§ House in Committee on the Lunatics Bill.
§ On Clause 3, relative to the appointment of the Commissioners,
§ Mr. T. Duncombesaid, that this clause had better be postponed until they had got the returns from the Inspectors in Lunacy of the cost of visiting the several houses, and their state; but this was a part of the plan of keeping the House in the dark.
§ Lord Ashleysaid, that the only return 526 not before the House was that of the amount paid to each Commissioner.
§ Sir C. Napiersaid, that before he received his half-pay he was obliged to make a declaration; and he did not see why these gentlemen should not be subjected to the same test before they received their salaries.
§ Mr. Warburtonsaw no use in the declaration.
§ Lord Ashleysaid, that the treasurer's accounts were a sufficient guarantee of the rectitude of the payments, and for the travelling expenses there was also sufficient evidence.
§ Mr. T. Duncombesaid, that they ought to have paid Commissioners, responsible to the Government and the country, and not men who were part amateurs, and part professional, and who were responsible to nobody. Before they passed this clause, which made the Commission permanent, they ought to have evidence that the Commissioners had hitherto done their duty. He asserted that they had not. He thought they ought to see if they could not have a better Commission formed than at present existed. He would not press his Motion for the postponement of the clause, but would call upon the Chairman to read the clause at length.
Mr. V. Smithdefended the conduct of the Commissioners generally, and especially with respect to the case of Mr. Percival.
§ Mr. Christietrusted the noble Lord would not only be induced to reconsider the present clause, but the effect of the Bill altogether. He was sorry that his hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury did not mean to press his Motion for postponing the clause.
§ Mr. Wakleyfelt convinced that the present Commission would never work well. He objected even to three Commissioners, believing that one Commissioner, who should be responsible to the Home Office for his actions, would do more good than three or even eleven Commissioners, of which the present Commission was composed. He thought that amateur Commissioners could never do that good for the public that one properly paid Commissioner could do. It had been asserted that insanity was a purely mental malady; now he asserted that in nine cases out of ten it arose from disease. There was no case of insanity without structural derangement. He trusted that 527 the noble Lord would reconsider the clause with reference to the Commissioners, as he thought it might be framed in a manner that would operate far more beneficially to the public.
§ Sir C. Napierhoped the noble Lord would reconsider the clause. He considered that an unpaid board was not so good as a paid one.
§ Lord Ashleydenied that unpaid Commissioners were not so competent to perform their duties as paid ones. For himself, he would say that when he entered the Commission he did so with a determination to do his duty; and he considered himself as responsible for the performance of those duties as if he had been paid a hundred guineas a visit. As to the statement of the hon. Member for Finsbury, that one Commissioner would be sufficient, he asserted, without fear of contradiction, that it would be impossible for one individual to perform such onerous duties.
§ Mr. Warburtonagreed with the hon. Member for Finsbury, that paid Commissioners were better than unpaid ones; but, at the same time, he thought there should be unpaid gentlemen connected with the Commission, who would represent persons of moderate fortunes who were afflicted with insanity.
§ Sir J. Grahamwas anxious that the Commissioners named in the clause should be continued in the Commission.
§ Mr. T. Duncombeagain objected to the appointment of any unpaid Commissioners. He could see no advantage in having one of the Commissioners in the House; it would not make the Board more responsible. He wished to see them responsible to the Lord Chancellor or the Secretary of State. He would beg leave to move the omission of the names of the amateur Commissioners. The hon. Member moved to omit all the words mentioning the unpaid Commissioner.
Mr. Vernon Smithdefended the appointment of the unpaid Commissioners. His duties as a Commissioner were so onerous that he was sure that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to induce the same number of gentlemen to supply their place if they were now to resign those offices.
§ Sir J. Grahamcontended that the appointment of unpaid Commissioners was desirable, because they were generally men without any professional bias—men of the world, and under the control of public opinion.
§ Sir R. Inglissaid, there would always be found men in this country willing to undertake any sort of duties, however invidious, merely for the sake of the public good. He was sure, therefore, that there would always be a sufficient number of amateurs to undertake the office of Commissioners of Lunacy.
