Case Study: Prosecution under the 1845 Lunatics Act

Culturally, when we think of the lunatic asylum, we think of dark, haunting sites of abuse and neglect. More broadly, when we consider mental illness in the past, images are conjured up of ‘mad’ neighbours left to their own devices, or individuals confined away by relatives out of the gaze of the local community. Overwhelmingly, there is a sense of shame and maltreatment in these cultural depictions. But how true are they? In this post I delve into one case in 1873 of a family concealment of mental illness, and the consequences this had.

Recently, my research has taken me to examine the misdemeanours that resulted in prosecutions brought under the 1845 Lunatics Act. This legislation created the central regulatory body, the Commissioners in Lunacy, who had the power to inspect all residences and institutions that housed people certified as ‘insane’ to ensure they were being correctly treated in a humane and supportive manner. They also had the power to instigate prosecution proceedings against anyone who breached the law. Misdemeanours ranged from keeping an individual classed as insane without the correct certification and order, to severe neglect and abuse. Those prosecuted could be staff members of asylums found to have mistreated patients, or could be the general public guilty of some sort of wrongdoing on the part of the ‘insane’.

The case I want to highlight is that of Joseph E, of Brackenthwaite, Wigton, prosecuted in…1872 for keeping his 73 year old mother in his house illegally, as she was insane, and wilfully neglecting her whilst under his care. Detailed in the Commissioners in Lunacy 1873 annual report, they commented:

‘the superintendent of police visited…and found his mother shut into a room with a wet flagged floor, no fire, and little light, for the window had been boarded up. Her condition was excessively filthy, and evidenced utter neglect. With the exception of a nightcap, she was naked, and was found crouched on her bed…How long the woman has been kept in this state did not appear. She had been found wandering in a state of nudity in Wigton, in February or March preceding the visit of the superintendent, and had then been brought back to her son’s house. The police took proper steps for lodging the lunatic in the Cumberland Asylum with due expedition, and charged the son before the local bench with cruelty and neglect…He was committed for trial to the Quarter Sessions, and, on hearing what had occurred, we ordered our secretary to prosecute.’

When the case came to court, something curious happened, which the Commissioners referred to as ‘a complete failure of justice in a case of undoubted ill-treatment’. Although the evidence of mistreatment was proven, the relationship between the Joseph and his mother apparently removed his liability for prosecution, as he had a ‘natural obligation’ to keep her, rather than the fact being that he willingly took on her care and knowingly mistreated her. As a result, he was acquitted of all charges.

Therefore, although the presence of the Commissioners in Lunacy goes against the cultural portrayals of madness and asylums, as there clearly was a correct code of practice ensuring that abuse/neglect did not happen, incidents did arise whereby people severely mistreated the mentally vulnerable. Does this mean that our understanding of mental illness in the nineteenth century is skewed by a small number of incidences? Possibly so, or was it that the prosecutions were upheld as examples, with a view to combating more widespread breaches? In this case, as we have seen, prosecution wasn’t successful, but there were many more which did result in a fine or prison sentence. However, the maximum sentence brought in any of the prosecutions that I have studied (1845-1890), was seven years in prison, which was for the manslaughter of an asylum patient by an attendant. In reality then, was the law tough enough on breaches of the Lunatics Act? Did this leniency result in many more abuses later on, and into the twentieth century?

Thanks for taking the time to read this post. Stay tuned for more on prosecutions, as I am working on a book chapter on this area. Follow me on Twitter for full updates @caradobbing 

If you liked this, you may also enjoy my thesis, which is freely available to view  - https://leicester.figshare.com/articles/The_Circulation_of_the_Insane_The_Pauper_Lunatic_Experience_of_the_Garlands_Asylum_1862-1913/10226480

Work related worry in the nineteenth century asylum

Last year, 54% of all working days lost were attributed to conditions caused by work related stress, and increasingly, pressure due to overwork is inducing bouts of mental ill health among workers.[1] However, the impact of overwork on an individual’s mental health is not a phenomenon consigned to recent decades. This post details three cases that demonstrate how work was found to impact patients in the archives of the Garlands Asylum, in an attempt to link our experiences with those confined in lunatic institutions of the nineteenth century. 

