The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-17 00:00:00

to give it to the wife for life. She said, "I am
going to marry for the benefit of my sisters, and I
will have it so that I can will it to them, or do as
I like with it." 'Witness said, " What do you say to
that, Windham; what relatives have putt ?" His
reply was, " I have no one I care abou' except my
mother, and she is already provided far out of the
estate." Mrs. Windham then said," Let us have it put
down at once." Witness said there was no ocsasion for
anywriting about it. Windham said, " Oh yes, let us
have it in black and white, and then she will be satis-
fied." Witness then wrote these lines—" Settle-
ment to be executed between William Windham
and Agnes Anne Rogers. Mr. Windham agrees to
settle on his wife absolutely £BOO per annum, to be
charged on the freehold estate at Felbrigg Hall,
Suffolk ; trustees, Dr. Ferries Whidborne, of Gull-
ford-street, and Signed ANNE AGNES
ROGERS, W. F. WINDUAM." Witness afterwards
wrote on the top of the paper " 16th Sept., wed-
ding." It was endorsed 20th of August, 1861. On
that occasion he persuaded her to accept the £BOO.
He asked them who their trustees were to be, as
they must have two. She said she had asked her
doctor, and she must see him for his consent. He
then asked Windham whom he would name. He
said, " Well, I don't know. I have no friends or
relations whom I care about." Witness suggested
his mother, but Windham said she was out of
health and would not do. He said he would think
about it. Witness asked him to whom he should
send the draft to peruse on his behalf. Windham
said he had no solicitor then, and did it require it.
Witness said it was usual to do so, Windham said
' he shonld wait until the end of the long vacation
before he engaged a new solicitor. He added, " I
have heard you highly spoken of by two or three
people, and surely you can do it between us." Wit-
ness said, "I shall send it in a rough state down to
counsel to have an opinion upon it." He imme-
diately rang the bell, and sent the draft to Mr.
Graham Hastings. The gentleman and lady then
left. A day or two afterwards he saw Mrs.
Windham alone at his office. The substance of
that interview was communicated to Mr. Wind-
ham, After that he saw them both together. Wit-
ness said, " So I understand it is not to come off—l
never thought it would." Windham said, " Oh yes
it is; I have made up my mind, and it shall." He
then told witness that he had agreed with "Agnes"
to give her when he came into his property £1,500
a-year, as she was going to give up a large amount
to marry him. Witness asked who the trustees were
to be. Windham said he knew no one who would
do. Witness asked why he did not have General
Windham, with whom witness had been at
school at Reading. He said, " He wants to get hold
of my property—we are not friendly, and I shan't
have him." Mrs. Windham said, " I asked Mr.
Roberts if he would be one"—witness knew to whom
she referred—" provided Windham can't get any
person to be a trustee for him." Windham said,
"I have no objection to Roberts. I understand he
is a wealthy man—he drives his four-in-hand and
keeps a pack of hounds." Witness said he believed
that to be the case. It was then decided that he
should be associated with Dr. Whidborne. After
the draft settlement came back from Mr. Graham
Hastings, Roberts's name was put in as trustee.
Witness said, " I understand you have only a life
estate in part of your property ; what do you in-
tend doing with that ?" Windham said, "I intend
cutting off the entail directly, and I shall get you to
do it." That was the subject of the conversation.
The draft was returned from counsel on the
28th of August. When he said "It is off,"
he said that in reference to what Miss Wil-
loughby had said to him on a previous occasion
when alone. He saw Mr. Windham the day the
draft was returned. Witness asked him whether
he had selected his own trustee, and he said no, he
had not, and he did not care so long as they were
respectable and responsible. He asked him whe-
ther he should put in Roberts's:name, and he replied
yes. Up to that time witness was sure Windham
did not know Roberts. He was sure he did not
Roberts until after his marriage. The draft was
altered, copied, and engrossed. It was executed at
their own house on the 29th. It was sent to Mrs.
Windham's place of abode in Blenheim terrace, St.
John's-wood. Witness's clerk was the attesting
witness. Witness attended the marriage at the re-
quest of Mr. Windham. Witness declined being
made one of the trustees. Windham said that hav-
ing changed the wedding day two of his military
friends were unable to come, and pressed witness to
attend, Witness knew Whidborne and Mrs, Wind-
ham's brother, who was residing with her, Witness
left a few minutes after the marriage. When Miss
Willoughby called she generally came in a one horse
brougham. Witness saw Windham next in Paris,
where he executed the disentailing deeds on the 2d
of September. He gave them up to Mr. Windham's
subsequent solicitor. He saw him at Morley's
afterwards. He often invited witness to go to Fel-
brigg Hall. He went down with Whidborne on the
Saturday, and they shot on the Monday and Tues-
day. The General came on the Wednesday. That
was by the General's arrangement. He heard the
general and Windham talking about the sale of
some property of the value of £l,OOO. The con-
versation lasted about half-an-hour. They did not
come to any arrangement about the land. The
general had lent Windham £l5 and acknowledged
receiving Windham's cheque for it. The general
was introduced to Mrs. Windham and her sisters
and lunched with them. Witness exchanged
cheques for £2OO with Mr. Windham, as he wanted
circular notes to go to Paris. When witness was
in Paris Windham asked him to let him have a
cheque for £l5O, as witness was better known there
than Windham was, and witness not having one
with him sent one for that amount directly he got
to England. During all these interviews Mr.
Windham talked sensibly and as a sound man. A
proceeding was taken against witness in the Court
of Chancery, which annoyed Windham, who said,
" You will catch it, as Vice Chancellor Sir Page
Wood is a bosom friend of my uncle, the general."
Witness said he told him Vice-Chancellor Sir Page
Wood was a perfect gentleman, and he was sure
the application would be dismissed. Mr. Windham
made an affidavit stating the circumstances.

