The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-02 00:00:00

BSDAY EVENING, JANUARY -2, 1862.

the oath I have taken, that this alleged conversa-
tion is entirely and utterly false, if I were to die in
the box.—(This declaration, made in a solemn and
impressive manner, created a great sensation in the
court.).

During the above examination it was understood
that the brother of Mr. Llewellyn was in court.
Mr. Field said he would now put in the mar-
riage settlement, which conferred upon Agnes Ann
Rogers an annuity of 1800 until 1869, when it was
to be increased to £1,500; two persons, named
Woburn and Roberts, being named to see the due
execution of the same. It also secured to Ann
Agnes Rogers, alias Willoughby, the free and un-
controlled disposition of the property and jewels,
to be retained for her own separate use, and to be
willed and disposed of in any way she might think
fit, notwithstanding any act of coverture to the
contrary.
Mr. Hansel' then proved the signature to this
settlement to be in the handwriting of William
Frederick Windham.
Mr. Hansell then put in the certificate of mar-
riage celebrated between William Frederick Wind-
ham and Agnes Ann Rogers, at St. John's Church,
St. John's-wood, London, in August, 1861. The
attesting witnesses were Mr. Bowen May and Mr.
Rober ts.
Mr. M. Chambers said that was the case for the
petitioners.
Mr. Coleridge said he believed his case would
be a short one ; and what he proposed was, that Sir
11. Cairns should open his case, call his witnesses ;
and, if necessary, he (Mr. Coleridge) would supple-
ment any witnesses ho might wish to call after-
wards.
Sir H. Cairns then rose to address the jury on
behalf of the alleged lunatic, Mr. William Frede-
rick Windham. He said it became his duty to
address them on behalf of Mr. Windham, who was
the subject of the present inquiry, and he did sa
under circumstances which were to some extent
uuparalleled. The present inquiry had lasted
almost twelve days, and during that time a
demand had been made on the patience and atten-
tion of the jury which, as far as he was aware, was
without a precedent in modern times. The peti-
tioners had raked up and chronicled the events in
the life of Mr. Windham of more than 21 years,
and exhibited to the public gaze, and had pictured
to them, with no delicate touches, the vices or frail-
ties of him who was the subject of the present
inquiry. Himself and friends, who were counsel
of Mr. Windham, were compelled to sit there in a
state of constrained quiescenee,except so far as was
allowed to them in cross-examination, and not per-
mitted to correct the errors which witnesses fell
into, or to expose their inconsistencies, and although
now and then in doing so they might have appeared
to draw upon the forbearance of thejury in pressing
questions, they were necessarily prevented from
explaing at the time their reasons for doing so, and
as the jury could not understand their relevancy to
the inquiry, they were obliged to take them on the
credit of counsel. He now rose to address them,
and in doing so he should, in the first instance,
make two requests. First, on behalf of Mr. Wind-
ham, that, in the consideration of his remarks, they
would bring with them a calm, unbiassed, and he
would add a judicial judgment, for they should
remember that, short of the issue of life and death
being in their bands, there was no issue more mo-
mentuous than the present inquiry in dealing with
a fellow-creature. The second request he had to
make was on his own account, which was to ask
their indulgence, as he felt the extent of the case
upon which he might have to address them, which
was a duty and a task he might well shrink from
did he not rely, in fine, mainly upon the knowledge
that he was about to defend Mr. Windham from a
charge the most cruel, the most unjust, and the most
unjustifiable that was ever preferred. (Loud
applause in the court, which drew from the Com-
missioner a remark that if such unseemly conduct
was repeated he should exercise the power vested in
him to prevent its recurrence.) It would perhaps be
convenient for him then to state precisely the issue
they would have to try. They were empanelled
to decide whether Mr. Windham was capable of
managing his own affairs, or whether he was in-
capable of managing his own affairs on account of
his unsoundness of mind. The order by which
that case was referred to them was couched in
terms which were not used in that case alone, but
had been used in a long experience in the court
from which it came. There were a great number
of cases in which it was said that a man was in-
capable of managing his own affairs, but not indi-
cating unsoundness of mind; and he would draw
their attention to some hypothetical cases bearing
upon that point. The jury, however, before they
decided against Mr. Windham, must combine two
elements—incapacity of managing his own affairs
and with that they must be satisfied that that in-
capacity arose from unsoundness of mind. If a man
was enamoured of an object and disposed to give
all he possesses to obtain it, then they would have
one of the two propositions he had mentioned with-
