|
Colney
Hatch Lunatic Asylum
The foundation stone of
England's largest 'lunatic asylum' was laid on 8 May 1849. By 1852, when
it had been open for a year, it was costing 8/2d per week to keep each
of its patients, of whom there were, by 1856, nearly 1,500 . Even as
late as 1914, when the establishment was run by the London County
Council, the cost was still only 10/- per week per patient.
Dr
Edgar Sheppard became Medical Superintendent of the Male Department in
1862 and had, by the time he left in 1881, been both reviled for
reaction and praised for innovation.
When
the asylum was opened, Henry Pownall, chairman of the Middlesex
magistrates, had proudly stated that 'No hand or foot would be bound
here'.
But in the mid '60s, Sheppard had felt the need to reintroduce the use of
physical restraints for some of his patients. For this he was widely
criticised, especially as reversion to the old practice was interpreted as an indication that the
newer—more humane—methods had failed. However, a visiting German
neuro-psychiatrist, on a tour of British asylums, suggested that the
practice was almost inevitable with such an establishment.
An
asylum with more than 2,000 patients and only two directing
physicians…each with only one assistant…and…one attendant for
twelve patients, is indeed an impossibility…with or without
restraint…It is not an argument against the non-restraint system, but
only against asylums of the enormous size of Colney Hatch.
On the
other hand, Sheppard organised leisure activities with concerts
and dramatic performances, brought in outside groups to entertain,
formed an asylum band and held fortnightly balls.
He had
long been a hydropathist and, since its reintroduction into the British
Isles in 1856, an advocate of the Turkish bath. Its first
recorded use in the treatment of mental illness was in
1861. Articles describe its tentative introduction under Dr Power, resident doctor at
the Cork District Lunatic Asylum,
and under Dr Lockhart Robertson at the Sussex
County Lunatic Asylum at Haywards
Heath.
Sheppard
visited Dr Power's Turkish bath at the Cork Asylum in 1863, and this
strengthened his resolve to have one installed at Colney Hatch. On Monday 16 May 1864, he invited David
Urquhart and Major Robert Poore, directors of the London &
Provincial Turkish Bath Company, to visit the asylum and 'discuss the possibility of building a Turkish bath for the
inmates'.
Urquhart seems to have
given the impression that a Turkish bath could be constructed for around
£300, but when he wrote to Sheppard the following Monday he suggested a
much grander affair which was estimated to cost an extra £200. On the
intervening Saturday, the asylum's Clerk of Works, Mr Wood, had
visited Urquhart and come back with technical data and dimensions so that
a plan could be drawn for submission to the Board on 24 May.
This
plan was for a building of 1,500 square feet which, Urquhart
wrote, 'will become the model
for the asylums, hospitals, unions, and barracks of the three
kingdoms...'
Urquhart
realised that the Board would be concerned that money spent on what was
at that time still a relatively new type of facility should allow of its
use by as many patients as possible. He continued,
As you dispose of the patients' time, and can arrange relays from six in the morning till eight at night (and herein lies your
facility), you can pass 700 patients through the operation of the bath daily. For mere washing you can pass them through it at the
rate of 250 an hour.
The charge for fuel will not exceed 1s.6d.
per diem. I will not
speak of soap or linen, as those charges you bear already.
In
Mid-October, Sheppard and Wood were invited to Urquhart's London Hammam
by its manager, John Johnson, to see the new experimental room heated to
a temperature of 205º F
solely by radiation. Thanking Urquhart for suggesting the visit,
Sheppard wrote that a temperature of 180º F
would seem most appropriate for the proposed bath at Colney Hatch, the
plans and specification of which were,
now
in the hands of the contractors for the purposes of an estimate, which I
may hope to obtain in a few days. We shall then commence operations
without delay.
In
this, Sheppard proved to be somewhat over-optimistic.
Perhaps
the most innovative aspect of Urquhart's original plan was the proposal that,
The whole will be arranged panoptically, so that a
superintendent, himself unseen, can, with the exception of one
apartment, watch every patient.
Here, Urquhart was
following a plan proposed by his family friend and childhood mentor,
Jeremy Bentham who, in 1791, had designed the
Panopticon as the basis for a new
type of prison which allowed the maximum supervision of prisoners by the
minimum number of warders.
Like
Bentham's prison, however, this Turkish bath was never built. The Asylum
Board, rejected the plan on account of its cost, and Sheppard noted in
his report for 1865 that Mr Wood was 'now engaged upon plans of a less elaborate
description' for submission to the next meeting of the Visiting
Justices.
The
Turkish bath approved later that year was, at approximately 700 sq ft,
less than half the size of that originally proposed, and of a much
simpler construction.
