The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-03 00:00:00

THE TVINDHAM CASE.

(autinued from The Sun of yesterday.)

Sir H. Cairns was much surprised when be heard
his learned friend say, " We here close cur case,"
as he certainly thought that would not have been
done until he had called into the witness-box every
one of the petitioners and those persons who had
appeared before the Lords Justices, in reference to
this case. He felt surprised that they had not said
we will come here, and stating all we know, give
an opportunity of answering every question which
may possibly weigh in the opposite scale ; and he
considered it would be the province of the jury to
require that it should be done, but if it was not done
then they would draw their own conclusions from
it. As to the members of the family who had seen
Mr. Windham from his infancy, who were familiar
with him, and observers of his whole course of life,
why were they absent, and persons who had but a
glance at his conduct, or who heard his laugh, were
those who were to tell them the state of his mind?
The other horn of the dilemma was that if they
were called forward they would be unable to speak
to any partieular acts which would tell against him.
Mr. Chambers, in his opening speech, referring to
the subject of property, took credit for the motives
of the petitioners, and stated that General Wind-
ham was so much older than his nephew that he
could not benefit from the property. Let them
examine that point. There was an estate called
Felbrigg, which, when Lady Sophia's jointure fell
in, would be worth £3,000 a year. The devised
estates in 1869, when the mortgages would be
nearly paid off, would produce about £9,000 per
annum. Here was an income of £12,000 a year in
all. Supposing it could be determined that Mr.
Windham was an imbecile and incapable of taking
care of his affairs, and that his marriage was null
and void, what would be the consequence ? The
person next in remainder to the whole of this pro-
perty of £12,000 a year was General Windham,
for his life, with the remainder again to every
one of his sons. If Mr.: Windham were of im-
becile mind no :marriage could be contracted ; he
would live and die a bachelor, and the whole
property of £12,000 a year would be as well
and firmly secured to General Windham, if
he lived long enough, but at all events to his
family, as if the best conveyancer in England or
the world were now to convey and settle it in that
way. It was idle to say that General Windham
was free from the possibility of suspicion because,
forsooth, he was older than his nephew. Here was
the transfer of the entire property to his family,
whether he might himself live to enjoy his life
interest or not. But the matter did not stop there.
Look at the position of the other petitioners. Were
Mr. Windham to be declared insane, the authorities
in lunaoy would regulate the property. Everybody
knew that a certain sum was allowed for the main-
tenance of the lunatic. Supposing that, oat of
£12.000, some £3,000 or £4,000 a-year were allowed
for the comfortable maintenance of the lunatic as a
bachelor, £B,OOO per annum would remain. Sup-
posing that the contingency of the lunatic living a
a long time, say 40 years, and the general not com-
ing into possession, were to happen, there would
be at the death of the lunatic an accumula-
tion of between £300,000 and £4oo,ooo—a
very pleasant thing for the next of kin. Who
were the next of kin ? Why, the other peti-
tioners. As to the proceedings before the Lords
Justices, who were the parties before the Court ?
Why, 11 heads of families, who are also petitioners.
One of the parties who made an affidavit to the
Lords Justices was Lady Cecilia Baring, and
he would ask why she was not called to tell the
jury the same facts as she made in her affidavit to
the Lords Justices, for they could not suppose but
she said something as to the state of mind of her
nephew, and which induced the Lords Justices to
order this inquiry. Then another party to the pro-
ceedings before the Lords Justices was Captain
Windham, and he would ask why he was not put
into the box and called upon to state on oath in
public what he said in private to the Lords Jus-
tices. Then another person was Mr. Hook, a
banker in London, and one of the guardians of Mr.
Windham, and regulating his allowance, and di-
recting the course of his education. Where was
he, as he could tell them something about money
and the proceedings of Mr. Windham. Where was
he ? Why was he not in court that they could
examine and cross-examine him in public on those
things which he had in private told the Lords Jus-
tices ? They should then have known something
about it, and he must presume that he was afraid
to come and submit to that examination. He (Sir
H. Cairns) would have liked to have asked Mr.
Hook, if he had come, if it was judicious for a guar-
dian to take his nephew to houses to drink cham-
pagne, to choose his own residence in London, and
if at that time he considered he was sane or insane,
or fit to manage himself or his own business. Did
he tell the Court of Chancery, Mr. Windham being
a ward of that court, that he considered that he
was of unsound mind, and, before he came of age,
ask for an investigation to ascertain if he was fit
to dispose of his own property ? If he consi-
dered he was of unsound mind, then Mr. Hook
had grossly neglected his duty. He had heard
that while at Mr. Llewellyn 's Mr. Windham
was pursuing a riotous and profligate life, and hav-
ing heard this did Mr. Hook go to him, rebuke or
remonstrate with him, and put him into a place
where he would be removed from temptation ? Did
he do that as his guardian, or did he for six months
keep all this to himself and say nothing about it ?
It seemed that Mr. Hook had sold his nephew a
horse, with which he drove about London, and he
(Sir H. Cairns) did not say that Mr. Windham had
made a bad bargain, or that Mr. Hook had done
wrong in selling it—he believed in that transaction
he had acted honestly—but was that the reason
that kept Mr. Hook away so that he should not be
questioned about it ? Then, as to the marriage of
Mr. Windham, he would ask did Mr. Hook take
any steps about it; did he go the Vice-Chancellor,
or to Miss Willoughby, and inform her of the na-
ture of the person to whom she was about to be
married ? He did nothing of the sort, and although
he was well aware of the intended marriage he said
nothing at all about it. So much for Mr. Hook. He
now came to the Corypheus of the petitioners—
General Windham—who made four affidavits before
he could get the Lords Justices to move in the mat-

