Mr. T. WILSONasked the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been drawn to the differentiation obtaining in the case of the claims of relatives of pauper patients alleged to be of unsound mind as contrasted with the rights of the relatives of the well-to-do; and whether, in view of the existing overcrowded condition of infirmaries and pauper asylums, he will take immediate steps to have posted up near the entrance to the observation wards of Poor Law infirmaries under his control the provisions of Section 22 of the Lunacy Act, 1890, whereby the rights of the relatives of pauper patients are recognised, provisions which have been hitherto disregarded?
§ Mr. HAYES FISHERThe answer to the first part of the question is in the negative, and I do not think there would be any advantage in adopting the suggestion contained in the latter part. There is no reason to suppose that the justices would make an order for detention if the alleged lunatic could be properly taken care of by his relatives, or196W that the guardians would desire to undertake the cost of maintaining in their institution a person who could be safely discharged.