Cross-examined—He did not hear the remarks of
the Vice-Chancellor. The application was dismissed
without costs. Mr. Windham owed hire £2OO,
£l5O, £lOO, and the price of a horse. If he had
said in his affidavit that besides the £350,
Windham owed him £4OO, it was a
mistake. He had forgotten though to
state that he had paid Mr. Attenborough
upwards of £3OO for Mr. Windham, besides the
other sums. That made altogether £7ll that
Windham owed him. Mr. Windham had paid him
no money. The money he paid to Attenborough
was to redeem jewels pledged by Mrs. Windham
when single. Au action was threatened by
Mr. Neal, a solicitor, against Mr. Windham for the
mortgage money advanced upon them, so he paid
it. He gave Mrs. Windham the cheque for £2OO
for Mr. Windham, which the latter told him he
received. He had not the slightest idea of what
his bill of costs would be. Perhaps £5O, besides
£2O for going to Paris. If his affidavit stated that
Mrs. Windham first mentioned her marriage with
Windham to him in June, and not in August, it was
correct. He could not tell where Mrs. Windham
was living on the 18th of June. He knew she first
lived in Orchard-street, and then in Wigmore-
street. On the first occasion she spoke of it, she
might have said that Wind= was going to settle
some thousands a year upon her. On the 3d of
August he first heard Mr. Windham was a ward in
Chancery, and an infant. He did not know whether
Windham ever saw the draft settlement. He told
his clerk to take it to Mrs. Windham's house, for
Mr. and Mrs. Windham to go over it together.
Mrs. Windham said she did not like to get married
and to have to give up her £2,000 a year, Before
Windham came of age witness treated the proposed
marriage as a mere flirtation between boy and girl.
Mrs. Windham said she did not care for Windham,
and said, "I will only marry him in consideration
of a good settlement, and for the sake of my
sister!, of whom 'Windham is very fond. He has
promised to educate them, and to introduce them
into good society
in the country." That she said
before Windham, Witness held the jewels for Mr.
Windham still, for which he had paid Attenbo-
rough.

By the Jury—Witness did not ask Windham how

his uncle was trying to get his property from him,
As far as witness knew Roberts, he considered him
to be a respectable and responsible man. Roberts
has an income of £5,000 a year. He had never
drawn such a marriage settlement before, and he
tried to make it for life, only in this case Mr. Wind-
ham said he had no relative that he cared for, and
he should leave all his 'property to his wife. He
did not dispose of the jewels, as it would have been
a breach of trust.
) The inquiry was then adjourned.

LAN INTELLIG EN CE.—Jan. 16.

ARCHES COURT.
(Before Dr. Lushington.)

