REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE.

HC Deb 09 July 1877 vol 235 cc1002-10

MR. RYLANDS,

in rising to call attention to the Report of the Committee appointed to inquire into certain matters relating to Broadmoor Criminal Lunatic Asylum, said, that the House had recently decided upon placing all the prisons in the Kingdom under Government control, in consequence of a general belief both in the House and out of it, that Government could manage matters of that kind with greater efficiency and economy than local bodies, but the lessons derived from the history of Broadmoor Asylum gave a very different idea of the results of Government administration. That history was not one of old date—it was, in fact, a very recent one, commencing only about 15 years ago, and after that short period, the dissatisfaction existing with reference to the cost of the maintenance of the Asylum, and doubts generally with reference to the arrangements had led the right hon. Gentleman opposite, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, to appoint a Committee of Inquiry from whom he requested a Report on the existing state of the establishment, both in respect of its cost as a lunatic asylum, and of the expenditure required to put the building in a proper condition and maintain it; the Committee were also instructed to consider whether any arrangement could be made by which the expense of maintaining such an establishment could be reduced, by re- taining the existing buildings or site, or by any alteration thereof, or by the sale of the present site and removal elsewhere or otherwise. The right hon. Gentleman no doubt was fully justified in appointing such a Committee, but the constitution of the Committee was fairly open to question. He (Mr. Rylands) on more than one recent occasion had called the attention of the House to the practice which had arisen of referring the investigation of matters of administration to Departmental Committees, upon which permanent officials occupied an influential position, rather than to Select Committees of that House. He had strongly objected to the practice as being calculated to lessen the control of Parliament over the various Administrative Departments, and to promote, in the interest of the permanent servants of the Crown, the public expenditure rather than diminish it. Had the present matter been referred to a Select Committee of the House of Commons, it would no doubt have secured a large amount of valuable evidence upon the subject, and would have led to a Report of a more satisfactory nature than that which had been laid upon the Table of the House. The Committee appointed by the right hon. Gentleman consisted of Sir William G. Hayter and Mr. Walter, M.P. (who were Members of the Council of Supervision of the Asylum), Mr. A. B. Mitford (of the Treasury), Dr. Mouat (of the Local Government Board), and Mr. Everest (of the Home Office). The Asylum was under the control of the Home Office; but a local element in its management was introduced in the Council of Supervision, which included the names of several gentlemen residing in the locality of the Asylum. The Council of Supervision was clearly to some extent placed upon its defence in the inquiry, and therefore it was open to remark that two of its Members were placed on the Committee, and in fact adopted the Report with the assistance of Mr. Everest by a majority of 1 over the dissenting minority consisting of Mr. Mitford and Dr. Mouat, who had expressed their dissent from their Colleagues in decided terms. Mr. Mitford went so far as to say that "the majority took for granted the perfection of Broadmoor." Notwithstanding, however, the natural disposition of some Members of the Committee to make the best of a bad case, the Report adopted by them and presented to the Home Secretary was quite sufficient to demonstrate the singular incapacity with which the whole affair had been managed. The buildings were constructed under the authority and control of the Government in accordance with the plans of Sir Joshua Jebb, and were opened in May, 1863. The total cost of the buildings and land up to the present time amounted to £166,350, and although they had been in existence only 14 years the construction had been so objectionable as to lead to serious doubts whether it might not be advantageous to pull down the buildings, sell the site, and erect new buildings elsewhere. And this was an instance of the way in which Government managed matters of that kind. Had the magistrates of one of the English counties fallen into such serious mistakes in the erection of their county asylum, as to lead to a proposal to pull it down within 15 years and to build another, the outcry against their folly would be heard throughout the Kingdom, and it would be generally thought that the magistrates would be more fitted to occupy places within the building itself than to superintend its management outside its walls. But that had actually been the case in the erection of Broadmoor by the Government, and although the majority of the Committee did not recommend the pulling down of the building, the minority were of opinion that that would be the proper course to be taken, and all of the Members concurred in the opinion that the buildings were "very badly constructed and in constant need of repair." Within a year of the opening of the Asylum the medical superintendent reported upon the inadequacy of the means originally provided for warming the wards—he stated that— The buildings are heated by iron stoves and open fire places. Notwithstanding a large consumption of coal, portions of the buildings such as single rooms remain unwarmed, and damp walls and bedding are the necessary result. But without going into other particulars of bad construction there was the fact stated that— The majority of the looks throughout the building can be picked with scarcely any difficulty. Not only had the Government failed to secure the erection of well-constructed buildings; but the cost of the institution under their management was excessive as compared with county lunatic asylums. In Broadmoor, the average cost per annum