Mrs. ELDRED. The first refusal I got from the assistant super-visor over there, who told me that I could not see Mr. Tisdale. I would not take his word for it and I went directly to Doctor Lind. First, I said, "Is that Doctor Lind's orders?" and he said "yes;' so that I went directly to Doctor Lind and asked him if he had given those orders that I could not see Mr. Tisdale, and he said "Yes." I said, "Why?" He said, "Because you have broken one of the rules of the hospital.

Mr. SCHAFER. Did he tell you what that rule was?

Mrs. ELDRED. Why he said I could not bring that writ in, previously having told me that, as Mr. Tisdale's first friend, I could bring it in and get his signature; that that was my privilege as Mr. Tisdale's first friend. Then he told me I had broken one of the rules by bringing it in and getting his signature to it..

Mr. SCHAFER. I do not get the point.

Mrs. ELDRED. I failed to get the point, either. I told him I thought it was a bad move.

Mr. SCHAFER. No; I do not get your point. You stated that you had been visiting Mr. Tisdale.

Mrs. ELDRED. Yes.

Mr. SCHAFER. And then, when you went to see Mr. Tisdale to present the writ for his signature, you were denied the opportunity.

Mrs. ELDRED. No. I got his signature to that writ and then, when I went to go out, the supervisor told me that he wanted to speak to me and I stopped outside of the office and he said, "I want you to tear up that writ," and I said, "Why," and I said, "You have no right to hold a British subject here in this hall and I will not tear it up, but I will take it to Doctor Lind, and if Doctor Lind tells me to tear it up, to tear up this writ, I will do so."

Mr. SCHAFER. What did Doctor Lind tell you?

Mrs. ELDRED. Then I took that paper to Doctor Lind and I asked him-I said, "That is the paper which your supervisor told me to tear up.” He read the thing over and saw the signature and he said, "As Mr. Tisdale's first friend, you have a right to do this, but it would have been well to have taken the matter through the hospital authorities." So I considered that I had done the right thing.

Mr. SCHAFER. Then

Mrs. ELDRED. Then, later, I went to see Mr. Tisdale in the usual way and the supervisor told me I could not see him.

Mr. SCHAFER. What reason did he give?

Mrs. ELDRED. He did not give any reason, except it was Doctor Lind's orders, and when I went to ask Doctor Lind his reason for it, Doctor Lind simply said I had broken one of the rules of the hospital.. Mr. SCHAFER. Did he tell you what rule?

Mrs. ELDRED. No.

Mr. SCHAFER. Did you attempt to see Mr. Tisdale subsequent to that time?

Mrs. ELDRED. After that time?

Mr. SCHAFER. Yes.

Mrs. ELDRED. No, I did not, but I met Doctor Lind some timelater I can not tell whether it was weeks, or whether it was a couple of months. I met him on the street and he told me he had changed his mind.

Mr. SCHAFER. At the time that Doctor Lind refused you an opportunity to see Mr. Tisdale, did he indicate that you could not see him just at that particular time, or did he indicate that you could not see him any more?

Mrs. ELDRED. I understood that I could not see him any more. Mr. SCHAFER. Can you definitely remember about that?

Mrs. ELDRED. Yes.

Mr. SCHAFER. It may be that at that particular time he was in such a condition that you could not see him. He may have been taking a bath, or you can not tell what may have been happening to him.

Mrs. ELDRED. He said I had broken the rules of the hospital and I could not see him in the future.

Mr. SCHAFER. In the future?

Mrs. ELDRED. Yes.

Mr. SCHAFER. You did not attempt to see him?

Mrs. ELDRED. No.

Mr. SCHAFER. The doctor did not tell you that you could not see him because he was a dangerous man?

Mrs. ELDRed. No.

Mr. SCHAFER. Is there anything further that you want to call to the attention of the committee on that matter?

Mrs. ELDRED. No.

Mr. GOODWIN. Are you related to Mr. Tisdale in any way?

Mrs. ELDRED. No, sir.

Mr. GOODWIN. Did you have any previous acquaintance with him before he was committed?

Mrs. ELDRED. I contacted him as a Red Cross volunteer worker in the hospitals here.

Mr. GOODWIN. While he was in the hospital?

Mrs. ELDRED. While he was in the hospital; yes.

Mr. SCHAFER. At no time an employee of St. Elizabeths Hospital told you you could not see Mr. Tidsale because of his mental condition?