THE OFFICE OF THE JUDGE PROMOTED BY THE BISHOP OF
SALISBURY V. THERM DR. ROWLAND WILLIAMS (CLERK).
Dr. Phillimore, Q.C., Mr. Coleridge, Q.C., and
Dr. Swabey appeared for the Bishop of Salisbury ;
and Dr. Deane, Q.C., and FitzjAmes Stephen
.for
the Rev. Dr. Rowland -Williams.

Dr. Deane resumed his argument this morning.
Having replied to the arguments of the counsel for
the promoter on the question of inspiration, he
proceeded to deal with the question of prophecy,
and inquired whether the views on that subject ex-
pressed by the defendant were opposed to the doc-
trines laid down by the standards of the Church of
England. The question was not whether Bishop
Chandler and Dr. Hay were right, as put by his
friends on the other side, but whether Dr. Williams
had said anything inconsistent with the Articles of
Religion, which he contended he had not. The doc-
trine of verbal inspiration had been giverrup by the
other side, and it was admitted that each prophecy
might have a double sense. The learned counsel again
adverted to the three divisions that obtained in all
systems of divinity—let, doctrine; 2d, ritual; and
3d, evidence. Dr. Deane argued that prophecy was
to be regarded as evidence, and, as such, subject to
examination and criticism. On that point he had
two authorities to which he would refer. For one
he was indebted to his learned friend, Mr. Cole-
ridge, who had quoted it in support of the promo-
ter's views. He meant Dr. South's sermon on the
first chapter of the Epistle to the Romans. He also
referred to " Cudworth," and maintained that there
was good authority for the position Dr. Williams
had taken up in reference to the prophecies of
Isaiah. Before Dr. Williams could be condemned
he would ask the Court to pause. Where, supposing
the defendant to be wrong, was the doctrine of the
Church that made such opinions heretical ? Com-
mentators might say so, but not the Church. As to
the ninth count, he remarked that it had been framed
very negligently, for Dr. Williams had expressly
stated in his Essay that he did not deny the reality
of the Prophet Jonah. It had been said that to
deny that Daniel wrote the Book of Daniel was
to jeopardize Christianity, :and Mr. Coleridge,
with that admiration for Dr. Arnold that every
man feels, quoted from his writings in support of
that proposition ; but he would read a letter of that
distinguished man, of the 25th of January, 1840,
which was to be found in his biography, the effect
of which was that there were very likely "genuine
fragments" in the Book of Daniel. Dr. Arnold
held that opinion more than 20 years ago, and he
was not the man to conceal his views from the
world. When the defendant wrote, "It provokes a
smile on serious topics to observe the zeal with
which our critic vindicates the personalty of
Jonah," he meant that the contradiction of the
author provoked the smile. The defendant was
charged in the ninth count with having maintained
that the revelation of St. John, the Epistle to the
Hebrews, and the 2d Epistle of St. Peter were not
parts of the Holy Scripture, and that their autho-
rity was not binding on the Church. That charge
was founded upon the passage in the Essay where,
in quoting Baron Bunsen, it is said that "the
fourth Gospel is the latest of all our genuine
books." That implied:the genuineness of the other
books. That observation applied only to the
chronology and authorship of the books. It had
been contended that it was heretical to say that
the Epistle to the Hebrews bore " traces of being
post Apostolic," but that could not be maintained,
seeing that Dr. Williams admitted that it was au-
thentic. Dr. 'Williams said the book had authority
in the Church, that its contents had a strong bear-
ing on the great scheme of redemption. The 11th
count charges Dr. Williams with affirming "that
the statements of Holy Scripture as to historical
facts may be read and understood in a wholly
figurative sense, and in a non-natural sense." Dr.
Williams did not entertain any doubt as to the
truth of the history contained in the Old Testa-
ment; but he inquired whether the events brought
about by the providence of God—the Deluge, for
instance—could not be accounted for by the opera-
tion of fixed and immutable laws. That was not
heresy. As to the smiting of the Assyrians, diffe-
rent views had been entertained by Bibilical critics
as to the agency by which their destruction was ac-
complished. Some had accounted for it by suppos-
ing that the Assyrian host had been destroyed by
pestilence ; others that the agency was the blast of
a hot wind.

