THE KING OF PILLS

Auckland Star, Volume XXXII, Issue 76, 30 March 1901, Page 5 (Supplement)

THE KING OF PILLS

HIS QUEEN'S MENTAL HEALTH UN-

SETTLED,

(From Our Special Correspondent.)

LONDON", February 15.

"The King of Pills," as the lads of St. Helens style Mr Beecham, does not seem to linve exhibited his infallible remedy on his own family too successfully. Mrs B. was till recently iv a lunatic asylum at Northampton; iv fact, her suddeu removal therefrom was the subject of some interesting proceedings in the Divorce Court on Monday last. Last December the case cntuc first before the courts, but no question was raised as to Mrs Beecham's condition by her daughter and the relatives who are opposed to the husband and father. It seemed then to be admitted Mrs Beecham suffered from delusions, notably that she was a prominent personage; also her language on occasion was strong enough and—well, "tutti frutti" enough to turn every well-intentioned pill iv the St. Helens factories pink with dismay.

In December, however, Mr Bargrave Deane, K.C., got an order from the courts obtaining access to the lady for her solicitors and the daughter, Miss Emily Beechani. Mrs Beecham used the permission to take an action for divorce against Mr B.

Last week Miss Eniily, Beechain went to the asylum to see her mother, but she was not allowed to do so. Then she learnt that Mr Beecham had visited Northampton the day before, and had removed his wife. Miss Beeehaiu was refused her mother's address. On Monday Dr. Bnyley, the medical superintendent, and his son, who was said to have refused the asked-for permission, were present In Court, In order to show cause why they should not be committed for contempt in refusing to carry out the judge's order. Mr Inderwick, who represented Dr. Bayley, said that the doctor desired to toll His Lordship exactly what took place. Tho Judge: Is the asylum at Northampton a private asylum? Mr Inderwick explained that it was a public one. It was a big place, charging bljj fees to rich patients, so that It could charge smaller sums to patients who were poor. Mrs Beecham was sent to the asylum in March, 1599. Although her daughter alleged that she was unlawfully detaiucd, medical certificates showed that "she was sullen in her demeanour, with a certain amount of violence; talked loudly; refused to answer questions, and had hysterioepileptic attacks." A nurse described her as imagining herself to be the Princess of Wales, violent in her behaviour, using disgustiug

At. this point Mr Bargrave objected. There was absolutely no reason, on this occasion, to drag in these details about the unfortunate lady. So Mr luderwick dropped medical particulars and said it would be shown that on the particular day Miss Beecham wasn't allowed to see her mother her mother absolutely refusedtoseeher.But before that she had been seen many times by Miss Beecham, her brother, and Mr Becke, a Northampton solicitor. On one of those occasions, as a result of many previous visits, Mrs Beechnm signed the aflldnvit in reference to the judicial separation action.

"But did Dr. Bayley refuse to tell Miss Beecham whore her mother had gone?" asked the judge.

Mi* Inderwick could not say. Ho went on to describe Mr Beecham's visit to the jinylum on sth February. He called "in the r.sual way" to see his wife. And he saw her.

"Did he get Dr. Bayley's permission to do so?" asked Sir Francis Jeune.

"He didn't see the doctor," was the reply.

Anyway. Mi1 Beeehani saw his wife, and there was a most affectionate meeting! She "flung her arms round his neck." They had a long talk, and the lady said that flhe wanted to go home with her husband and to tier children. She explained to her husband that the desire on her part for a judicial separation hnd been nil due to her daughter, who, telling her all kinds of awful things about Mr 8., had "talked her With that the couple saw Mr Becke, and tho lady signed a necessary legal document which boi'e the notice that she desired that the action for separation from her husband should be stopped. Dr. Bay ey was seen and consulted. He thought that the lady was well enough to leave, and so «hi- left, with her husband, caught the 0 o'clock train from Northampton that very evening, went home to Lancashire, and is vow living with her husband and children. Mr Bargrave Deane protested against all fhese mis-statements. Mr Beecham had doubtless good reasons for avoiding the— 'hem!—inconvenience of the Divorce Court, but If there wore a "talker over" in the «um> it certainly didn't appear to be Miss Ultimately it whs arranged (both partiea nrotestlnc Jiat they desired only the best SSSTwlsest course/ that Mrs Beecham should be privately Interviewed by bir Francis Jeune on Wednesday and questionf d as to her real wishes. Meanwhile the daughter and relatives w.ere to be kept way from Her, as advised by Dr. Bayley.