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

THE TVINDIZA3I CASE,

The proceedings in this case were resumed yes-
terday morning in the Court of Exchequer, West-
minster, before S. Warren, Esq., and a special jury.
Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C., Mr. Field, and Mr. H.
Williams :appeared for the petitioners; Sir H.
Cairns, Q C., Mr. Karslake, Q.C., and Mr. Mil-
ward for the alleged lunatic; Mr. Coleridge, Q.C.,
for Mrs. Windham ; and Mx. Charles Russell for
Lady Sophia Giubelei, the mother of the alleged
lunatic.

Dr. Forbes Winslow recalled and cross-examined
by Mr. Coleridge, Q.C.—I saw Mr. Windham only
on two occasions for the purpose of conversing
with him. I consider this a very remarkable case,
but not unusual. In some of its features it might
be unusual. I have had a large experience in cases
of this sort for 20 years, and extensive practice. I
have 70 or 80 patients in various diseases under my
care every day. I class this as a case of imbecility-
There are well known conditions of mental dis-
orders. It is a case in medical language of "amen-
tia." I have to inspect persons who are to be placed
in lunatic asylums under lunatic acts. I examine
them, and if satisfied I give a certificate.
Re-examined by Mr. Chambers—l rank this as a
case of imbecility under the class of amentia. Not
absolute idiotcy or lunacy, but between the two. It
is a numerous class, If I was to confine my opinion
to the two interviews with Mr. Windham I should
decline to sign a certificate to confine him in a lu-
natic asylum; but he requires some control. He
requires some restraint, :but not to be placed in a
lunatic asylum. I have noticed certain acts which
led me to the conclusion that he is of unsound mind.
I mention as an instance of this his continued friend-
ship for Mr. Roberts, although he told him of his
having connexion with his wife before marriage.
There was a paralysis of the moral tense of decency,
no apparent sense of shame, and I could not make
him understand that it was an act of indecency that
a man should live with his wife almost up to the
day of her marriage.
By the Commissioner—This is a condition of
mind between lunacy and idiotcy, incapable of ma-
naging himself or his affairs. That was the defini-
tion of unsoundness of mind as laid down by Lord
Eldon in Lord Portsmouth's case. In my opinion
the state of mind of Mr. Windham is such that he
is incompetent to manage:his affairs. The jury, as
laymen, are as well qualified to determine this
question as myself. The type of this case is most
difficult to analyse, on account of its subtle nature.
The boundary line of amentia is so difficult to as-
certain that you must be guided more by the action
of the persons than by your own observations. In
a case like this, in order to come to a right conclu-
sion, you cannot disembarrass your mind of the
history of the case.
By a Juror—He appeared to be insensible to
shame. When lam called upon to examine pa-
tients frequently the details of the case are laid
before me. The general practice is to have placed
before me certain facts. lam guided to my con-
clusions by what I saw and what I have heard in
court. A combined action from both. I attribute
as much importance to one as the other. It is the
usual practice to give the medical man a statement
of facts by which I was to test the capacity of the
person to be examined. No proper investi-
gation could take place without it, or it
would be like calling upon a chemist to test a cer-
tain liquid without giving him the means to test it.
By the Commissioner—lmbecile persons are re-
markable for their cunning. They are capable of
understanding a certain amount of tutoring, and
for a time would be able to answer the questions.
The impossibility of fixing the attention on any
given subject only for a short period of time, was a
distinguishing characteristic of this species of im
becility. Deadness or insensibility to moral obliga-
tions is also a frequent concomitant to this species
of insanity.
Dr. Thomas Mayo, examined by Mr. Chambers
—I am president of the College of Physicians. I
have given my attention to disorders of the mind to
a great extent, and early in life I wrote a work on
the subject. I was present on two occasions with
Dr. Winslow, when we had interviews with Mr.
Windham. I was in court y esterday, and heard
what Dr. Winslow said. He has substantially given
a very accurate account of those interviews. I formed
an opinion of the state of mind of Mr, Windham
from these interviews. I had interviews with him
on the 13th and 14th of November. The first in-
terview with him, accompanied by Dr. Winslow,
was about two hours. I had a second interview.
Dr. Bright was present on both occasions. I could
see in Mr. Windham a very weak intellect and an
impure mind to the extent that I should expect him
to turn out of very unsound mind. What I ob-
served was perfectly consistent with the mass of
evidence I have heard in this court. Speaking of
his intellectual s 3 mptoms, Iks should say he was
childish and inconsequential under circumstances in
which a man of intellect would be serious. Helmade
disjointed remarks. Speaking of the ethical part
of the case, by far the most important, my attention
was most attracted to the mode he received and
treated the relations between himself and his wife.
All that took place on that subject has been
correctly stated by Dr. Winslow. There was an
utter childishness and shamelessness. I would
particularly specify the indifference with which
he treated the question, whether he had said he
had had connexion with the female whom he
afterwards married before marriage and that
that had satisfied him. He said he had
only made the remark to blind people as to his in-
tended marriage. When asked by me whether he
