remarked that he was struck with the different appearance and conduct of the insane in hospitals here and that in England; that among the insane he saw here there was a constant restlessness, a complaining spirit, seeking protection and counsel of every one passing, as though there was something wrong or wanting; whereas, in the British hospitals, there was a quiet contentment, every intelligent insane person feeling and knowing that his rights were protected by Government, and wrongs and abuses could not exist without being exposed and corrected. This was proved to them by frequent visits of the Commissioners of Lunacy to hear their complaints and to settle difficulties. Cannot a Republican Government make some similar provision for the most unfortunate of all its subjects, suffering more or less daily for the want of it? There are other points wherein the insane need this outside supervision, such as personal liberty, mechanical restraint, seclusion, correspondence, detention, ill-treatment of any kind, real or imaginary, etc. In case, even, that there were no wrongs or abuses, what a relief would it bring to their minds, in a suspicious and disturbed state, to know and be assured that their individual cases are all looked after, and that no real harm can befall them?

The English gentleman referred to, after inquiring into the management or provisions made for the government of our hospitals, remarked that it was very different in Great Britain, that the rights and interests of the insane there were more carefully guarded, that every insane person knew he had influence and power at headquarters, and that the Government was his friend.

In a Government made "by the people and for the people," cannot the rights of its feeblest and most needy subjects be protected? Can neither democracy nor republicanism do it? Most assuredly it can, and will as soon as the means and ways are understood. No intelligent or thoughtful community will always rest easy in such a state of things, or be satisfied with present legislation on this subject.

3. The third party demanding this supervision is very numerous, including the friends of the insane and the public at large. These hospitals sustain a most intimate and important relation to the community, different from any other institutions. Every member of society, every man and woman should feel an interest in them. Who is not liable to be insane, or have a friend thus affected? Every voter and tax-payer should feel an interest in

them, inasmuch as the money for building them comes directly from taxes, and was appropriated by Legislatures representing individual voters. Besides, the moneys constantly used for defraying the expenses of these hospitals and paying the salaries of the officers in charge of them, come mainly from tax-payers, however small these taxes may be.

While superintendents and trustees have the immediate charge and control of these institutions, they do not own them, neither were they built nor are they continued for their emolument. In one sense, they are masters, but in another, from a higher and broader view, they are servants. While they have their rights, and their opinions are to be respected, there are parties inside and outside of hospitals who also have rights therein, and whose opinions are entitled to consideration. The claims and interests of the latter parties are vastly greater and more important than those of the former. In fact the real interests of those in charge of these hospitals are trifling and insignificant compared with those of the insane and their friends. On the side of the latter not only far greater numbers are concerned, but the health and lives of multitudes are more or less involved in the issue. Under these circumstances it would seem that the insane should have the wisest and best supervision that can possibly be provided. The principles of humanity, of justice and common sense demand it. Such supervision has been found in the Lunacy Commissions of England and Scotland. The most beneficial results have followed the labors and reports of these Commissions, which may be best described in the language of one who was superintendent for a long time of the largest lunatic hospital in New England, and who has visited those abroad.

This gentleman, Dr. M. Bemis, of Worcester, from his own large experience and personal knowledge, is abundantly capable of forming opinions and making comparisons. In answer to the inquiry what improvements have been made in the lunatic hospitals of Great Britain, and what relation does the Lunacy Commission hold to these institutions, makes this statement: "The improvements are many. They have supplemented and modified this system to such an extent that, while it bears some resemblance to the past, the present is studded all over with new features. The improvements for ventilation, cleanliness, classification, for freedom, both outside and inside, are most noteworthy. Their advances in the

direction of labor among the patients, in the immunity from physical restraint and seclusion, in the granting of innocent indulgence to trustworthy patients, are far beyond what is now practiced in any American hospital. The Lunacy Commission has done much, and its continued operation is of incalculable benefit, not only to the insane, but also to the officers of the institutions. They have improved the condition of the insane in many ways, and have rendered a residence in a lunatic asylum less irksome and hopeless to those who are obliged to submit to the restraint and treatment in a public institution. They have removed the hard and forbidding, cruel fixtures for restraint and seclusion. They have wellnigh emancipated the insane from the use of mechanical restraint; have quite abolished every kind of punishment and task; have raised and improved the quality of food and clothing. They have opened the apartments of the furious and filthy to the sun and air, and opened the doors, that all may enjoy, in some degree, the freedom of the several establishments. More than this, they constantly act as guardians for the insane, and they strongly support and strengthen those who conduct faithfully the affairs of the asylums. They have a systematic correspondence with every institution, and by reports of officers of each, they know, not so much the economies of each, but what is better, they have an understanding of the commitments to such an extent that they can easily tell the justice and propriety of any questionable case. They are made to know of all cases of restraint and seclusion, and they interest themselves in every case of hardship, and thus lighten the burdens of the insane, without in any way increasing the cares of the officers. From their frequent inspection of the several institutions, and from the mass of facts gathered by their correspondence, they publish every year a valuable report of their labors, with plans, suggestions and histories of cases of hardship, abuse and suffering."

