The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-16 00:00:00

THE LSUN,I LONDON, FkiURSDAY EVENING, JANUARY 16, 1862.

had a war—which God forbid—with men so nearly
related to us and speaking the same language, they
would find a very different state of things from
what there was in the last war. (Cheers.)
The CHAIRMAN, returning thanks as their repre-
sentative in Parliament, knew well that he spoke
to many a man who held political opinions at vari-
ance with his own. There was one subject upon
which, at the time he came forward as a can-
didate, he differed from many of them ; and that was
that the best policy of this country was to maintain
the navy in a high state of efficiency and strength.
(Cheers.) He still held to that opinion ; and he
asked them whether it was not true that, if one
thing more than another had prevented us from
being at war at that moment, it was the policy
which he had advocated at the last election ?
He did not say this in a boasting spirit ; but he
did say that, with a great country like this, we
were at all times bound to maintain a navy which
should not only efficiently protect our shores, but
should carry with effect our mandates to the fur-
thermost parts of the earth. (Cheers.) He con-
curred with, his gallant friend that the way to de-
fend this country was not by sticking up fortresses
at the mouth of rivers and placing garrisons all
along the coast ; the way was to strengthen the
wooden walls of old England—(cheers)—and to
meet the enemy before he touched our shores.
(Cheers.)
Other toasts were drunk, among which was that
of " the health of Mr. C. H. Greenhow," the ship-
ping master of North Shields, who has been mainly
instrumental in bringing up the Tyne Reserve to
its present state of efficiency, and the proceedings
concluded in the best order and good humour.

Witness replied that he would leave the matter I
entirely in his hands. When Mr. Lawrence re-
turned from Felbrigg witness ascertained that the
contract had been entered into by Lawrence and
Fry, as brokers, on his behalf. He afterwards gave
them acceptances at six months for £4,250 to pro-
vide funds for working out the contract. Mr. Law-
rence told witness, when he came back from Fel-
brigg, that it was understood that the ornamental
timber was not to be cut. Witness did not recol-
lect whether anything was said about the form of
the contract. Mr. Roberts was to receive some sort
of commission, but witness did not know what. He
was not at all acquainted with Roberts, and what
he knew about that person he had heard from Mr.
Lawrence. Witness concurred in the proposal made
by Mr. Lawrence, to give up the contract at any
moment.

Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers—He had been
in tho timber trade for nearly two years. In the
matter of the Felbrigg contract he had depended
all through upon Mr. Lawrence, whose judgment
was far superior to his own. He was at one time
a member of the Stock-Exchange, He got
into no difficulties there, but retired of his
own accord when he entered into the tim-
ber trade. The offices of Robinson and Co., in
Mark-lane, consisted of two apartments—one for
himself and his partner, and one for the clerk, The
clerk was a youth, and his wages were £2O a-year,
besides presents. Both he and his partner introduced
capital into the business—as much as £l,OOO. In
May last witness removed his private residence from
Peckham to Clapham. The rent at Peckham was
£3O per annum ; he now paid £lOO. His house at
Clapham was formerly occupied by Mr. Lawrence.
The firm of Robinson and Co. consisted of himself
and a brother of Mr. Lawrence. When Mr. Law-
rence offered to give up the contract to General
Windham he communicated the fact to witness. Mr.
Lawrence told him that General Windham had as-
sured him he would not lose the £l,OOO which he had
paid to Mr. Windham. Witness understood that if
the contract were given up he and his partner
should have their acceptances back, and they should
not be loser by the transaction; but there was no
written agreement to that effect. Witness had no
idea where the acceptances were now.
Re-examined—The acceptances given to Lawrence
and Fry were solely on account of the Felbrigg tim-
ber contract. In entering into contracts he and his
partner, as usual in the trade, left the whole man-
agement to their brpkers. Their transactions through
Lawrence and Fry had been considerable.
Mr. Robert Lemon, of Whitwell, Norfolk, said he
was a timber merchant, and did a • very large
" business. Ho was acquainted with the Felbrigg
estate, and the timber upon it. He had occasionally
been a purchaser at the sales at Felbrigg. He
had bought Felbrigg oak in a peeled state for from
ls. 9d. to 2s. per foot, on an average; some of it
was as low as is. In 1859 he was offered 180 loads
of oak for £6OO. He :refused to give more than
£550. The price asked was £3 6s. Bd. a load, or
ls. 7d. per foot. The timber was barked. He
described the Felbrigg oak as very inferior; it was
red-hearted and seamed, and was not so good as
the average timber in Norfolk. The trees round
the house were past their prime, and were every year
depreciating in value. Witness believed it would
improve the place to cut them down. They were
too near the house; some might be cut down close
to the stable wall. There was a good deal of wind-
fall timber on the estate. There was a very large
lot of beech, but it was short, buck-headed stuff, and
some of it was going back. At a little distance
from the house there were many well-growing
plantations. The local consumption of timber was
very small. The carriage from Felbrigg to Yar-
mouth, including road and canal, was 22s per load.
Last year the average price of bark in Norfolk was
£4 a ton. It would require four loads of timber to
produce a ton of bark. Peeling would cost 6s. a
load. It was the custom in timber contracts to
make allowame for defects. The allowance was
made in the measurement. On the Stratton estate,
near Norwich, there was a large quantity of wind-
fall beech which might be had for much less than
'6d. per fout. If 100 loads of beech were cut for
sale at Felbrigg he should not give 3d. a foot for it.

