country. Indeed, it may be said, that every law, every restriction of the liberty or the will of an individual, is repugnant to law, unless it be called for by necessity or expediency; but there is this distinction, that many laws are evidently expedient upon the face of them, and from the known principles and propensities of human nature, and require no specific proof that they are so; others may not appear to be expedient upon the face of them, and from the known principles and propensities of human nature, but may be shown to be so by evidence of particular facts and

circumstances.

"It is clear, therefore, that the court have a right, or rather are bound, to consider the expediency of proposed regulations; that the court has, by the statute, legislative, and not simply judicial func tions to perform; and that even if it were not so, if the court were bound to exercise a power simply judicial, in many cases the legality depends so entirely upon the expediency, that the court could not divest itself of the duty of consider ing it.

"I shall now proceed to consider the regulation in question.

"It must be premised, however, that the press at this presidency is at present placed on precisely the same footing as in England. In March, 1825, a regulation was passed by the governor and couneil (upon a suggestion from the court, made the preceding September, of its necessity, on account of the continued misrepresentations of the court's proceedings by one of the newspapers), which was merely a copy of the acts 37 and 38 Geo. 3rd, and the object of which was to afford to the public, and those who might be aggrieved

by anonymous libellers, the means of discovering the proprietors, editors, and printers, of newspapers, and other publications.

"The purport of the present regulation, which is the same as that passed at Calcutta, is to prohibit the publication of any newspaper, or other periodical work, by any person not licensed by the governor and council, and to make such licence revocable at the plea sure of the governor and council.

"It is quite clear, on the mere enunciation, that this regulation imposes a restriction upon the li herty of the subject, which nothing but circumstances and the state of society can justify. The British legislature has gone to a great extent at different times, both in England and Ireland, in prohibiting what is lawful in itself, lest it should be used for unlawful purposes, but never without its appearing to the satisfaction of the legislature that it was rendered necessary by the state of the country.

"It is on this ground of expedi ency and necessity, on account of the abuses (as stated) of the press at Calcutta, from the state of affairs there, and from the exigency of the case, that the Calcutta regulation is maintained by its very preamble; by three of the four reasons of the Court of Directors upon the appeal; and by the whole of the argument of counsel upon the hearing of it.

"Thus, the preamble to the Calcutta regulation is-

"Whereas matters tending to bring the government of this coun try, as by law established, into hatred and contempt, and to disturb the peace, harmony, and good order of society, have of late been frequently printed and circulated

in newspapers, and other papers published in Calcutta; for the prevention whereof, it is deemed expedient to regulate by law, the printing and publication within the settlement of Fort William, in Bengal, of newspapers and of all magazines, registers, pamphlets, and other printed books and papers, in any language or character, published periodically, containing, or purporting to contain, public news, and intelligence, or strictures on the acts, measures, and proceedings, of government, or any political events or transactions whatso

ever.'

"The reasons of the East India Company embrace the same facts and the consequent expediency and necessity of the regulation.

"The first reason commences"Because the said rule, ordinance, and regulation, was made by competent authority, and was rendered necessary by the abuses to which the unrestrained liberty of printing had given rise in Calcutta. The preamble of the said rule, ordinance, and regulation, states, that matters tending to bring the government of Bengal, as by law established, into hatred and contempt, and to disturb the peace, harmony, and good order of society, had recently, before the making thereof, been printed and circulated in newspapers, and other papers published in Calcutta.'

Again, in the second reason"That the restrictions imposed by the rule, ordinance, and regulation, which is the subject of appeal, were called for by the state of affairs in the settlement of Bengal, and were adapted to the exigency of the case.'

Again, in the fourth reason"The reasonableness of ordinances must depend upon the cir◄

cumstances and situation of the country to which they are applied.'

"I need not go through the addresses of counsel to show that the whole of their arguments in favour of this regulation are founded upon the fact, as stated in the preamble, of their expediency and necessity from the local circumstances and the exigency of the state of affairs at Calcutta ; and I respectfully presume that his majesty in council approved of the regulation for the same reasons, no others having been urged, and, in particular, upon the ground that the preamble of the regulation reciting such exigency was not traversable or questionable.

"But what is the preamble to the regulation which is now proposed to be registered in the Supreme Court at Bombay? Is there any recital of matters 'tending to bring the government of this country, as by law established, into hatred and contempt, having been printed and circulated in newspapers and other papers published in Bombay?' Nothing of the kind-the preamble merely recites, that a certain regulation had been passed in Calcutta for the prevention of the publication of such matters. Is it the fact that such matters have been published in the Bombay papers? Can a single passage, or a single word, 'tending to bring the government of Bombay into hatred and contempt'can a single stricture, or comment, or word, respecting any of the messures of government, be pointed out in any Bombay paper?

"How, then, without such necessity as is stated in the preamble to the Calcutta regulation, can it be expected that, even were the Supreme Court to consent to register it, and an appeal were pre

ferred, it would be confirmed by his majesty in council? Where would be the reasons of the Court of Directors in favour of it? Where would be the arguments of counsel in support of it?

