Another regular topic is that of the ‘Agapemonites’. The Agapemonites were a Protestant religious sect that existed in England from 1846 until 1956. The term ‘Agapemone’ translates to ‘the abode of love’ from a Greek based neologism. The sect was founded by Henry James Prince in the 1840’s and was founded on the belief that the second coming was imminent. However, the Agapemonites were best known for their scandals, not their religious beliefs. The first scandal was the supposed unlawful committal of Louisa Nottidge to Moorcroft House Asylum in North London.^[1] Louisa Nottidge was one of four sisters who were convinced by the Agapemone’s founder to donate their inheritance towards the construction of accommodation for the sect’s followers in Somerset. However, Louisa’s mother feared the spiritual and financial influence that Prince had over her and sent her son Edmund, her nephew Edward and her son-in-law Fredrich to kidnap her. Louisa eventually found herself in Moorcroft House Asylum in North London after being deemed insane and committed on the instruction of her mother. Throughout her time in the asylum, Louisa maintained that she was of sound mind and was there against her will. Louisa escaped from the asylum in January 1848 but, after meeting with a member of the Agapemone, was later captured at Paddington station. She returned to the asylum but was released in May 1848 after Frances Power Cobbe (a member of the Agapemone) petitioned the Commissioners of Lunacy for her release. 

Louise then sued her family for abduction and false imprisonment in the court case Nottidge v. Ripley and Another in 1849. Louisa proved that she had been illegally detained and returned to the Agapemone. The Lord Chief Baron held a famous dictum from the trial that: “You ought to liberate every person who is not dangerous to himself or to others.”^[2] This trial made national news and affected medical and legal discourse on the legal definition of insanity and the legal function of asylum committal. 

The Agapemonites had no significant following in Scotland which makes the regular mentioning of the religious sect in the Mirror after 1851 intriguing. From 1851, articles in the Mirror refer to the asylum as ‘the Agapemone of Morningside’.^[3] Additionally, articles – such as ‘The progress of picnicism among the Agapemonites’ by ‘IRAM’ – used the term to broadly describe asylum patients. The article described an experimental trip of both the sexes arranged by the medical staff and the term Agapemonites is used as the proper noun to represent the group of asylum patients. Additionally, ‘Punch’ is connected with the Agapemonites as they arrange for his statue to be placed in the ball-room upon his death.^[4] There is a commonality in the way the term is used in all the articles – the religious beliefs of the Agapemone sect is never mentioned. Instead, the term is used to describe the asylum and its patients. So, if the term was not used to display an affliction with the sect’s religious beliefs, then, why was it used? 

I believe that the term ‘Agapemone’ is used to reference the Nottidge v. Ripley and Another (1849) court case where Louisa Nottidge successfully won damages against those who forced her into Moorcroft House Asylum. Louisa was taken out of the asylum because of the petition made by the Agapemonites; without their work she would never have been released. Therefore, by referring to themselves as Agapemonites the patients also make themselves a target of release; it is either a serious or humorous gesture to the idea of being ‘saved’ from the asylum by an outside force. It is very plausible that writers of the Mirror were knowledgeable of Louisa’s court case, as it made national news and was well reported in The Times newspaper.

Interestingly, in the article ‘Commencement of the fishing season’ the author states that they ‘saw at an early hour a dozen of our Agapemonites seated around a breakfast table…The company could not have been better selected. The selection of law and physic were represented by gentlemen who have voluntarily withdrawn themselves for a time from the racket and dust of Parliament House, and the abomination of physic and the dissecting room, to breathe the air of liberty from professional turmoil in our peaceful and secluded abode.^‘[5]Here, the author states that all those selected for the fishing trip are happy to be in the asylum, and the asylum is described as a relaxing place which allows the gentlemen a place to recharge. However, why state that all these men are part of a religious sect which was famous for successfully petitioning for the release of an asylum patient? I believe here the author has used satire to directly contrast the nature of the Agapemone court case and the patient’s desire to be on the fishing trip. As such, they are – cleverly and subtlety – demonstrating that everyone is incarcerated against their will to a certain extent and that no patient arrives at the asylum voluntarily. 

---

[1] Joshua John Schwieso, ”Religious Fanaticism’ and the Wrongful Confinement in Victorian England: The Affair of Louisa Nottidge’, Social history of medicine, 9.2, pp.159-174. 

[2] Nottidge v. Ripley (1849), available at <https://docksci.com/judicial-insanity-trial-of-nottidge-v-ripley_59e9211ed64ab2ada386407c.html&gt&gt;

[3] ‘The Great Exhibition of Morningside’, The Morningside Mirror, 6.8 (May 1851), pp.57-58 (p.57)

[4] For more information see the webpage ‘Punch’ 

[5] ‘Commencement of the fishing season’, The Morningside Mirror, 6.8 (May 1851), pp.60-64 (p.60-61).