out the other. Ib . would read one or two sen-
tences from one of the most eminent authorities of
the land on the subject of idiots and lunatics, ex-
pressed in terms much better than he could express
it. He meant Mr. Justice Blackstone. The learned
counsel here read an extract from " Blackstone's
Commentaries" in regard to the treatment of idiots
and lunatics, which strongly condemned the Roman
law which allowed a friend or relative to step in
and take possession of the property of a man when
they considered it was not properly administered,
as contrary to the constitution of England. Neither
was there a discretionary power to do so when he
was guilty of any acts of extravagance. He further
quoted from the judgment of Lord Eldon in Lord
Portsmouth's case, in which he laid it down that
mere imbecility would not be sufficient to restrain
a man in the disposal of his property unless it was
accompanied by an unsoundness of mind. He
also quoted the observation of Mr. Commissioner
Warren on opening the ease, in which he laid
it down that to find a verdict in favour of the peti-
tioners it must be proved that Mr. Windham was
of unsound mind. As to the insanity relied on in
this case, in far the greater number of cases of in-
sanity there was what was called delusions. The
cardinal test of insanity is the absence or presence
of delusions, and in the opening they were told there
were none in this case. They were told that it was
a case of imbecility amounting to unsoundness of
mind. Where a jury had got to deal with a case
of insanity accompanied by delusions, the case was
different, and as they had been told that day, it was
one of great difficulty. A man might go through
all the duties of life with accuracy and precision,
but touch one chord, and then insanity instantly
manifested itself. There was a remarkable case of
a man who indicted Dr. Monro, who was under
the delusion that he was shut up in a tower, and
that he was in the habit of corresponding with a
princess, by writing to her in cherry juice. That
man was put into the box as a witness, and no one
could discover the least instance of unsoundness of
mind, and the trial was about terminating, when a
person came into court who knew the history of the
whole case, and he mentioned about the princess
and being shut up in the tower, when the insanity
immediately showed itself and the trial was put an
end to. The learned counsel then put some hypo-
thetical cases in support of his argument, to prove
that different views might be taken of the mental
powers of men in the absence of delusions. if a
man was accused of being imbecile who acted at
other times as a rational man, then they must care-
fully examine those acts to discover whether they
were assumed or not. As to property there was no
graduated scale as to the amount of property to be
enjoyed which could determine the question of sound-
ness or unsoundness of mind, and whether a man's
property was £2OO or £20,000a year, the result must
be the same, and the amount of money could not
affect the question as to the soundness of the mind.
He asked them then, when he should comment on
the evidence, to dismiss from their minds, and put
aside all they had heard or been told as to the un-
soundness of mind of Mr. Wind ham on account of the
largeness of his property. As to questions being put
to witnesses as to what opinion they had formed
from the evidence, although he could not object to
them, yet they were, he contended, not proper ques-
tions to be put to them when these statements were
not borne out by what the witnesses had seen for
themselves. He asked the jury not to delegate such
powers which belonged to them to the witnesses for
that was the issue which it was for the jury, and
the jury only to determine. This was a case of all
others to which this observation ought to apply. if
they were to put that issue on witnesses, he would
refer to a policeman,' who gave his opinion that
Windham was of unsound mind, and being asked
his reason for it, he said, because Mr. Windham
came up to him, took hold of his arm, and said " Come
old Kay, and have a glass with me." Then there
was the evidence of Mr. Corballis, the clerk at the
War-office, who never moved out of his own room

but who was quite ready to say that Mr. Windham
was of unsound mind, because of his peculiar laugh,
and that was the sort of evidence upon which they
were called upon to say that Mr. Windham was of
unsound mind. It was true that Mr. Windham was
of a boisterous spirit as a young man, and that he
was frequently at war with his tutor, and they had
got in addition that Mr. Windham had contracted
tastes which were distasteful to the public, and pro-
perly so. They had also seen statements thatpersons
had got about him, and took him to Emanuel's and
induced him to purchase £14,000 of jewellery, and
of his desire to sweep off all the timber from the
Felbrigge estate. The impetuosity of temper and
his self-reliant character had induced persons to
come forward into court and they were ready to con- ,
strue his early conduct of life into an unsoundness
of mind, and an inability to manage hisown affairs.
The jury bugges ted that Sir H. Cairns must hot,