The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-24 00:00:00

nor religion. The case of Mr. Windham's eppo- '
nents was that he was congenitally imbecile. Now
if he could show acts done by Mr. Windham—if he
could show a series of business correspondence
written by him, it was wholly irreconcileable with
the view of the petitioners. There were such acts,
there was such a correspondence, and in the face of
those acts and correspondence could the case be
sustained ? These affectionate relatives and sel.-
' sacrificing reversioners had letters of Mr. Wind-
ham's in their possession, some of which were
stolen from Mr. Windham, which showed his capa-
city, and why did they not produce them ? For the
same reason that General Windham had not come
into the box—because he dared not. It seemed
that an effect had been produced on the Master's
mind which might be produced on the minds of the
jury also, upon which he wished to say a few words.
The newspapers, acting in the discharge of their
duty, acting under a sense of responsibility to which
alone they were amenable, had thought it right
during the progress of this inquiry to reflect the 1
currents of popular opinion. They must take the
press as they found it—an instrument of great use
—the evil with the good together. It would be far
better in his judgment if comments of all kind had
been abstained from on the one side and the other
tiil the verdict had been given. However, the
eminent persons who directed the newspaper press
thought differently—they chose to write upon the
case, and, judging only by those things which he
had seen, it would seem as if the opinion cf the
judge and jury had already been formed, that
the Windham property was saved, and that the
marriage was set aside. If these persons thought
fit to write in this way, the real and the only
answer to it was that it 'was untrue, and could
not be anything but untrue. Those who wrote
in this spirit must have utterly mistaken the
character of an English judge and of English gen-
tlemen if they thought they could be so base, or
guilty of such an act of villany, as to be determined
to break this settlement because it was one which
they did not like, and to set aside the marriage be-
cause it was one which they did not approve of.
The ruinous expenses occasioned by this inquiry
would be a lesson enough for all the sins which Mr.
and Mrs. Windham had committed. It had been said
by Mr. Erskine, that " morals came cold in the ab-
stract from the pulpit, but men smarted under them
when we lawyers were the preachers." He did not
stand there to defend vice, to apologise for indecency
or to palter with religion. He knew perfectly well
that profligacy was wrong, that to live unchastely
was sinful, that if to follow the sweet pleasures of
sin was alluring, those who did so must be content
to pay the penalty in future bitterness and repent-
' ance " Stolen waters acre sweet, and bread eaten in
secret is pleasant, but he knoweth not that the dead
are there, and that her guests are in the depths of
hell." These were solemn and tremendous words,
and he did not mean to disavow them, but he stood
there to point out the irrelevancy of confounding
sin and vice with insanity, and immorality and irre-
ligion with imbecility and legal incapacity. But if
religion—if sacred religion—was to be dragged
into this case—if sacred allusions were to be made
use of, then he should say he would rather be the
Magdalen, who washed her divine Master's feet
with her tears and wiped them with her hair, than
that self-complacent Pharisee who condemned the
woman because she was a sinner, and plumed him-
self before the assembly for the outward regularity
of his life. He stood there to point out that there Was
nothing in the conduct of Mr. Windham to show
unsoundness of mind. No man of candid mind could
say that there was. He thought that this had been
abundantly shown in the coarse of this inquiry and
he hoped it would be shown in the verdict that
they would presently give. Apart from all pre-
judice he asked for their verdict for Mr. Windham
with the utmost confidence and an almost abso-
lute certainty of success, and more especially
he asked for it on behalf of the wife of Mr.
Windham with all the earnestness and energy he
could command. (Applause.)
Mr. Chambers, in reply, said that he should,
though sorely tempted and tried by the observations
of his learned friends, deal with the case before
them with calmness and- equanimity. A difficult
and trying duty was imposed upon him ; but who
would dare to say that he had gone a step beyond
that character which ha thought every honourable
barrister ought to earn for his profession in the
public mind. He had listened to the eloquent ad-
dresses of his learned friends; but this observation
was common to them all, that they had introduced
topics which were calculated to mislead, and
attempted to raise numerous issues which were
wholly irrelevant to the one which the jury had
really to try. Not being able to meet the real point
in issue, they abused all who were their opponents
on this occasion. He knew that this case had been
discussed elsewhere than in that Court, and great
want of knowledge had been exhibited in respect of
it from not understanding in the first place what
was the doctrine of the law upon it, and in the
second place from not keeping before the mind the
facts which have been disclosed. It would be clear
after understanding what the law of England on
this subject was, as laid down by the highest legal
authorities, especially in modern times, and what
the rule of guidance was as established by the
highest medical authorities, that Mr. Windham,
even upon the evidence presented by those who re-
sisted this petition, was brought within the category
of those who were of such unsound mind as not to
be capable of managing themselves and their pro-
perty—that he belonged to that class of persons
who were of such weakness of mind as to be unable
to take care of themselves and their property. It
was essential, first, to consider, what was the sound
doctrine of law, and, in the next place, to consider
from the medicel testimony what was the state of
Mr. Windham's mind. There had been a
studious concealment of the law of the case by
all his learned friends, and, as a consequence of
the ignorance of the law, views had been put
forward outside of the court which were
quite erroneous. The law of the case, as laid down
by Lord Eldon and others of the highest legal autho-
rity, was, that it was not necessary a person should
be an absolute imbecile or idiot to be adjudged
legally a lunatic, but that he should exhibit such
unsoundness of mind as showed that he was incap-
able of taking care of his person or property. It
had been laid down that imbecility or weakness of
mind might exist in different degrees between ab-
solute idiotcy en one hand and perfect capacity on
the other. That was the law as laid down by Lord
Eldon and Sir J. Nichol, and it was the view taken
by Dr. Taylor, Dr. Ray, and Dr. Copeland, in their
treatises upon insanity. That was the law as car-
ried out in the case of Lord Portsmouth, which had
been before referred to. The language used in
some of the medical works was, that it was enough
if the intellect of the person was " below par"—
if he was so feeble in mind as to "lay himself open
to be imposed on by the artful and designing."
Such was the language used in standard works on
insanity, not written to meet the requirements of
any particular case; and curiously enough, the evi-
dence given by those who are best acquainted with
Mr. Windham, and who were amongst his truest
and kindest friends, like Mr. and Mrs. Martin, was
that Mr. Windham's mind was " below the ave-
rage." The learned gentleman proceeded to show
that the whole course of Mr. Windham's life, the
malformation of his palate which was common to
idiots, his slavering, his filthy habits, his incapacity
to learn, his howling and slobbering, were indica-
tions that he was a person of such weak intellect,
of such feeble mind as to render him incapable of
taking care of himself or what belonged to bim.
All his learned friends had taunted him with not
putting General Windham into the witness-box. He
was responsible for advising that course, and he
should net be doing his duty if he allowed him to
appear there. In the first place, Gen. Windham could
not give so much evidence as others as to the habits
of his nephew, and in the next place having, as was
said, an interest in the issue of the case, he thought
it better that he should not appear as a witness.
What his learned friends wauted was an oppor-
tunity of worrying and tormenting General
Windham ; putting to him questions upon irrele-
vant matters ; he would not say abusing him, for in
the way of abuse the force of malice could no fur-
ther go. The object of these attacks was to with.
draw the attention of the jury from the real ques-