The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-04 00:00:00

9 11
45 16

6 64
1314 132
li 3il)
101 103

62 64
631 G4l

tOlt 1021
d
5Fi C 9
oot 91}
96 //8

5 11 (1
lot 10
89 91

123 125
39 41
96 98

45i 461

33i 39

77/ 78
65 67
95 97
5/ 6
38/ 39
8 0 pl
5 6 Pi

55* 1-.64
24 34
* d
82

6 6)

47 49
43 46
89 91

raill Ci!roisceinsg Business

91 93

2(4 214
6 6i

TILE WINDHAM CASE.

COMMISSION OF LUNACY THIS DAY.

(Before Samuel Warren, Esq., Q.C., Master in Lunacy,
and a Special Jury.)
FIFTEENTH DAY.

The Master,"on taking his seat, announced that it was
the unanimous opinion of the jury that they should have an
interview at the proper time with Mr. Windham without
the presence of counsel.

All the learned counsel objected to such a course, and the
discussion was deferred.

Dr. Tuke, who was examined in chief yesterday (a re-
port of which appears in another column) was cross-
examined by Mr. Chambers—He had at least twenty hours
of absolute interviews and long conversations with Mr.
Windham, in addition to three 'or four casual conver-
sations. He was only alcne with him on the 12th of
December. Mrs. Windham, Dr. Neale, Dr. Stevens,
Mr, Gwyn, and other persons were present during.
the interviews. He never saw Mr. Roberts in his life
Mr. Bury Hutchinson, a solicitor, was expected, but did
not come. Dr. Neale and Dr. Stevens were in and out of
the room, and it was not at all a medical consultation.
Possibly these gentlemen heard what he said to Mr. Wind-
ham. In the course of conversation Mr. Windham
said that his father had saved his uncle from
serious charge by alleging that he was insane, and that
his uncle would not dare to appear in the witness box.
He said that another uncle would not dare to appear,
as he had always been a drunkard, had had delirium
tremens, and was nearly blind. All these things were said
by Mr. Windham, with a view to show that he did not
attach much importance to the threat of issuing the cora-
mision. He did not know whether the statements of Mr.
Windham were true or false. He did not recollect that he
said which of his uncles it was who was constantly drunk,
or that he:said he was a clergyman. (The witness's notes
made after the interviews were put into his hands.) He
then said that his eldest uncle had had delirium tremens,
and he could hardly see, or, he might have said, t I stand,
and his father saved him from prison, pretending he
was mad ; and as for the General, his character would not
bear investigation, and he knew that he (Mr. Windham)
was quite well. Witness did not ask who has eldest uncle
was, or pursue the matter further. He read Mr. Buck's
affidavit, and he directed Mr. Windham's attention to it.
He asked Mr. Windham what fha stsitament could mean
that he had cut off his hand, as s ated in Mr. Buck's affi-
davit. Mr. Windham said "I don't know what Mr. Buck
means by saying it was not severe. I put my hand into a
chaff-cutting machine, and nearly cut my finger off. I bled
like a pig. The servants were horribly frightened, and
made me go to Mr. Buck." He also directed Mr. Wind_
ham's attention to other portions of the affidavit relating
to his peculiar illness. By this time he had entirely wiped
away from his mind the idea that Mr. Windham was under
any delusions. and implicitly believed everything he said.
He never saw a conjenital imbecile able to go so far as read-
ing Latin and Greek, but he did not think it would be im-
possible. In conjenital idiotcy memory failed as a general
rule, and the subjects died young. He had told Mr. Windham
himself that in four or five years he would become a lunatic,
or kill himself, if he persisted in such habits as he had read
in the affidavits. That was still his opinion. The only
affidavit which appeared to be of any force as against Mr.
Windham was that jointly made by the Llewellyns, and he
very carefully tested its internal accuracy. He came to the
conclusion that their testimony contained inconsistencies,
and did not make out a case of insanity against Mr. Wind-
ham. He (witness) knew that Mr. Gwyn became Mrs.
Windham's medical man after Mr. Back's dismissal. Mr.
Windham told him that Mr. Gwyn was in the house when
he was ill with sickness and dial-rliceea, and Mrs. Windham
asked him to see her husband; and then it was that the
peculiar nature of his disorder was discovered. Mr. Gwyn
was a most respectable practitioner, residing at Hammer-
smith. He (witness) had read Mr. Illing worth's affidavit,
and had directed Mr. Windham's attention to it. He ascer-
tained from Mr. Windham that Mr. Illingworth lost all in-
fluence over him by having taken him to Mr. Johnson, who
afterwards became the medical referee.

LAID INIELLIGENCE.-(7 HiS DAY.)

SHERIFFS' COURT.
COS V. HONEY.
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE-

This was an action upon a contract, Mr. Manly appear-
ing for the plaintiff, and Mr. Pearce of Giltspur-street, for
the d efendant.

The court had adjourned judgment till this morning, and
accordingly the Judge stated that, having looked into the
letters, he was of opinion two of them made a contract. If,
however, Mr. Pearce was advised, he could move the case
by eerteorari.

Mr. Pearce—l would rather have the judgment of the

court.

The Court then said that the words "I accept" were
fatal to the defendant, and plaintiff would have a verdict
with costs.

HOPCROFT V. THE ECONOMIC OMNIBULI COMPANY.
This was a claim for advertisements insetted for this new
company.

Mr. Buchanan, for the plaintiff, called his client, who
deposed that various advertisements, by order of the pro-
moters of this company, had been inserted in a periodical,
No one appearing for the company, the Court found for
the plaintiff with costs.

BILLINGSGATE FISH SA.LESMEN-BENJAMIN V. HARRIS.

This was a judgment summons, and Mr. Buchanan, for
the plaintiff, said his client was a fish salesman, and so was
defendant. The defendant was in a good way of business,
and though the amount was but a small one he had ne-
glected to pay it.
Committed for six days.

THE SUN,' LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JANUARY 4. 1862.