MR. W. JENKINS.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Volume II, Issue 55, 7 November 1863, Page 5

MR. W. JENKINS.

The Dunedin Observer contains some remarks on a person well known on this gold field—Mr. W. Jenkins, late of the firm of Pulford and Co.—and it is in compliance with a wish expressed by a number of that gentleman's friends, that we publish them, although not of very recent date: —

Driven Mad.—On Monday last the Daily Times published a long notice headed, •• A Dangerous Madman," which is altogether so untrue of the unhappy lunatic and so cruel to his wife, i children, and relations that we are constrained tQ draw public attention to the real facts of the case, and at the same time enter our protest against these sensational articles, which may please the morbid tastes of a few, hut must be truly disgusting to all healthy minds. Mr William Jenkins (the " Dangerous Lunatic" of the Daily Times) is an old and highly respected colonist of some eighteen years' standing. He came to the province about two and a half years since, and for a length of time carried on business as an upholsterer and furnishing ironmonger in Highstreet of this city. It was at the first outbreak oftheDunstau that Mr Jenkins loaded some drays as a venture and proceeded to the new district which was then attracting such general attention. He succeeded beyond his most sanguine expectations, and shortly after the Wakatip district being rushed he proceeded to the locality with pack horses laden with goods. Here "also he met with extraordinary success, which enabled him to purchase a store, erect an hotel, and enter upon other speculations, all of which ho turned to very profitable account. Mr. Jenkins was employed by one of the banks to purchase gold, large quantities of which he had to keep about his person for safe custody. A store on the Dunstan at the time we speak of meant little more than a canvas tent. There was little or no police protection,rowdyism was rampant and several robberies had been openly perpetrated in broad daylight. There is no doubt that intense anxiety and the fear of being attacked during the night acting upon a nervous temperament produced cerebrai disease. Hut the affection was only slight and exhibited itself in ecoentricitiefl of a nature so harm less that no

uneasiness was felt by those with whom Mr Jenkins came in immediate contact. Some three months ago while pursuing his business at the Lake, Mr Jenkins was suddenly arrested and forwarded on to the Dunstan. Here he was examined by two medical men, who deposed on oath to his perfect sanity. The unhappy man was at once liberated, but fearing a second arrest he made his way down toDunedin, where he put up at two or three different hotels—the Criterion. Waverly, and the Victorian. Beyond talking wildly and unconnectedly, and constantly dwelling upon the treatment he had received from the authorities, there were no other symptoms of insanity. Jenkins was however, again arrested, and at the intercession of his wife, through Messrs. Smith and Willan the solicitors, he was again set at liberty. And here we quote from the sensational notice in the Times, which says, " according to her (Mrs. Jenkins') statement to the magistrate (who subsequently had her before him and severely reprimanded her) her husband was no sooner out of gaol than he recovered his health" Mrs. Jenkins distinctly informs us that Mr Strode never reprimanded her. Indeed it would have been a most unfeeling act Lad he done so, and altogether contrary to the commonest dictates of humanity. As Mr Strode ordered Mr Jenkins' release, to have censured the wife for making an application, which application he granted, would have been to stultify himself. Here we have the Daily Times recklessly wounding the already too lacerated feelings of a most unhappy and unfortunate wife by not making itself acquainted with the true facts of the case. Mr Jenkins subsequently went to live in a cottage which had been rented by his wife. There he remained for some days, certainly exhibiting symptoms of insanity, but otherwise perfectly harmless and inoffensive, never attempting to offer personal violence to anyone. We now let the unhappy wife tell her own story of what subsequently happened. "My husband, she says, "was living quietly with me in a cottage which I had taken a little distance from the town. All that was wrong with him appeared to have been brought on by his troubles. It was one afternoon he was in the yard with me when the doctor of the lunatic asylum happened to pass in sight; my husband seeing him became very ex* cited, and called after him, using violent language. The doctor passed out of sight, when my husband once more became quite calm, but shortly after to my dreadful surprise two men entered my house, and without warning, or showing any authority whatever, dragged him off to jail. The report in the Daily Times says, that I told the magistrate that when my husband recovered his health, he set at nought all my control. I never told the magistrate anything of the kind. I could always control him, and if he were liberated this moment he would be perfectly harmless, and open to receive advice from anyone kindly offering it. My husband then made his escape, and no wonder, for his affairs were all going wrong at the diggings. He wanted to get up there if possible, to know what was being done with his property. That was the main cause of all his anxiety. He broke out of a room from which a child might have got away, came, much to my surprise, to my cottage during the night, and made up a little parcel of food to carry him on his journey, and bidding me good by, set off perfectly sane. My husband was seen in the bush by a constable named Eagerty, who took him for a bushranger, and pursued him as one pursuing a man who had committed a murder. My husband seeing a pistol presented at his head defended himself and Eagerty got hurt—but not anything like what has been represented. He afterwards attempted his escape, for he was in his excited state, fully impressed with the belief that he would be illtreated. In this attempt he was thwarted. Had my husband been allowed to remaiu with me, all would have been well. He is not as the Times states, a 'desperate man,' and the 'lives of citizens would not have been in danger.' I saw him yesterday at a distance and he was calmly playing a game of draughts with one of the keepers. He is no doubt wrong in his mind, but in the manner he has been hunted down from time to time, if he is a maniac it is not to be wondered at. That he is not so bad as has been stated any one can ascertain by visiting him." Such is the poor woman's account of this melancholy affair. The statement made by Mr Stoddart, the governor of the gaol, that he would not be responsible for the safety of 120 prisoners, because a lunatic was confined within its walls, only goes to prove that either the prison is not as secure as a prison should be, or that he has not a sufficient or efficient staff of subordinates to prevent a sudden attempt to break out.