ter. He-was the testamentary guardian of Mr.
Windham, and although he had sat in the court
during the whole of the trial, regulating the order
of witnesses—it was only that day that they missed
him from the side of his learned friend (Mr. M.
Chambers)—and yet he had not dared to present
himself in the witness-box and tell them on oath
what he had told the Lords Justices in private.
There was scarcely a witness had been examined
who had not made some reference to General Wind-
ham, and yet he had not come to be examined on
oath. He wished to have asked him whether he

took any interest as to the place he selected for his

nephew, whether he ever rebuked or remonstrated
with him as to his taste for low society. He
should like to know the conversations which took
place between General Windham and his nephew at
Mrs. Llewellyn's. He should like to see the letters
which were written by Mr. Windham. He should
like to see the papers which were given by Mr.
Llewellyn to Gen. Windham, and other letters which
were written by the person who was the subject of
the present inquiry. As to the verbal evidence of
railway guards, and other persons who had been
brought forward, what was that put in comparison
with letters which had been written ? And here he
must remark that it was with the utmost difficulty
that a letter written by Mr. Windham was yester-
day produced by Dr. Mayo, although Mr. Hansel'
admitted that numerous letters had been written by
Mr. Windham. He should like to ask General
Windham if he took any steps to intimate the un-
soundness of mind of his nephew when he informed
him that he would be able to get for him a commis-
sion in the Guards, providing he would only read
enough for it. Then he would like to have asked
General Windham about the telegraph ; and, after
the marriage, when he was at Felbrigge Hall, as to
his attempt to enter into an arrangement with Mr.
Windham for the purchase of the estate. Then
there was the timber contract, of which they should
have the fullest explanation ; and here he might
remark that his learned friend (Mr. M. Chambers)
had called Messrs. Fry and Laurence into court to
prove the contract, but had refused to allow them to
be sworn and examined upon a subject about which
they could have given the fullest information. He
called the members of a most respectable firm, and
yet although they were able to give the fullest in-
formation as to this contract, they were not allowed
to open their mouths. Then there was the marriage.
He had asked if there were any witnesses tobe called
who were present at the marriage, and he was told
that none would be called; and his learned friend
had contented himself by taking the course which
would have been taken in the most common case at
nisi prius, and had merely called a witness to prove
the handwriting to the marriage register. Having
dealt with the evidence which ought to have been
produced, he would now go to that which they had.
He hoped that, if any of the jury had sons, and
they were placed under the care of guardians, that
they would be treated with care,
and in a more
kindly manner than Mr. Windham had been. The
events of the boyish days of Mr. Windham had been
raked up ; and the act of a boy in a jacket, while
dining at Lord Bristol's, in laying hold of a iece
of meat with his hands instead of using a knife or a
spoon, was brought up as a proof of his unsound-
ness of mind. He was said to have made an attack
on Lady Alfred Hervey for having spoken to him
for doing so; but she had not been called to tell
them anything about it. Then they were toll that,
while at Torquay, be cried when he was requested
to be vaccinated; but Lord Alfred Hervey admitted