for each inmate was £57 17s. 3d., whilst in the county asylums of Lancashire it was as follows:—Lancaster, £21 18s. 2d.; Prestwich, £24 3s. 2d.; Rainhill, £25 9s.; Whittingham, £26. It thus appeared that the cost of Government management was considerably more than double the cost of local asylums. In the charge for the official Staff the difference was very great. In Prestwich Asylum, for instance, the Staff of attendants cost £4 16s. 4d. per year for each inmate, whilst the cost of the Staff at Broadmoor amounted to not less than £19 10s. 5d. per year for each prisoner. The salaries paid by Government were higher, and the attendants were considerably more numerous. No doubt, the argument would be urged that the inmates of Broadmoor being criminal lunatics of a dangerous and violent character, it was necessary to provide a large Staff of attendants. But that argument must be taken with considerable qualification. There was not that great difference between the character of the inmates of Broadmoor and those of other asylums. Dr. Mouat, in his separate Report, remarked that— All lunatics with homicidal or suicidal tendencies, however quiet and harmless they may ordinarily he, and all violent and dangerous maniacs with or without such tendencies, need the most careful and constant watching, with the highest degree of safe custody, whether they he in the criminal category or not. In some of the county lunatic asylums the proportion of that class of inmates was very considerable. The medical superintendent of Prestwich Asylum, in his report, presented to the magistrates of the county of Lancaster last year, alluded to the fact, that owing to the great pressure arising from want of ac-comodation, the chronic cases who were quiet and orderly were sent to the workhouses of the parishes to which they belonged, in order to make room for the admission of new cases. The medical superintendent upon this remarks that— The continual elimination of the quiet element leaves in the asylum a preponderance of violent, sick, and acute patients, the average character of whose insanity is more severe than what is met with in kindred institutions. That our maintenance expenditure will necessarily be affected by these circumstances and conditions is apparent to everyone conversant with the subject. These classes of the insane not only need for their safety and well-being a greater amount of supervision—which means a larger Staff of attendants—but their diet accommodation and all the appliances for treatment necessitate a larger outlay than would be required for the care and management of chronic cases. Such were the facts in relation to Prestwich Asylum, and yet the cost of its maintenance was not one-half the cost of Broadmoor. But the excessive expenditure was not the only source of loss to the public by the mode in which Broadmoor was managed by the Government. There was reason to believe that prisoners were kept there long after the period when they might safely be set at liberty. Of course, in an asylum managed by local authorities there would be always the desire to save unnecessary charges upon the rates, by removing the inmates as soon as they gave evidence of recovery. But no such course appeared to have been taken at Broadmoor. When a criminal lunatic entered its walls there seemed to be no chance of his ever leaving them. An instance of that kind occurred in connection with the Warrington Union. For several years the Union had been charged with the maintenance of four criminal lunatics, about whom the Board of Guardians could get no information, until at length a deputation from their body were enabled, by the assistance of the right lion. Gentleman opposite, to visit Broadmoor, and they then discovered that two out of the four criminal lunatics charged to the Union for several years past might properly have been discharged from custody. One of the cases was so remarkable as to be worthy of the attention of the House. It was the case of a man named John Urey, of Warrington, who was charged at the Liverpool Assizes, August, 1868, with burglary, was found to be insane on arraignment, and directed to be imprisoned during Her Majesty's pleasure. He was certified not to be suicidal, nor dangerous to others, nor subject to epilepsy, and no medical evidence appeared to have been give at any time of his insanity. The felony consisted of stealing a pair of boots, and might probably have been committed whilst under an attack of temporary insanity caused by drink. If the man had been convicted in the ordinary course, he would have been imprisoned for six or twelve months; but, being treated as a "criminal lunatic," he was committed to Broadmoor in 1868, and had been there ever since, at a cost to the British taxpayer of about £600. His age at the time of commitment was only 19, and he was, therefore, now 29, with the prospect of living many years longer, and but for the outcry raised by the Warrington Board of Guardians, he would probably have remained in Broadmoor until his death, and have cost the country thousands of pounds for his maintenance. There appeared no reason to doubt that on investigation of the case of all the inmates at Broadmoor, other instances of this gross mismanagement might be discovered. When the question was discussed by the Guardians of the Warrington Union, the Chairman said that as rational men they could scarcely believe that a man could be kept in a public building, at the public expense, and yet not a soul on the face of the earth caring anything about him. One of the Guardians said that the case proved the truth of the observation made by the Swedish Chancellor to his son—"Behold, my son, with what little wisdom the world is governed." That was a fair criticism of the conduct of Government officials in this matter, and when it was remembered that Broadmoor was a Government prison under the control of the Home Office, it appeared most probable that the result of the Bill recently passed by the House handing over all the gaols in the Kingdom to the Home Office, would lead to the creation of many abuses in their management, and to a large increase of expenditure.

