ASYLUM FOR DRUNKARDS.

Evening Star, Issue 3013, 15 October 1872, Page 4

ASYLUM FOR DRUNKARDS.

Mr Justice Gresson, in charging the Christchurch Grand Jury, a few days ago, is reported to have said : As the time for the next session of the Provincial Council is drawing near, it may not be out of place to invite your attention to the 21st section of the Lunatics Act 1868, which enables a Judge of the Supreme Court to send drunkards to a public asylum for curative treatment for any period not exceeding twelve months. Since the Act has come into operation 1 have, made several orders for detention in the Asylum at Sunnyside, I did not expect that in all, or even most of the cases, a complete reformation would be effected, but even where the temporary restraint has proved ineffectual to eradicate the confirmed habit, the enforced abstinence from intoxicating liquor for a time was a benefit to the unfortunate victim himself, and a great gain to his unhappy family. Latterly, however, I have been obliged to refuse several pressing applications from finding that the admission of persons of this class into the Asylum seriously interfered with the discipline of the establishment, and the comfort of the lunatic patients. The evil has been pointed out by Archdeacon Wilson, the Acting-Chaplain of the Asylum, in a letter dated 24th June, 1872, addressed to his Honor the Superintendent of Canterbury, and published in the report on the Lunatic Asylums iu the Colony, presented to both houses of the General Assembly by command of bis Excellency.” “ After some introductory remarks, Archdeacon Wilson proceeds in these terms: ‘ You are aware that for some years past I have served as acting-chaplain to the Asylum at Sunnyside, in the neighborhood of Christchurch, During that time it has been very satisfactory to mark the great improvement which has been effected in the treatment of lunatics under the skilful management of Mr Seager. Latterly, however, I have noticed with great regret an element of serious disturbance introduced owing to the operation of the Act above mentioned. Until the law for the committal of habitual drunkards came into force, the cases of lunacy treated in the Asylum were of the usual character, involving more or less aberration of mind during the greater part of the period of confinement. Under such circumstances it has been seen, in the case of Sunnyside, bow great a measure of success can be attained in curative treatment, even where appliances and classification of patients have been much below what modern experience suggests. It is much to be feared, however, that the progress of improvement will be seriously retarded by the introduction of a class of persons whose symptoms are specifically different from those of the mass of patients among whom they are thrown. Generally a very shert time is required to relieve an habitual drunkard from the effects of his vicious habit. The complete removal of the means of indulgence, makes him iu a few days a sober man. He is then, and so long as he can be kept from drink, perfectly sane. He is fully aware of the position in which his intemperance placed him ; angry with the friends at whose instance his committal has been effected ; angry with the manager of the asylum in which he is placed, and just in the frame of mind to make him an objectionable associate for lunatics of the ordinary kind. It has been found at * Sunnyside’ that drunkards iu this state have fomented disorder in the house, causing common lunatics to rebel against necessary discipline, and depriving them of all benefit from the quiet order which usually prevails. The evil is further aggravated when the habitual drunkard happens to be of better education and higher social position than other patients. In this case he not unfrequeutly takes advantage of hla position to make some unfortunate half-witted lunatic the butt of ethers, involving him in senseless scrapes, and taking care to keep himself out of the mischief he has caused. This statement would not be complete were I abstain from mentioning that great moral delinquencies are likely to ensue from the presence in the asylum of a class of persons who seldom derive much benefit from their confinement; while their influence and example are injurious to others.’ I do not understand from the foregoing observations that the Archdeacon objects to habitual drunkards beiag placed under curative treatment, but only to their being confined with ordinary lunatics j on the contrary, he directs attention to the evidence of Dr David Skae, physician to the Royal Edinburgh Lunatic Asylum, taken before a Select Committee of the House of Commons, in which to the following question—* How do you propose to deal with insane drunkards or dipsomaniacs?’ witness replies, * They ought certainly to be

confined, and for long periods of time. At present cases of this kind could not be kept in an asylum except for a few months, be* cause they are apt to be sent out by the Commissioners ot Lunacy. I certainly think they ought to be confined for long periods of time, so as to secure them.’ In reply to the question, * Do you think that the reformatory treatment, provided it involved abstinence from drink, for a long period, would save many cases from going to insanity?’ Dr Skae answers—‘lthink it would, and a great majority would return to their families,' Mr Hamilton, the Inspector of the Sunnyside Asylum, in his report to the Colonial Secretary, dated 26th June, 1872, referring to the ‘ curative treatment of habitual drunkards,’ while deprecating their admission to the Asylum in its then condition, uses the following language * The treatment has been successful in some instances, and only lately the keeper met one patient in excellent health, who expressed himself satisfied that his cure was complete and would be permanent.’ Gentlemen, 1 concur entirely in opinion with Archdeacon Wilson, Dr Skae, Mr Hamilton, and, I may add, with the experienced superintendent of the Asylum, Mr Seager, both as to the inexpediency of using Sunnyside or any ordinary lunatic asylum as a place for the curative treatment of habitual drunkards, and also as to the expediency of trying the effect of curative treatment in such cases. It is for this reason that I have brought the subject under your notice at what you may, perhaps, think unnecessary length. 1 have felt much pain on two or three occasions lately at being obliged to refuse the urgent entreaties of wives or other near relatives to make an order for the detention of persons who were bringing ruin upon themselves and their families by theii habitual intoxication. Even the limited experience we have had here of the working of the Act, proves that the experiment is not hopeless, and I trust you will agree with me that it is worth while to incur an expenditure which need not be large, in providing suitable separate accommodation for the curative treatment of habitual drunkards. For my own part I should be glad to learn that the Legislature could see its way to supplementing the powers given to the Judges under the 21st section of the Act, by enabling them to award hard labor during the period of detention. Whether we regard the amount of mischief to the drunkard himself—to hi* family, or the country—it would be difficult to exaggerate the magnitude of the evil caused by his selfish indulgence of a vicious habit. I trust, therefore, gentlemen, you will use your influence to obtain a grant from the Provincial Government during its next session sufficient for the purpose of giving the experiment of the working of this Act a fair trial.