"Suppose an act of parliament passed to suspend the habeas corpus act in Ireland, on account of treasonable practices in that country; in such case, evidence of such practices would be laid before committees of the two Houses of Parliament before the act was passed, and the act would also recite them, as the Calcutta regulation recites the evils which it was intended to

remedy. But would the fact of such act having been passed for Ireland justify a motion to extend it also to England, without any evidence of any such treasonable practices; nay, when it was well known that there were no such, or any, circumstances to call for it, and with a mere recital of the habeas corpus act having been suspended in Ireland, as the present proposed regulation merely recites that the same regulation had been passed at Calcutta?"

The final judgment of the court was-regulation disallowed.

THE select Committee appointed to inquire into the state of the Pauper Lunatics in the county of Middlesex, to consider the propriety of extending the provisions of 14 Geo. 3rd, c. 49, to pauper lunatics, and of the consolidation of all acts relative to lunatics and lunatic asylums, and of making further provisions relative thereto, have, pursuant to the order of the House, considered the subject to them referred, and agreed to the following Report:

In the course of their inquiry into the state of the pauper lunatics of the county of Middlesex, the attention of your committee has been particularly directed to the treatment of the male paupers of the parishes of Marylebone, St. George, Hanover-square, and St. Pancras, who have been or are confined in the White House at Bethnal-green, belonging to Mr. Warburton. The evidence thereon is specially submitted to the consideration of the House.

From the registers of the visiters appointed by the college of physicians, and from other testimony, your committee might infer, that however great its defects may be,

Mr. Warburton's establishment has hitherto been considered as good as the generality of licensed houses where paupers are received in the neighbourhood of the metropolis; but if the White House is to be taken as a fair specimen of similar establishments, your committee cannot too strongly or too anxious. ly express their conviction, that the greatest possible benefit will accrue to pauper patients by the erection of a County Lunatic Asylum.

The select committee of 1815 called the attention of the House to the following abuses in the management of the houses for the reception of lunatics :

"1. Keepers of the houses receiving a much greater number of persons in them than they are calculated for; and the consequent want of accommodation for the patients, which greatly retards

recovery.

"2. The insufficiency of the number of keepers in proportion to the number of persons intrusted to their care, unavoidably leading to a proportionably greater degree of restraint than the patients would otherwise require.

"3. The union of patients whe

"4. The want of medical assistance, so applied to the malady for which the persons are confined.

"5. The detention of persons whose minds do not require confinement.

"6. The insufficiency of the certificates on which patients are received into madhouses.

"7. The defective visitations of private madhouses, under the provisions of 14 Geo. 3rd, c. 49."

The evidence taken before your committee leaves no doubt that these observations are still applicable to licensed houses where paupers are received in the neighbourhood of the metropolis, and they are apprehensive that similar abuses elsewhere prevail, as no improvement has taken place in the law. It has been clearly established in evidence, that there is no due precaution with respect to the certificates of admission, to the consideration of discharge, or to the application of any curative process to the mental malady. Your committee therefore repeat, adopt, and confirm, the recommendations of the committees of 1807 and 1815; and they trust that every effort will be made during the recess, by all persons concerned in the control and management of their establishments, to improve the condition of the unfortunate lunatics committed to their charge; and they further recommend, that legislative measures of a remedial character should be introduced at the earliest period of the next session. They have, therefore, in consequence, prepared a series of propositions, which they beg to offer as the basis of future legislation. Your committee have purposely omitted any statement of fines and penalties, conceiving such

sidered when any bill or bills shall be introduced.

Your committee are aware that some expense may be incurred by the system of visitation they recommend, but the appropriation of the fees on licences (which might perhaps be increased), and fines levied, would defray a considerable part of such expense; and your committee confidently anticipate, that the additional sum required will not be considered of importance when compared with the great and practical benefits to be derived from an extended and improved system of regulating and visiting lunatic asylums.

1.-That it is expedient to repeal the acts of 17 Geo. 2nd, c. 5. s. 20 and 21; 48 Geo. 3rd, e. 96; 51 Geo. 3rd, c. 79; 55 Geo. 3rd, c. 46; 56 Geo. 3rd, c. 117; 59 Geo. 3rd, c. 127; 5 Geo. 4th, c. 71; 39 and 40 Geo. 3rd, c. 94. And to consolidate into one act of parliament the provisions of the same, and to make such

further provisions as will facilitate the erection of county lunatic asylums, and improve the treatment of pauper and criminal lunatics.

2. That it is expedient to repeal the acts of 14 Geo. 3rd, c. 49; 19 Geo. 3rd, c. 15; 26 Geo. 3rd, c. 91, and that an act of parliament should be passed, under the provisions of which all houses for the reception of insane persons, except county pauper lunatic asylums, St. Luke's, and Bethlem hospitals, shall be licensed and regulated; and that the following provisions should form the groundwork of such act.

3. That it is expedient that the Secretary of State for the Home Department do, on the day of in every year, by an instru