have recognized an antagonist. He says, with perfect truth, that the Association, of which this Journal is the organ, disclaimed from the first any intention of establishing a periodical in rivalry or opposition to his own, and we can assure him that the desire to avoid the appearance of such opposition has even actuated our choice of the form and mode of publication. The establishment of this Journal is but the development of one of the original objects of the Association, expressed in its earliest

This accusation of sentimentality made against all Superintendents by this reviewer, is it true? and is it to be lamented if it is true? This sentimentality for the possession of which we are arraigned, would it not on the whole be greatly to the disadvantage of our patients could we part with it? What does it mean but the exercise towards them of the finer feelings; of pity, gentleness, sympathy? And what would the reviewer have us to substitute for it? Restraint and common sense." The accusation of sentimentality is a stone certain to be cast at the promoters of every new mode of philanthropic action, or at the antagonists of any established brutalities. Howard was accused of sentimentality when he improved prisons, and Mr. Thomas Carlyle, in his "Latter-Day Pamphlet on Model Prisons,' re-echoes the taunt. He advocates common sense and the briefest disposal of scoundrels by "tumbling them over London Bridge," and as for attempting to improve them by model prisons and the like, why all that is but "the rotten carcase of Christianity; the malodorous phosphorescence of post mortem sentimentalism." We may be wrong, but as a matter of opinion and of taste, we prefer Howard's sentiment-regulations, namely, the publication of papers written ality to Mr. Thomas Carlyle's cynicism; we may be wrong, but we greatly prefer the new method of treating the insane to the common sense, punishment, and hard work, advocated by our reviewer.

It is not the easiest task in the world to make a daily professional tour through the wards of an asylum assume all the characteristics of a sentimental journey. An asylum is the place in which, if the finer feelings are not carefully watched and cultivated, they will easily cease to exist, even in the least degree. It is a place in which common sense stands a fair chance of being converted into common selfishness. And the mind-physician who does not constantly strive to treat his patients on principles dictated by the finer feelings of pity and sympathy, will not be long before he finds himself actuated by coarser ones. So much for this reviewer's scoffing accusation of sentimentality. We trust and we believe, that there are few Medical Superintendents who do not desire to possess this refined mental attribute as far as the adverse circumstances under which they are placed will permit them to do so. It would be unpardonable to omit the reviewer's estimate of treatment in lunatic asylums. It is comprised in a sentence: "The public asylums are virtually workhouses, and labour is the great means of cure, diversified by occasional amusements. In the private establishments, labour is subsidiary only to amusement, and is itself used only as a recreation." There is not another word about treatment.

In conclusion, we must express a hope that the writer of this review will not allow himself to be annoyed with our observations. We have dealt much

by the members on subjects connected with insanity. The execution of this primary object of the Association was commenced in the year 1843, but was soon discontinued; probably for want of some one to take a lead in its developement.

At the meeting of the Association, at the Retreat, York, in 1844, a letter was presented from Dr. Julius, of Berlin, stating that he had been commissioned by Professor Dammerow, of Halle, the Editor of the Journal of the German Psychiatric Society, to present to the Association a copy of their first number, just published, as a token of the high respect of the continental Association, and to express the desire of the members of the latter that the English Association would follow their example by publishing a periodical devoted to mental diseases, by which means a mutual and beneficial exchange of publications might take place. At that time the Association resolved that the question deserved their best consideration, but postponed any attempt to carry the suggestion into effect. From so early a period was the pnblication of a Journal contemplated and desired by the members of our Association.

In 1848, Dr. Forbes Winslow commenced to publish that journal which has made for him so high a reputation. His labors contributed greatly to attract the attention of the Medical Officers of Asylums to psychological literature, and to remind their Association that it was neglecting one of its most vital and important functions.

"Willing to rouse the younger sort he came,
And fired their souls to emulate his fame."

« ForrigeFortsæt »