had ever been in bed with three women at a time,
he treated this question with levity. He denied it,
but laughed. The adhesiveness he showed in his
attachment to Roberts, in spite of his admitting a
low opinion of him, was another circumstance of
his indifference to moral obligations. He had an in-
capacity in regard to the management of his affairs,
for such a man would be sure to have bad asso-
ciates, and a mind so weak would be sure to give
way to them. Those were the principal points
leading to the opinion I have expressed.
Mrs. Llewellyn re-called and cross-examined by
Sir H. Cairns—l have seen my brother, Conway
Dignan, in the streets begging once since my
mother's death last summer. In September, Octo-
ber, November, or December, I did not meet my
brother and speak to him in St. James's-street. I
did not meet him and say, " Ah, Conway, how are
you, and what are you doing P" 1 did not see him
in St. James's-street. In the month of July I saw
him begging, and I was so shocked that I asked my
solicitor to get him a situation. The only time I
spoke to him was while I was in a cab in the Vaux-
hall-road. He came to me and 1 said " Conway, be
a good boy." I never said, in any shape or form,
" I know of a capital thing you can do nicely. Did
you ever hear of young Windham ? His uncle the
General has begun to try to bring him in insane,
and if you would swear for the General it would
be the making of you, and you would not require a
situation." I never said so, nor did I say two words
to him. I never heard so base an accusation, or that
I ever said, " The General will have the money,
and not his nephew. What you will have to swear
is this, that you lived with Llewellyn as his clerk,
and had ample opportunities of hearing Mr. Wind-
ham's noises and mad ways." My brother never
said, " Oh, Augusta, how can you try to bring
a younger brother into such a mess P You
know I neither know young Mr. Windham
or the General, and I would not get myself
into trouble by false swearing for you or twenty
Generals." I never said anything of this, or did I
speak two words to him. I deny every word of the
following; every word is totally false :—" You are
very foolish. You know as much as other people
who are on the General's side." I deny having
said, " Will you go with me to a solicitor P" I never
spoke but a few words to him at the latter end of
June. He did not say, "I will not do anything of
the sort, and I would sooner stop in my present
position than try to injure a young man I know
nothing about." I did not say, " If you do not com-
ply with my wishes I cannot do anything for you;
you are very foolish." He did not say, "I would
not go into any court to forswear myself, or injure
my family's name." I deny having spoken to him
since the month of June. I did not say, " You can
take your own course. What does it signify if you
do bring in young Windham insane ? it will not
injure you, but will be the making of you. You
don't suppose I am doing this for nothing, do you ?"
I never said anything of the kind.
Re-examined by Mr. Chambers—My brother
begged of passers by like a ragged man, thinking
to get money out of Mr. Llewellyn to support him
in idleness. He never earned a shilling in his life.
The last day I saw him was the day before Christ-
mas• day, opposite our house in Duke-street, hooting
and pointing at it, and getting a mob round him.
Mr. Llewellyn went to Vine-street for the police to
watch him, and he went away. I tried to get him
a situation twelve months after my mother's death,
as I was horrified at his appearance. That was I
think in May, 1861, when I tried to get him a place
at my mother's solicitor's. I took him in a cab with

me ; and once I was going to my sister's, when he
stopped me whilst I was in a cab, and said, " Oh,
Augusta, I hope you will forgive me." I said, "Be
a good boy," and that was all that passed be-
tween us.

By the Commissioner—My brother, for his bad
conduct, was expelled by my husband from the
house. Before I came into court to-day I had not
the most remote idea of the questions that would
be put to me, and I say solemnly, and in the pre-
sence of these 23 jurymen, under the obligation of

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 £BOO 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. Hansell 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.
Roberts.
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
H. Cairns should open his case, call his witnesses ;
and, if necessary, he (Mr. Coleridge) would supple-
ment any witnesses he 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 so
under circumstances which were to some extent
unparalleled. 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 quiescence, 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 hands, 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 ho 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 impanelled
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. He 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 rolative to step in
and take possession of the property of a mart 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 case, 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 ho 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 pat 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. Windham 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. Windtam
was of unsound mind, because of his pec.ulhiei..zeh they
.laugh,
and that was the sort of evidence uvp:. w
on
r
were called upon to say that Mr. 4
unsound mind. It was true thtadham was of
.
of a boisterous sirit as a y Mr. Windham was
p 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 thatp er80118
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 his own affairs.
The jury suggested that Sir
Cairns must note