MR. ASSHETON CROSS

said, if he had thought that the Report would form the subject of such remarks as had been made by the hon. Gentleman opposite, he should not have laid it upon the Table. When the Estimate about Broadmoor came before him some years ago, he was told that £12,000 or £13,000 was wanted in order to put the institution on a satisfactory footing, but he refused to ask for such a sum, because he was not satisfied it was worth while spending any more money on Broadmoor until it had been decided what should be done with the institution itself. When the matter came forward again he thought the better plan would be to obtain information for his own guidance. He believed it was right to associate with the Members of the Council of Supervision a gentleman from the Treasury, another from the Home Office, and a third from the Office of Works, the buildings at Broadmoor having been placed under the care of the latter Department. Their Report was made as a primary step in the investigations of the Home Office under his sanction and entirely at his own wish, in order that the whole thing might be thoroughly considered before an extra shilling was spent upon the place. The Report was made at the commencement of the present Session, and he had not yet had time fully to consider it. He had himself personally visited the place and made himself acquainted with every nook and corner of it, and he hoped to be able before very long to do something which might relieve the country from a certain degree of expense. He agreed that the expense was at present enormous. The hon. Member opposite was wrong in supposing that the inmates of Broadmoor were at all under the control of the Home Office, because practically the asylum was under the direction of the Council of Supervision. How it ever entered into the minds of men, 15 or 16 years ago, to spend a considerable sum of money in buildings such as existed, was a mystery to him; but neither the present nor the late Government was responsible for it. He hoped that before any serious discussion was had on the question another year would be allowed to elapse, and by that time he hoped that he should be able to come to a satisfactory arrangement with regard to it. One word with reference to the Council of Supervision. Those gentlemen devoted themselves to the discharge of their duties to the best of their ability, and had rendered very valuable assistance. A more competent body of gentlemen could not be found, but they had a difficult task to contend with. Comparison had been drawn between Broadmoor and the different county lunatic asylums, but it was difficult to draw that comparison with sufficient regard to all the surrounding circumstances of each case. It was admitted that if lunacy was dealt with in its commencement, the probability was that a cure would be effected; whereas if it were confirmed it would be much more difficult to deal with it; and that when it had shown itself by criminal acts and had become chronic it was very doubtful whether a cure could be effected at all. The first question that had arisen with regard to Broadmoor was, whether criminals who had become lunatics should be sent there to be mixed with those who had been acquitted on the ground of insanity, and who had, therefore, never been criminals at all; and he had come to the conclusion that this mixture of criminal and non-criminal lunatics should no longer be permitted to continue. One of the first things he did, therefore, on coming into office was to direct that no person who had been convicted of crime should be sent to Broadmoor, notwithstanding his subsequent lunacy. He had limited those directions, however, to the case of men, because there was no other place where the women could be accommodated, but he hoped soon to be able to remedy that defect. The lunatic criminals who had already been sent there would remain, but no more would be sent. The hon. Member had touched upon the question of the number of attendants in that establishment. He much regretted the absence of the hon. Member for Berkshire (Mr. Walter) on this occasion, because he had wished that the hon. Gentleman should have heard his explanation upon this point. He was satisfied that it was owing to the number of the attendants that so much quiet and order was preserved at Broadmoor. It was fallacious to compare the number of the attendants at that establishment with that at ordinary county lunatic asylums, on account of the dangerous character of the lunatics confined in the former. The hon. Member went on to say that a number of persons were detained at Broadmoor who ought to be discharged. It was possible that that might be so, and he had himself directed two of the former inmates to be discharged, on their friends and relations promising to carefully and narrowly watch them. He had paid special attention to this subject lately, and he had become impressed with its difficulties. There was no doubt it was one of the most painful things which anyone in office could have to deal with, that a man, to all appearance perfectly sane, should remain in a lunatic asylum simply because he had no friends to take care of him. On the other hand, there were many men whom they knew, if let out again, would take to drink, develop the same criminal tendencies, and danger would be the result. As to the expenditure, it would be found that this had been diminished during the last few years. He was happy to say that though the last published Returns showed a cost of £57 per head, in the next one published that amount would be reduced to £54. Although but slightly exceeding the cost at Dundrum, he admitted that these patients still cost more than was absolutely necessary.