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

.7 HE WINDHAM CASE.

The inquiry was resumed yesterday morning for the
eleventh time.
Dr. Forbes Winslow, in his cross-examination by Sir H.
Cairns, said—My first interview with Mr. Windham was
in the afternoon, and lasted till dinner time. At the conclu-
sion of the interview, I asked Mr. Windham to write a let-
ter, which he did, and which Dr. Mayo has. I was first
consulted about this case at the end of the last, or the be-
ginning of the present month. It was Mr. Nicholls, of
Norwich, who came to me first about it. I had not seen
Gen. Windham and Mr. Neale before that. Dr, Neale first
called on me two days after I saw Mr. Nicholls. I saw
Gen. Windham for the first time about a week or ten days
after that. I will not undertake to say that it was not the
first week in November that I saw Gen. Windham, but my
diary would fix the date. At the interview in Cavendish-
square we all sat round the table. I was furnished with
the affidavits previous to the inter view by Mr. Field. They
were the affidavits on the side of the petitioners only. When
I said I had not seen the medical affidavits, I meant those
on the other side. I did see the medical affidavits on the
side of the petitioners. They were placed in my hands three
or four days before the first interview. I suggested that Dr.
Mayo should be associated with me. He also was furnished
with the affidavits. Dr. Mayo and myself had a short con•
sultation previous to the interview. I made a few notes of
the result of the interview, but I have not got them here.
I was supplied by Mr. Field with a list of certain questions
which I was to put to Mr. Windham. I have not got
that list with me. (At the suggestion of Sir H. Cairns,
backed by the recommendation of the Master, Dr. Winslow
sent for this list, his notes of the interview, and his diary.)
I had no other directions as to the subjects upon which
I was to question Mr. Windham. I had seen General
Windham before the 11th of December five or six times.
The longest of these interviews probably extended over
half an hour. I will not swear it was not over an hour.
Twice 1 saw him at his house, and the other interviews
were at my own house. lam quite satisfied that the two
interviews I had with Mr. Windham were sufficient to
enable me to form an opinion as to his state of mind. I came
to a conclusion at the first interview, but I did not express
any opinion until after the second. I thought it necessary
to see him again, to satisfy my own mind as to certain points
upon which I had not formed any strong or conclusive
opinion at the first interview. For instance, as to his pre-
sent mode of living. Ido not recollect having seen Mr.
Field or General Windham between the two interviews,nor
that I had any communication with them. I will not swear
that I had not, but I have no recollection. I formed my
opinion of his incapacity to manage himself from various
circumstances ; first, from the fact of his having, against
tl.O advice of medical men, contracted marriage while labor-
ing under a loathesome and communicatable disease ; then
from his callousness to all ordinary feeling, when ho knew
that his wife's paramour had slept with her or in the same
house with her the night before her marriage ; further, I
do not think a man capable of managing himself who could
act, as Mr. Windham admitted he had, as a guard and en-
gine-driver on a railway train, or who was unable to form a
right appreciation of the position in which he had placed
himself by contracting such a marriage, and living in
friendship with a man who boasted of having been his wife's
pat amour previously to her marriage, Those are the prin-
cipal points upon which I formed my opinion as to his in-
capacity to manage himself. The way in which he admitted
having, shortly after coming into possession of his pro-
perty, involved himself in such serious liability ; the fact
of his quietly acquiescing in a course of proceeding which,
if he had the capacity to reason upon the consequences of
his own act, he must have known would ruin his property
—I allude to the sale of his timber ; in fact of his living
with Roberts,and his apparent indifference as to the amount
of the expenditure he was incurring,and his general remarks
in answer to questions relating to his affairs and the gift of
the £14,000 ofjewellry to Mrs. Windham as compensation
for the injuries he supposed he had done to her. These are
the main grounds on which I formed my conclusion as to
his incapacity to manage his affairs. I arrived at my con-
clusion from the questions I put to and the answers I re-
ceived from Mr. Windham in combination with what had

been told meby General Windham and Mr. Field. I assumed
that what they told me was correct. I assumed that the
statements they made as to the value of the timber were
corree, and that under the contract the estate of Felbrigg
would be denuded .of timber, that the £14,000 of jewels had
really been given to Mrs. Windham in compensation. If a
young man just coming into a large property contracted
gambling debts, involving hie estate to a ruinous extent, I
should not consider from that fact alone that he was of un-
sound mind and incapable of managing his affairs. If such
a person contracted a marriage with an unchaste woman I
should not consider that alone evidence of unsoundness of
mind. If he made a present of £6,000 of jewellery to his
wife on his coming of age or at his marriage I should not
consider that as proof of unsoundness of mind ; but I take
all the circumstances and all the facts together, end draw my
conclusions from the whole. In the conversation at the
interview Mr. Windham told me that medical gentleman
had informed him that the sore upon his person was a mere
abrasion of skin, and not the result of disease. I had not
heard that just before the marriage he had consulted a me-
dical man, who told him he might marry safely. Ha did
not tell me, in reference to the gentleman who slept in Mrs.
Windham's house the night before marriage, that he had
engaged to have no more communication with her. Although
I. do not consider that the mere fact of a man marrying a
woman of previously unchaste character proves imbecility
of mind, I think it makes a material difference when the
husband knows that her paramour was with her up to the
nil;ht previous to the marriage. I think such a marriage
under such circumstances is an act which no man who was
not drunk, drugged, or insane, would commit. 1 did not
know that the house in Wimpole-street was taken by Mrs.
Windham's brother for the purpose of the wedding, and
that the brother slept in the house on the night in
question as well as the gentleman referred to. I do
not think a taste for driving railway engines would be
proof of incapacity in a man to manage his own affairs, but
it is one of the elements of the case, and we must look at all
the elements in combination. I take that together with
various other acts of folly. He admitted that he had acted
as guard to a train and driven an engine. He also admitted
that he had acted as a waiter. I think the driving of an
engine by an amateur, though competent, is an act of folly.
I do not think driving a four-in-hand or a stage coach by
an amateur who is competent would be an act of folly. An
amateur who takes charge of a railway engine might im-
peril the lives of hundreds of people, but an amateur who
drives a four-in-hand or a stage coach imperils only the
lives of his friends, who go with him voluntarily. It would
be different in the cage of a public stage coach, but in that