Dr. Lushington —ls there an atom of evidence to
support such a proposition in reference to the slay-
ing of the first-born of the Egyptians ?
Dr. Deane—No, but that is a construction that
is permissible.
Dr, Lushington—Then, it was only an ingenious
construction.

Dr. Deane—This is a criminal prosecution. If
the Court should hold that only a literal interpreta-
tion of this and other passages in Scripture is allow-
able, then the ranks of the Church will be thinned.
However, so far as regards the passing through the
Red Sea, no ingenious construction was necessary,
for the Bible says that the waters were divided by
a strong east wind. The defendant in his' Essay,"
so far from impugning, had really vindicated the
historical accuracy of the book of the Exodus from
the attacks of the men with whom the pro-
moter desired to class him—Volney and others.
A great deal had been made of the extract
in the 12th charge, containing the words, "The
deep drama of the heart and mind became ester-
, nalised into a commercial transfer, and this effected
by a form of ritual." It had been said by his learned
friends that if Dr. Williams alluded in that passage
to the corruptions of the Romish Church he should
have removed any misconception as to his meaning
by a note in some of the many editions the volume
had passed through. That was not necessary, for
it was abundantly clear from the immediately
preceding passage, in which the word " transub-
stantiation" occurred, that it was applicable to the
Roman Church and ritual. Having very briefly re-
marked upon the 13th count, he passed to the 14th,
and maintained that Dr, Williams had not given ex-
pression to views with reference to the incarnation of
our Lord inconsistent with Romans, chapter 1, 4th
verse, and referred to the "Homilies" and " Dr.
South's Sermons" (37th.) As to the 16th count, in
which were quoted the passage from the Essay,
" How long shall we bear this fiction of an external
revelation," these words were applicable to the
Roman Church, and that was evidenced by the con-
text. How otherwise could the following sentence be
explained,—" If Protestant Europe is to escape
those shadows of the twelfth century, which, with
ominous recurrence, are closing round us, to Baron
Bunsen will belong a foremost place among the
champions of light and right." There was no neces-
sity for the author to explain his meaning here, for
any intell'gent man would understand the applica-
tion of the passage. It had been called "offensive
doctrine." Would the Court punish for offensive
doctrine ? It might be offensive to the disciples of
Loyola, but the prosecutor had failed to show that
it was contrary to the doctrine of the Church of
England. Much confusion had been caused by
neglecting' to distinguish the parts of the Bible to
which inspiration was attributed by the Church.
The essay of the defendant did not militate against
the true theory of the Church of England, that
Holy Scripture is the Word of God—that the
Word of God is contained in it. It was an
error in the highest degree misleading to say
that any isolated passage, because found in the
Bible, is to be regarded as he Word of God, and re-
ferred to the Dean of Canterbury's "Commentary on
the Acts of the Apostles" (chapter 7). As to the
charges brought against Dr. Williams in reference
to prophecy, he said that the defendant had not
dealt so much with prophecy as with its treatment ;
the views he had expressed coincided with those of
Bacon's " Advancement of Learning," book 11. He
argued that the counts relating to propitiation and
original sin, as they stood, could not be admitted.
The learned counsel concluded as follows :—Mr.
Coleridge had said that the readers of this Essay of
Dr. Williams, "if, unfortunately, they should fol-
low him ou the path which he has traced out, will
arrive not merely at the dreary country of doubt
and infidelity, but eventually at the barren and
hopeless strand of a despairinr, atheism." That
sketch was drawn by a master hand; but possibly
one might suggest something else than infidelity
indicated, not only ha the unextracted but in the
extracted passages of this Essay. Has not super-
stition had its victims ? There may be a ritual,
there may be a faith, and a system of religion that
may speak to the senses and the imagination, and
yet leave the heart untouched and unpurified. The
eve, the ear, the very sense of smell, may each and
all be gratified, while no light can reach the souls
of those who travel through a country where super-
stition dominates. Scarce a ray of light reaches
the unhappy soul, and if it penetrates it is obscured.
It:resembles an ignis fatutts, having no mark of its
Divine origin ; for the priest has stepped in between
man and his God ; the Virgin or a saint stands in
the place of our Saviour. There is a medium course
that can be pursued. The Court knows full well