DETENTION IN ASYLUM

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19108, 29 February 1924, Page 5

DETENTION IN ASYLUM

THE HARNETT CASE. HEAVY DAMAGES AWARDED. CASE VIRTUALLY A TEST. Proas Atsocia'icm —B 7 T-slegropb—Copyrigbi LONDON, February 27. In the Harnett lunacy case the jury awarded £25,000 damages against the doctors.—Keuter. (Received Feb. 28, at 9.40 p.m.) In the Harnett case the jury answered the various questions as follows: —Was Harnett of unsound mind in December, 1912?—N0. Did Dr Bond honestly believe that Harnett was then of unsound mind, and not fit to be at large?—No. Did Dr Bond take reasonable care to ascertain?—No. Did Dr Adam honestly believe that Harnett was not fit to be at large?—Yes. Did he take reasonable care?—No. # After the verdict the judge addressed the jury on the apportionment of damages. The jury apportioned Dr Bond £17,500 and Dr Adam £7500. The costs of the case are estimated at £IO,OOO, of which £2OOO will go for shorthand notes. Sir Charles Bush, in summing up, recalled the fact that one doctor, who gave evidence, said that Harnett askpd him to spell "parallelogram" as though this was a proof of insanity. This had long been used as a test for drunkenness, but there was nothing remarkable in Harnett asking him to spell it. His Honor disagreed with the Attornev-general's contention that the jury should not take into consideration the circumstance that the unlawful imprisonment had lasted for nine years when assessing the damages. He thoueht the jurv could compensate Harnett for the whole period. At the end of the case the judee said he thought that insanity cases should be classified, and independent medical opinion obtained to show whether a person was sane or insane. Some judicial inquiry mi<rht also be held to provide further safeguards. The Dailv Chronicle says that the case was an inauirv into the whole system of dealing with the insane. It was evident that tlie British svstem does not provide adequate safeguards neainst improper certification.—A. and N.Z. Cable. A message which appeared yesterday stated that a remarkable action was being heard in which Mr Harnett, a well-to-do farmer, was sir.nqf Dr Bond. Lunacy Commissioner, and Dr Adam, keeper of an asvlum. Mr Hnmett claimed damages for unlawful detention for nine years at the instance of Harnett's wife's brother, against whom another case is pending.