It is important to note that patients admitted to a lunatic asylum would be diagnosed according to the symptoms they displayed. As a result, largely due to a lack of understanding of the workings of the brain and how mental illness manifested, conditions were attributed to physical causes. For instance, injuries close to the brain were thought to trigger a breakdown of a person’s mental health. In the casebooks, events such as ‘injury to head from fall on a rock’, were cited as the cause of insanity. In this instance, the patient, Christopher S, had suffered a head injury, which bled profusely at the time, but no one considered it a serious threat to his health. Two years passed before he was admitted to Garlands, which was triggered by the violence towards his wife, to such an extent that she was afraid of him. Less common in the casebooks were explanations of conditions due to ‘moral’ causes, as they were then termed. Anything considered to be caused by a heightened emotional state, for example ‘disappointment in love’, can be found but were much less common. In 1872, in a review of Garlands’ first decade of admissions, Dr Clouston stated that only a quarter of cases were due to emotional trauma. 

The first patient, Joseph T, was admitted to Garlands in November 1882. The cause of his insanity was believed to be ‘worry and hardwork’. Given his occupation, a general practitioner, it can easily be deduced as to why his profession would’ve impacted his health. Before the NHS, GPs were their own enterprises. They worked long hours, travelled great distances to visit patients at home, and had to secure their own business. His case notes also tell us that he was resident in the Crichton Asylum in Dumfries five years earlier, and although he had been discharged recovered, it was noted that he had not felt well since. Interestingly, it was work that aided him whilst under treatment in Garlands. Shortly after admission it was noted that he ‘has gone to work with a party in the grounds’. This was part of the work-based therapy offered in Victorian asylums, as useful occupation was seen to divert patients from their disordered thoughts. A little later on, Joseph’s case notes state that: ‘Is very industrious, says he feels he would break windows etc. if he did not work’. However, it was this outdoor work which also led to his exit from Garlands. After being granted more liberty, due to continuous good behavior, he was placed in charge of one of the working parties, and increasingly given more freedom. This gave him the chance to escape, as detailed in the following passage: 

‘The patient was allowed a considerable amount of liberty and never showed any tendency to abuse this privilege, nor had there been anything unusual in his mental state of late. He went out for a walk between 7 and 8am and he did not appear at meals. A search was instigated for him...’ 

Joseph was never found, or brought back to the asylum, and his body was recovered mere miles from Garlands five weeks later near a quarry, which it was presumed he fell into shortly after his escape. 

Second, cases can be found in the records of patients who experienced delusions to do with work. One example is that of John W, who was admitted to Garlands in February 1897. He was 37, suffering his first attack of insanity which had lasted about a week. The doctors couldn’t find an apparent cause, but noted that he ‘came home from work saying there was a conspiracy against him and refused to go back’. Under ‘delusions’ it was also recorded: ‘says there was a conspiracy against him by fellow workmen and that part of it is to bring him here’. John remained in Garlands for 6 months, and was discharged as recovered as his delusions abated.

The final case to be presented demonstrates that a lack of work could also be a cause of mental breakdown. Richard A was brought to Garlands on 4 October 1862, and was said to have been driven insane by his ‘anxiety of mind for want of work’.  He lacked a hereditary predisposition to the illness, therefore the cause of Richard’s mental instability was attributed to his lack of work and food. Within six weeks Richard was discharged as recovered, restored to full health simply by eating, sleeping well, and being usefully employed in the Asylum workshop.  Here we can clearly see that periods of economic decline, specifically in agriculture, effected, not just a person’s income, but also their mental health. Farmers and casual agricultural labourers were at times merely surviving, and, in some cases, the threat of losing work, or being without an occupation, was enough to trigger insanity. 

Thank you for taking the time to read this post. If you would like to read more of my research on the Garland Asylum, my thesis is freely available to view online: https://leicester.figshare.com/articles/The_Circulation_of_the_Insane_The_Pauper_Lunatic_Experience_of_the_Garlands_Asylum_1862-1913/10226480 

For more information about mental health, talking about mental illness, and support, visit https://www.time-to-change.org.uk/ 

 [1] https://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/causdis/stress.pdf