THE TRAGEDY AT THE WHAU ASYLUM.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XX, Issue 6828, 5 October 1883, Page 5

THE TRAGEDY AT THE WHAU ASYLUM.

THE' CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE HOMICIDE.

The inquest into the occarrence at the Whan Asylum, the killing of one patient by another, under circumstances already detailed, will be held to-day, and the circumstances are certainly such as to call for" stringent inquiry, not so much into the management of the Asylnm as into its crowded state and paucity of attendants and warders. As the resulfof an inquiry made yesterday, we have ascertained that the facts are somewhat peculiar. Anthony Gnschnell, an Austrian hy birth, and a maniac with homicidal tendencies, was admitted to the Lunatic Asylum from the Monnt Eden Gaol in . June, 1883, on the medical certificates of Drs. Goldsbro' and Stockwell. Since thea he has been an inmate. His temper was usually quiet, and he wa3 clean and orderly, but occasionally his dangerous tendencies manifested themselves, and the Medical Superintendent, Dr. Young, had warned all the wardera to exercise every care in regard to him. The occurrence happened, not in a cell, but in a day room in the east end of the building, which, although it contained beds; is used as a breakfast and dining room for dangerous patients. Fortytwo men usually dine in thiß room who cannot be trusted with knife, fork, or spoon. They are supplied with what is called spoon diet; that is to say, "their potatoes are mashed and their meat chopped up. Owing to special instructions regarding Gnschnell, he was the last admitted into the breakfast room, when all the others were seated. There were four attendants present at the breakfast, and Mr. Hardy, the head-warder, me.de a personal inspection at eight o'clock, and found all right. The Austrian was not even sitting at the same table with the old man Mills. There was a table between them, and, so far as could be gathered, no communication passed between them, and they sat on extreme corners. The duty of the attendant, McAredy, who had charge of the ward, was to. see the ward cleared out, the patients sent into the airing court, and the place locked up, before he went to breakfast. He says he cleared Mills and the Austrian out with the other patientß, and locked the place; but the difficulty is to reconcile this with the facts which occurred, and McAredy has been suspended, pending the result of the inquest. The tragedy occurred in the day-room, which was supposed to he locked, and yet Mills and the Austrian must have been there. The assault was committed at the extreme end of the ward, in a passage six feet wide, on one side of which were the attendants' room, the outlet being to the airing-court. Gnschnell apparently picked up a heavy deck-scrubber broom, nsed for scrubbing the oilcloth in the passages, and following up Mb victim, struck him violently on the back of the head, fracturing his skull, and smashing the brush off the handle. He then proceeded to belabour bis victim with the handle. Another patient, named Edwin Jolly, avers that he saw the assault, but his statement must be accepted with caution. He, however, states distinctly that he saw Gnschnell break the scrubber over Mills' head, and then belabour him with the handle. If the ward was supposed to be clear, and the attendant responsible for that fact, how does it happen that three patients were left in the room, Mills, who was killed, Gnschnell, who killed him, and Jolly, who saw the assault? A good deal of explanation will be required, and no doubt there will be a searching investigation. THE PERPETRATOR OF THE DEED. ■ As already stated, Anthony Gnschnell is an Austrian by birth, On being interviewed yesterday, he said he was 41 years of a?e. He is a low-set man, about 5 feet 6 inches in height, but not very muscular. Hiß head is rather wide, and his cheekbones high; his complexion brown. He has lost his right eye. In answer to our reporter's questions, which he answered with fair intelligence, he explained that he lost his eye through an accident with a bulluck dray in Taranaki. He says he has been seven and a-half years working in that province, principally splitting sleepers for railway contractors. It was only when the conversation touched on his homicidal tendencies that he became incoherent, and when asked why he killed the old man, be said he must kill someone to prevent swearing—whether it was to prevent it on his own part or that of others, was not quite clear, but he appeared in a placid state, willing to kill the reporter or anyone else if the oppor- | tunity offered. THE VICTIM.

Mills, who was killed, was admitted to the Asylum on the 23rd of April, 1882, from the Police Court on the medical testimony of Drs. Tennent and Haines* He was suffering from dementia. He was stated to be quarrelsome and destructive, bat not dangerous. There will be many matters arise regarding the case which may be of interest. One is bonnd to be prominent, that ia—the want of accommodation, the , overcrowding of the wards, and the utter numerical inefficiency of the staff. HOMICIDAL MANIA. The books on mental disease contain mention of many singular cases of this horrible form of madness, in which the patient is quite quiet and harmless till the opportuoity offers, and the to him irresistible impulse comes,and by a sadden blowsome one is bereft of life. In many cases of murder the defence has been set up, that although the prisoner was not deranged in the ordinary sense of the term, his crime was owing to an impulse which he could not resist, and for which, therefore, he ought not to be held accountable. Judges have, however, often treated this plea in the same way as they treat the plea of kleptomania for stealing. In one of the most, remarkable cases the prisoner was a youth of 18 years of age, his mother had been twice in a Lunatic Asylum, having been desponding, and having attempted suicide; his brother was of weak intellect, silly and peculiar. He himself waß of low mental organisation. The pri-

soner said that he had felt "an impulse to kill some one that hejsharpened his knife for the purpose, and went out to find some one whom he might kill; that he followed a boy, who-waß the first person ho saw, to a convenient place; that he knocked him down, stuck him in the neck and throat, knelt upon hia belly, grasped ,him by the necK, and squeezed till the blood came from his nose and mouth, and thenr trampled npon his face and neok until he was dead. He then washed his hands, and went quietly to a job which he had obtained. He knew the boy whom he had murdered, and had no ill feeling against him, "only I had made up my mind to murder somebody." He did it because he wished to be hanged. His oounsel argued that this vehement desire to be hanged was the strongest proof of insanity; the counsel for the prosecution, on the other hand, urged that the fact of his having done murder in order to be hanged, showed oliarly that he knew quite well the consequences of his act, and was therefore ciiminally responsible. He was found guilty, and Mr. Justice Wightman, in passing sentence, informed him that ne had been " found guilty of a more barbarottß aod inhuman murder than any. which has -come under my cognizance duiihg a judicial experience of apwards of twenty tyeara.' It is stated," the Judge went

on to toy, "that you laboured under a morbid'dtsire to die by the hands of justice, and that lor thia purpose you committed the murder. Thia morbid desire to part with your own life can. hardly be called a delusion; and, indeed, the consciousness on your part that you could effect your purpose by designedly depriving another of life, shows that you were perfectly able to understand the nature and consequence of the act which you were committing, and that you knew it was a crime for which, by law, the penalty was capital. This was, in truth, a further and, I may say, a deeper aggravation of the crime." When sentence of death had been passed, the prisoner, who during the trial had been the least concerned person in Court, said, with a smile, " Thank you, my Lord." He wasin due course executed. j