Mrs. ELDRed. No.

Mr. SCHAFER. Is there anything further that you desire to bring to the attention of the committee?

Mrs. ELDRED. No.

Mr. GOODWIN. What was done with the writ of habeas corpus? Mrs. ELDRED. Why the writ was sent to Mr. Savage to present to the court.

Mr. GOODWIN. And was Mr. Tisdale subsequently released.

Mrs. ELDRED. Yes.

Mr. GOODWIN. From the institution?

Mrs. ELDRED. Yes.

Mr. GOODWIN. That is all.

Mrs. DE MONTIS. Mr. Chairman, if I might ask Miss Henaughan to make a statement about the report made of Mr. William O'Brien being under heavy guard and that he could not be seen.

Mr. GOODWIN. Is this the same witness?

Mrs. DE MONTIS. No; this is another witness.

STATEMENT OF MISS MARY HENAUGHAN, WASHINGTON, D. C.

(Digest of testimony given by Miss Mary Henaughan on February 28, 1929)

Miss Henaughan believes there was collusion between officials of St. Elizabeths Hospital and the court in obstructing the release of William O'Brien,1 who seems to be a sane man. The patient signed a writ of habeas corpus, suing for a sanity trial. He was brought into court twelve times and on each of these occasions the trial was postponed on one pretext or another. Finally O'Brien's friends filed an affidavit of prejudice and asked that the case be dismissed. Mary Ruthven, now being held, has been denied due process of law and is impounded for financial reasons rather than her mental condition.

Mr. SCHAFER. What is your name?

Miss HENAUGHAN. My name is Mary Henaughan.

Mr. SCHAFER. What is your work or profession?

Miss HENAUGHAN. I have been a public-school teacher.

Mr. SCHAFER. Retired?

Miss HENAUGHAN. No.

Mr. SCHAFER. I believe you should state in your own words the facts relative to Mr. O'Brien, which I understand you intend to bring before the committee.

Mr. GOODWIN. Just make any statement you wish in reference to Mr. O'Brien.

Miss HENAUGHAN. I have been visiting Mr. O'Brien for several years, and two years ago about this time and during these months we had him out in the District Supreme Court twelve times. We were going to try to get him released. He seems to be a sane man. But we did not succeed. There was some obstruction of justice, it seems to me, somewhere.

Mr. SCHAFER. When you state "we" who do you refer to?

Miss HENAUGHAN. Mr. Savage was the one that had to do with getting the writ out and attending to that matter, and I happened to get acquainted with Mr. O'Brien; and when I found that out, of course, I went to the court with him the twelve times.

Mr. GOODWIN. Was the case continued and kept on the calendar? Miss HENAUGHAN. We had asked to have it dismissed at last, because there were-I do not know, perhaps, just the legal terms I ought to use--but they were twisting the things so and barring us at every

turn.

Mr. SCHAFER. Who?

Miss HENAUGHAN. The court. I believe there was collusion between the hospital and the court.

Mr. GOODWIN. I think you ought to develop, Madam, your basis for the belief that there was collusion of any kind between St. Elizabeths Hospital and the court.

Miss HENAUGHAN. Well, for the very reason that we had to take him out so many times. I can not see why a sane man would be held over there and the taxpayers would have to support him if he is able to support himself, which we all think he is.

Mr. GOODWIN. Were you at court these 12 times his case was postponed?

Miss HENAUGHAN. I was there 12 times.

Mr. GOODWIN. Did you hear the court make any statement as to why the case was postponed, or who requested the postponement?

1 Release granted, see p. 158.

Miss HENAUGHAN. Well, the court, of course, for 11 times, and then at last-Mr. Savage knows more about that than I do―at last they had something up that they would get some little trick on our side that we could not get him out, and something that was going to be detrimental to Mr. O'Brien, and we asked at last to have the case dismissed.

Mr. GOODWIN. You were in court all of these 11 times?

Miss HENAUGHAN. Twelve times.

Mr. GOODWIN. Twelve times. Did you hear the judge make any statement in postponing the case or give his reasons for a postponement?

Miss HENAUGHAN. He said that-I know that he said that when he had signed the writ and would allow it to come before him before, he did it because it would be a serious offense in his State, where he came from, if he would refuse to do such a thing. But he allowed us to have those hearings, and there was not any record to show Mr. O'Brien ever had been adjudicated in any way, it could not be found; he had been confined a long, long time, and Judge McCoy said he would just assume there were records.