The
building work cost £180; equipping, fitting, and furnishing it, a
further £120. The total cost of £300 was the equivalent of half of Dr
Sheppard's annual salary, or feeding just over 600 patients for one
week. The rooms were heated by radiation and even though the doorway was
only covered with a blanket, the temperature reached a steady 190º F.
John
Johnson was invited to the opening on 26 July 1865 and described
how Sheppard brought in a patient to try the new baths.
It
was a case of malancholia—a young intelligent man he seemed, had lost
a child, and could not be brought to believe in its death, but fancied
it had been stolen. Dr Sheppard said it was a very bad case, as he could
not get any sleep. Had not had more than three hours' sleep in four days
and nights. Was in the bath nearly an hour, sweated very well, epidermis
peeled off in the most extraordinary manner. He was very comfortable all
through the bath, and afterwards while cooling, and, despite the
conversation going on between four or five persons present as to the
bath itself, fell off into a sound sleep. Dr Sheppard woke him, and he
said he felt very comfortable. He went to bed at eight and slept soundly
till six next morning, when he took exercise—a new man. Dr Sheppard
says it was a bad case, but now he will be right in about ten days.
The
asylum's annual report for the following year, 1866, had numerous
mentions of the Turkish bath and its success. The Secretary's
report noted that 'several of the Patients themselves, when coming
before the Committee for their discharge, have attributed their cure in
some measure to its influence'.
But although
there were always more female than male patients at Colney Hatch, he
also noted that,
Up
to the present time it has not been used for Female Patients in
consequence of the Nurses being ignorant of the duties required, but the
Committee have authorised the Medical Superintendent of the Female
Department to send a certain number of Nurses to London for instruction,
should he think fit to do so.
Unsurprisingly,
Sheppard, in his Medical Superintendent of the Male Department's
Report, dwelt on his pet project at some length pointing out that
Visiting Justices and Medical Superintendents of several other asylums
who were considering whether the bath should be added to their own
institutions came to Colney Hatch to see it for themselves. He assured
those committee members who had previously 'had a not unnatural mistrust
of a power so susceptible of misapplication, and so shrouded in
prejudices by the community at large' that the Turkish bath at Colney
Hatch had been an unqualified success.
It is no wonder that Sheppard should have achieved good results
with the Turkish bath, and that it should have gained the approval
of his patients. At that time the provision of toilets was
inadequate and the normal bathing facilities were
considered unacceptable by the Commissioners in Lunacy. Hunter
and Macalpine quote a number of their reports criticising
the inadequate supply of hot water in the ordinary baths
such that 'about 3 Men and from 3 to 6 Women are bathed in the same
water',
and
that, 'It was not until 1883 that every patient was bathed in fresh
water.'
Sheppard was no less
up-beat in his report the following year.
The
success of the Turkish bath, established in 1865, is abundantly
confirmed by the experience of 1866. Upwards of 80 male patients,
besides attendants and servants, can testify as to its usefulness.
The bath
was now being used used by the female patients, with equal success. Dr
W G Marshall, the (male) Superintendent of the Female
Department, referred in his report to a patient with Dementia after Puerperal
Mania who attributed her recovery to the bath.
Previous to her having the baths she suffered from small
abscesses of a furuncular character, which she prevented from healing by
constantly picking, and she would sit listlessly about the ward, not taking
any interest in objects around her. After the third bath her habits
became much improved, her health re-established, and she began to employ
herself in needlework and general household work, and was a most useful
Patient during the remainder of the time when she resided in the Asylum.
In 1867
the Turkish bath had been used 497 times by nearly 100 patients,
and the following year, the number of baths had reached 600,
the number of Patients themselves being 104, of whom
47 have been discharged as recovered. The Visiting Justices have heard
from the mouths of many Patients, on discharge, how much they have
attributed a speedy cure to the agency of that eastern blessing which is
now bec0oming an institution also of the western world.
And to
confirm the success of Sheppard's project, the Commissioners themselves
indicated that,
The Turkish bath is
in active and beneficial operation. We witnessed its application, and
from the reports made to us upon the subject, it is we think to be
regretted that from its small extent, its use is necessarily much
limited and infrequent.
Although
Sheppard asked for the bath to be extended, this does not appear to have
happened. By now, however, the success of the Turkish bath in helping
some of the patients to a speedier recovery was being taken for granted.
It warranted no more than passing mentions in the reports of the years
which followed, and it is not known how long it remained in operation.
But it
continued in use during the reign of the next superintendent and was
still in use between 1882 and 1888 when Robert Jones,
later Sir Robert Armstrong-Jones, was Superintendent. He was so
impressed by it that he took the idea with him to his next post at
Claybury Asylum in Woodford, setting up a Turkish bath there
in 1893
which, excepting the duration of World War I, remained open until
1939.
|