Cross-examined—Witness went over the wind-
fall timber in 1860, and said it was worth £4 10s.
a load, or 2s. 3d. a foot, without the bark. He
was afterwards told by Captain Windham that
it fetched £4 12s. 6d. per load, and witness stated
that he would have given £5OO more than the
actual purchaser had given. He had a Govern-
ment contract at the time, and he was vexed at
losing the timber, which he had looked upon as his
own. £5OO more than the sum given by the pur-
chaser would have made the price upwards of £5 per
load. He was not aware that the tenants on the
Felbrigg estate were bound to cart the bark ; but
they had always done so.

Re-examined—The windfall timber in 1860 was
of prime quality, and, rather than lose it, he would
have given £5 a-load for it, in order to supply the
Government under his contract.

Mr. Robert Steward, Mayor of Yarmouth, said
he was a timber merchant, and knew the Felbrigg
estate. The Felbrigg oak was the worst in Norfolk
and the same remark applied to the beech. A great
deal of it ought to have been cut down long ago.
lie would not take the beech for nothing, if he were
obliged to remove it to Yarmouth. The value of the
marked oak was not great. The trees were red-
hearted, an infallible indication of decay, and if he
were a Government inspector he should not allow a
foot of them to enter a dockyard. If the oak were
for sale he should not give more than £3 10s. a-load
or 'ls. 9d. per foot for it. He estimated the carriage
to Yarmouth at 255. a-load. In the case of the Fel-
brigg oak an allowance of from 20 to 30 per cent.
should be made for defects. To measure the girth at
two-thirds of the length from the butt-end instead
of in the middle would not make a difference of
more than 15 per cent., and no allowance was made
for defects in the Felbrigg contracts.
Cross-examined—The Felbrigg oak was defective
and the Government ought not to have it at any
price, but witness believed that if anything like a
good plice were given for it the intention would be
to get the Government inspectors to pass it.
Colonel Fitzroy said he lived at Stratton, near
Norwich. He first met Mr. Windham at the ova-
tion given to his uncle in Norwich in 1856. He
sat opposite at dinner, and saw how he conducted
himself. Mr. Windham drank a good deal of wine,
and became intoxicated before the dinner was over.
Until be got drunk he was perfectly quiet, but be
was afterwards rather noisy. There was a good
deal of noise in the room. The next time the wit-
ness saw Mr. Windham was at a review at Norwich
in 1860. Mr. Windham was in uniform, and on
horseback. Witness talked to him a good deal
during the day, and his observations were such as
witness would have expected to hear from an officer
who had learned his drill. Witness saw him on a
similar occasion last year. Ile was bitting on the
box of Lady Suffield's carriage, and his behaviour
was sensible and proper. Witness had seen him
on various other occasions, and ho never had the
slightest notion that he was either insane or im-
becile.

Mr. Hood, examined by Mr. Karslake—l am
superintendent physician of Bethlehem Hospital,
and was formerly connected with the Colney-hatch
Asylum. I had also at one time a large private
asylum. Mr. Windham called upon me on Friday,
the 13th of December. He wanted to have my
opinion as to the state of his mind. I conversed
with him for a considerable time, for the purpose
of testing his mental capacity, and with his consent
I took notes of the conversation. I had little pre-
vious knowledge of his case. At my request he
gave me an account of his early life. He told me
that he lost his father, to whom ho was much at-
tached, when he was 14 years of age. He described
his residence at Eton, stating that he was placed in
the fourth form at entrance, and that when he left he
was in the fifth form, having gained the promotion
by examination. He said that after leaving Eton
he was placed entirely under the care of tutors
whom he disliked, and that consequently his life
had not been a happy one. He told me that he
came of age in August last, and that he had since
married. He went on to say that his property at
Felbrigg was worth about £3,000 a year, and that
there were other estates worth about £9,000 per
annum which he would come into possession of in