Mr. SCHAFER. I want to get some facts about which you have knowledge. You apparently did not have knowledge of the cause of his applying to the court. How long have you known Mr. O'Brien? Miss HENAUGHAN. Well, over two years.

Mr. SCHAFER. About how many times have you visited him? Miss HENAUGHAN. I think I have been out there maybe a half dozen times.

Mr. SCHAFER. To your knowledge had Mr. O'Brien ever been out of the institution on a parole?

Miss HENAUGHAN. Only what I heard. I did not know him at that time; I heard them say that he was.

Mr. SCHAFER. When conversing with Mr. O'Brien did he converse in what you thought was a normal manner?

Miss HENAUGHAN. Indeed he did. He was a very fine man. Mr. SCHAFER. Did he seem to worry about being confined? Miss HENAUGHAN. No; he does not seem to be worrying about being confined. He is more peaceful than anyone would think a man would be, out there where he is.

Mr. SCHAFER. Did he indicate that he desired to be taken from the institution?

Miss HENAUGHAN. Oh, yes. I saw him last Sunday a week ago, just after we supposed he would be in court on Thursday. We went to court at 1.30 and he was not there, and some of the friends went out to see him on Thursday afternoon, just two weeks ago to-day.

Mr. SCHAFER. Did he indicate to you at any of the times you visited him what means of livelihood he would have should he be discharged from the institution?

Miss HENAUGHAN, Yes; he said last Sunday a week ago, “I would get my pension fixed up."

Mr. SCHAFER. He said what?

Miss HENAUGHAN. He would get his pension fixed up.

Mr. SCHAFER. Well, he has not got his pension fixed up yet, I believe.

Miss HENAUGHAN. No; but he would have if he had got out.

Mr. SCHAFER. He might have. I know a little about the procedure in the pension game. It would be some time before he would get a pension.

Miss HENAUGHAN. He might.

Mr. SCHAFER. Did he indicate to you that he had any relatives who would take care of him or support him should he be discharged? Miss HENAUGHAN. He was going to the Soldiers' Home.

Mr. SCHAFER. Did he indicate that he was entitled to go to the Soldier's Home?

Miss HENAUGHAN. He did not say, but I have always felt that all soldiers were entitled to it.

Mr. SCHAFER. Do you know whether or not he is entitled to enter the Soldier's Home? [After a pause.] Do you know whether he was honorably discharged, which is a requirement if he is to enter the Soldiers' Home?

Miss HENAUGHAN. No; but I know that he did something one day and they are assuming there are records some place, but they can not find them. So they must be assuming everything.

Mr. SAVAGE. He has stayed in the Soldiers' Home before. ?
Mr. SCHAFER. Was he discharged without honor?

Mr. SAVAGE. He has had two enlistments, and he has been in the Soldier's Home.

Mr. SCHAFER. Under the regulations of the Soldiers' Home if he has one dishonorable discharge, even though he had five good ones, he would not be admitted.

Mr. SAVAGE. I do not think he has been dishonorably discharged. Mr. SCHAFER. I believe he has. I believe I have the record. Doctor WHITE. He has what is called a "bobtailed" discharge. On the discharge paper of a soldier, there is at the end of the page a place left for his commanding officer to certify as to his character, whether good, bad, or indifferent. They sometimes put in there "honorable" and sometimes put "dishonorable," but when they do not want to commit themselves they take a pair of scissors and cut that off. So that is called a "bobtailed" discharge; and that is what started all the trouble originally.

Mr. SCHAFER. I have my doubt whether he could enter a soldiers' home.

Mr. SAVAGE. He has been there once.

Mr. SCHAFER. Yes; but they have changed the regulations. Do you believe that Mr. O'Brien is mentally competent?

Miss HENAUGHAN. I do.

Mr. SCHAFER. Do you know of your own personal knowledge that any official of St. Elizabeths Hospital has prevented Mr. O'Brien from having his day in court?

Miss HENAUGHAN. Yes; they have not prevented him from having his day in court, because he was out there 12 times. But the court said for some reason unknown to me-I can not see why courts do not function in Washington as well as in other parts of the country. Of course, maybe they do not function in other parts of the country, but they are in very poor shape here.

Mr. SCHAFER. Have you been denied the opportunity of visiting Mr. O'Brien at any time?

Miss. HENAUGHAN. No; I never have. I told him on Sunday when I was out there a week ago last Sunday that a friend had told me that