§ Mr. Duncombehad no idea of degrading any of the Commissoners by calling them amateurs. He was sure that paid Commissioners would be found to discharge their duties better and more fully. The present Board had visited various lunatic asylums about three or four times during the last eighteen months, and then always at an hour when he was sure that everything was prepared for their reception. They ought to go when they were not expected. He would beg to ask how many asylums the noble Lord, or any member of the Board, had visited lately?
§ Lord Ashleybore testimony to the zeal and activity of the unpaid Commissioners. He himself had, during the last year, taken the chair at the meetings of the Board thirty-four times, and each time the Board had sat no less than four hours.
§ The Committee divided on the Question, that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question: — Ayes 45; Noes 6: Majority 39.
§ Clause again put.
§ Lord Ashleysaid, the appointments were all made without reference to any other feeling than that of completing the efficiency of the Board.
§ Mr. Christieprotested against granting retiring pensions to individuals who had held the office of Commissioner, and while in that position had received very large salaries.
§ Mr. Wakleytook the same view of the case, and contended, that after what the House had done last night, when it had openly declared that under no circumstances should relief be given to the able-bodied poor in Scotland, and that as soon as a poor roan was deprived of employment, he was to support himself how he could, or starve along with his destitute family—after such a vote, to propose now large retiring pensions to men who had 529 long held large salaries was preposterous.
§ Mr. T. Duncombewished to hear from Lord Ashley the age of Dr. Turner, and the period of his service as a Commissioner. He might have been appointed fourteen and a-half years ago, and he was now, in six months, under this new Act, to receive a pension of 750l. When Dr. Turner first entered upon that office, he had no expectation of receiving any pension at all.
§ Lord Ashleycould not tell the hon. Member for Finsbury the age of Dr. Turner; he should, at a guess, say he was about sixty-five; but he (Dr. Turner) was very well able to fulfil the duties of his office.
§ Sir J. Grahamwould take upon himself all the responsibility of having recommended these appointments to the Lord Chancellor.
§ Mr. Duncombewished to know whether any arrangement had been made between the noble Lord (Lord Ashley) and those parties who had been put in nomination for those offices?
§ Lord Ashleysaid, that he had entered into no arrangements whatever.
§ Mr. Duncombedid not object to the payment of 1,500l. a year to the medical members of the Board; but he was strongly opposed to a similar sum being given annually to the legal members, who would be amply remunerated by a salary of 1,000l. a year. Police magistrates received a salary of 1,000l. a year, and had, into the bargain, to submit to a deduction of five per cent. for the purpose of forming a superannuation fund. He would, therefore, move, as an Amendment, "That the medical members of the Board do receive a salary of 1,500l., and the legal members 1,000l. a year."
§ Mr. Hindleythought that 1,000l. a year would be enough for either class of Commissioners, and he would submit an Amendment to that effect. If the noble Lord would put an advertisement in The Times for a person competent to judge of cases of insanity, and offer 1,000l. a year, he would have so many applications that he would find it difficult to make the selection.
§ Lord Ashleysaid, that the sum of 1,500l. a year was mentioned, that they might be enabled to select the most talented and efficient persons to fill the offices of Commissioners.
§ Mr. Warburtonsuggested the adoption of a sliding scale of salary according to seniority.
§ Mr. Wakleydiffered from his hon. Colleague (Mr. Duncombe) as to the propriety of awarding a higher salary to the medical, than to the legal Commissioners. Such an arrangement would, in his opinion, be decidedly unjust. He would recommend that barristers should be appointed after five years standing at the Bar, and not after ten years.
§ Sir C. Napiercontended that 1,000l. a year was quite sufficient for the services of the Commissioners, as the Lords of the Admiralty or the Treasury had no more.
§ Mr. Brothertonwould give his vote for the larger salary, because it would provide men of greater efficiency.
§ Mr. Duncombemoved, as an Amendment to leave out the words "five hundred," so that the salaries should all be reduced to 1,000l.
§ The Committee divided on the Question, that the words "five hundred" stand part of the clause:—Ayes 31; Noes 7: Majority 24.
§ The Committee again divided on the Question, that the clause stand part of the Bill:—Ayes 31; Noes 10: Majority 21.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ The House resumed. Committee to sit again.