1869. I asked him what were his tastes and pur-
suits. He replied that he was very fond of all
kinds of field sports—riding, driving, hunting, and
shooting—and that he should like to live always in
the country. I asked -whether he was in the habit
of reading. He replied that he did not read much,
that he was certainly not studious, that he was en-
gaged all day, and in the evening was too tired to
read. He stated that the Lewellins were kind to
him when he lodged with them, but they had turned
against him and had put in their affidavits what he
called a pack of lies. I asked him what they charged
him with. He said they charged him with kicking
up great rows in the house, and all sorts of accusa-
tions which could be disproved. " Perhaps," he
said, " I was rather boisterous ; but what then ? "
I asked him whether he had been on familiar terms
with many policemen. "1 Yes." he replied, " I knew
a lot of them, but I only chaffed them, and the prin-
cipal witness against me is a man who can he
proved to be willing to swear anything." I asked
him whether he thought his marriage was one likely
to please the family. He replied " Perhaps not ;
but my mother is the only one that cares for me—
the others would let me go to the devil if it were
not for the property. I know I have not made a
good marriage, but I had an infatuation for my
wife. I knew she had not led a moral or respectable
life, but I hoped that being married we would be
happy together. However,. the thing is done, and
there is no use speaking of it." He told me that
they were not living together, that his wife had left
him for other men, and that she had spent his
money in a most extravagant manner. He had been
greatly disappointed, he said, and hoped never to
see her again ; and he added, " When I get out of
this trouble I shall apply for a divorce." I remarked
that if he got a divorce I was afraid he would do
the same thing again ; to which he replied, " I am
not quite such a fool as that—' Once bit twice shy.'
He said that if he could get rid of all this bother
he thought he might get on very well yet, because
he felt perfectly able and willing to manage his
affairs. He told me that his debts might be about
£19,000, but bills dae by his wife were coming in
daily, and he had that very morning received one
for £3OO, of which he had no previous knowledge.
He said he' had advertised that he would pay no
more of his wife's debts. I then spoke to him about
the letting of his farms. He said he had not taken
the home-farm in hand, as he did not wish to en-
gage in "fancy farming," which was an expensive
amusement, but had let it to his bailiff at a good
rent, as he did not like to have a stranger so near
' the hall. I asked him whether the railway company
had made any offer to him for the passage of the
' railway through his property. He said they had
not, but he was anxious that the railway should
pass through his estate. He was afraid, however,
that the scheme would not be carried out, because
the Barings, the Buxtons, and other families were
opposed to it on the ground that it would interfere
with the quietude of Cromer. He told me that the
story of Atkins about the boot-trees was all lies, and
that what he wanted was a set of trees, not for
every pair of boots, but for every kind of boots. He
appeared to me fully to understand the value and
use of money. He acknowledged ho had led a noisy
and rather fast life, and regretted many of his ac-
tions, more particularly his marriage; and he told
me that he should have avoided many of his indis-
cretions if he hadknown that his family were anxi-
ous to make him out a lunatic. 'When putting on
his overcoat he said he hoped I would help to
prove him sane. I replied that from what I had
seen of him I did not believe him to be insane, and
that I would have no objection to say as much for
him. I told him, however, that ho had commit-
ted many bad and vicious actions, and expressed
a hope that he would lead a better life in
futures. He said he was much obliged to me, and
trusted I would do what I could for him. I saw him
again for a short time on the 31st of December, but
nothing particular passed between us on that occa-
sion. My chief object in the second interview was
to examine the structure of his mouth. His answers
were coherent, consequent, and rational throughout.
I could not say, judging from the interviews alone,
that he is otherwise than of sound mind.

Cross-examined—And competent to manage his
own affairs. I endeavoured to impress upon him
the desirability of acting with caution during the
course of these proceedings. He did not seem to be
much impressed with IN hat I said ; but he may have
been so. One of his solicitors—Mr. Rowcliffe—
brought him to me, but I saw him alone. I had not
heard anything of the goings-on at Felbrigg on
Christmas night when I had the second interview
with him. He treated my advice with respect, but
I cannot say what effect it had upon him. I remon-
strated with him about continuing acquaintance
with Roberts. He told me on the 31st December
that he had left Piccadilly, and intended to have
nothing more to do with Roberts.
By the Jury—l did not examine the form of his
head, nor should I have paid much attention to it if
I had. " Amentia" is an exploded term, and I
hardly know what it means. Mr. Windham is a
person of sound mind.
Miss Babington, a niece of the late Lord Macau-
lay, said she lived at Lichfield with her-parents. In
1859 she was travelling with them abroad. They
visited Spa, where they were introduced to Colonel
Bathurst and Mrs. Wilkinson. The latter seemed
to take a great interest in Mr. Windham,and called
him' William." Her daughter was with her. Mr.
Windham, as far as witness saw, was always per-
fectly gentlemanly in every way, At the table
d'hote he was rather high-spirited, but nothing
more. Witness never saw anything in him which
induced her to believe that he was of unsound
mind.

Cross-examined—llo was rather unpolished in

his manner.

The inquiry was again adjourned.