"THE KING OF PILLS."

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7068, 9 April 1901, Page 2

"THE KING OF PILLS."

HIS QUEEN'S MENTAL HEALTH UNSETTLED.

FAMILY JARS.

[Fbom Our Cobbespondent.] LONDON, Feb. 15,

" The King of Pills," as the lads of St Helens style Mr Beecbamti, does not seem, to have exhibited his infallible remedy on his own family too successfully. Mrs Beeeham was tllT recently in a lunatic asylum at Northampton, in fact, her sudden removal therefrom was the subject of some interesting proceedings in the Divorce Courfc oil Monday last

Last- December the case came first before the Courts, but no question- was raised as to Mrs Beecham's condition by her daughter and tbe relatives who are opposed to the husband and father. It seemed then to be admitted Mrs Beeeham suffered from delusions notably, that she was a prominent personage ; also her language on occasion was strong enough, and, well, "tutti fru'tti" emiough to turn -every well-inteattoncd pill in tihe Sb 'Helens' fa-d-hn.es .pink wl'& dismay.

Ih 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 Beechaon. Mrs Beeeham used the permission to take an action for divorce against Mr Beeeham. Last ifreek Miss Emily Beeeham went to the asylum to see ber mother, but she was not allowed to do so. Then she learnt that Mr Beediam had. visited Northampton the day before and had removed his wife. Miss Beecn&ih. was refused her mother's address.

On Mon-day, Dr Bayley, the medical sup-erii-tendenJt, and his son, wlho was seMl to have refused the asked- for permission, Were present in Cdurt 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 tell his Lordship exactly what took place. The Judge : Is the asylum at Northampton a private asylum?

Mr Inderjvick explained that it was a public one. It was a big place, charging big fees to rich patients, so that it could charge smaller sums to patients who were poor. Mrs Beeeham was sent to the asylum in Mar<&,«lßSi9. Although her daughter alleged that she was unlawfully, detained, medical certificates showed that "she was sullen in her demeanour, with a certain amount 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 dis-* gusting—

At this point Mr B&rgrave Deane object-, cd. There was absolutely no reason, on t'hife occasion, to drag in these details about the unfortunate lady. So Mr Ihfier^vick dropped medical -particulars and said it would be shown that on the particular day Miss Beeeham wasn't *. allowed to see her ntother her mother absolutety- refused to see her. But before tbat she had been seen many times by Miss Beeeham, her brother and Mr Becke, a Northampton. ealici'ttoT. On one of these occasions— as a result of many previous visits— -Mrs Beeeham signed the affidavit in reference to the judicial separation action*.

"But did.Dr Bayley retfuse to tell Miss Beeeham -where her mother had gone?" asked the Judge.

Mr Inderwick could not say. He went on to describe Mr Beecham's .visit to the asylum on Feb. 5. He called "in the usual way "tp see his wife. And he saw her.

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

"Ise didn't see the doctor," was the reply-,

Anyway, Mr Beeeham saw his wife, and there was a pipst affectionate meeting ! She "flung her asbis round his neck." They had a long talk, and the lady said that she wanted to go home with her husband and to her childrem*. She explained to her husband that the desire r-~ her part for a judicial sfeparation had b. .; all due to her daughter, Who, telling her all kind of awful things about Mr Beeeham '*had talked her over."

With that the couple saw Mr Becke, arid th-e lady signed a necessary legal document Which bore the notice that she desired that the' action for separation from her husband should be stopped. Dr Bayley was seen and consulted. He thought the lady wa-s well enough to leave, and so she left with her husband, caught the six o'clock train from Northampton that very evening, went home to Lancashire, and is now living with her husband and children.

Mr Bai'grave Deane protested* against all "these anis-staHem eorts. Mr Beeeham had, doubtless, good reasons for avoiding the— ahem! — inconveniences of tht Divorce Court, but if there were a " talker ovel^ln the case it- certainly didn't appear to be ' Miss Beeeham.

Ultimately it was arranged (both parties protesting tlhat they desired only the heA and wisest course) jj, that Mrs Beeeham shold be privately interviewed by Sir Francis Jeune -on Wednesday and questioned as to her real wishes. Meanwhile, the daughter and relatives were to be kept away from her as advised by Dr Bayley.