When the great advantages as here described arising from a Lunacy Commission are considered, it would not seem possible that the superintendent of any hospital would or could oppose such a supervision. The insane are not the only parties benefited, but the hands of the trustees and superintendents are supported; much of the prejudice existing against these institutions and their managers would thus disappear; less complaints would be heard from the insane and their friends, and far greater confidence would be placed

in these hospitals by all classes in the community. But what is the attitude in which superintendents in this country place themselves in respect to such supervision? Some years since, as a body, they passed a resolution affirming that "the appointment of Lunacy Commissioners, with a view to official visits or any supervision of State institutions for the insane, is to be deprecated as not only wholly unnecessary, but injurious and subversive of the present efficient system of control by trustees appointed by the State executive." It may be said that this resolution was adopted by a convention of superintendents years ago, and that the sentiment is not generally endorsed by them at the present day. It is gratifying to know that here and there a superintendent is taking a more charitable, a more liberal and enlightened view of things; but, at the same time, the adoption of a Lunacy Commission has been bitterly opposed for years, and that, too, in a variety of ways, by hospital officials; in fact, the chief opposition comes from this particular quarter. In confirmation of this statement we might recite some facts and circumstances which occurred not long since in several States.

When it is considered that a Lunacy Commission, properly conducted, is calculated above all other agencies not only to inspire public confidence in these hospitals, and improve the condition and treatment of their inmates, but also to stay up the hands of superintendents and strengthen their administration, it is surprising that they should ever oppose it. In fact, they should be the last to oppose it and the first to welcome it. But, great advances have been made within a few years in public opinion on this subject. It is being found out that people have rights, and, when understood, they will be maintained. The world moves-the progress of science is always forward. Reform is only the work of time.

Again in these large establishments questions frequently arise, the settlement of which need just the advice and counsel which such a Commission can give. Differences of opinion sometimes occur between the friends of a patient and the superintendent as to treatment, or how long the person must remain in the hospital, or when he can return safely to his home; also, differences arise between the overseers of the poor of cities and towns and the hospital officials, as to the removal of pauper insane persons to almshouses, or other places of support. In such cases the intervention of a third party is very necessary.

Then, the question of a more complete classification of the insane, both on the score of humanity and economy, should receive far greater attention than it has hitherto. Instead of building palatial residences at immense cost, and herding together such large numbers of the insane, let the chronic class, comprising fully two-thirds or three-fourths of the patients in hospitals, be provided for at less expense in asylums or other establishments or homes, furnishing advantages better adapted to these persons than large and costly hospitals.

This question of separating the chronic from the acute insane has a most important bearing upon the present mode of treating insanity. The magnitude of the subject is so great that it can here be only alluded to. In the hearing last year before the parliament committee in Great Britain, this question of classification received much attention. The heads of both the Scotch and English commissions of lunacy-Sir James Coxe and Lord Shaftesbury-expressed strong opinions, not only in favor of a more complete classification on this point, hut an apprehension that this mixing up in large numbers of acute and chronic cases, might have been one of the causes why no more success had attended the present mode of treating the insane. When doubts and fears are expressed by the highest living authorities on a subject, should not a question so important receive more attention? This is the work of a commission of lunacy. It cannot be done by an individual alone, nor by any one institution. It requires too much time, labor and thought. Legislation should provide the way and the means.

Besides, there is a strong impression in the minds of some of the most thoughtful persons (who are by no means ignorant on the subject) that there are things decidedly wrong in the whole system of management and treatment of the insane. Among the reasons for this is the fact, that the proportion of recoveries among this class has been for many years steadily decreasing, whereas, in all other diseases the rate of cure has been constantly increasing. In no other disease is there such an accumulation of chronic cases. If there is something radically defective in the present mode of treating the insane, it is high time that it should be known. But how can this be done without legislation; without appointing persons for doing this very work?

Another question, closely connected with the above, is the great