The Sun.
London, England, 1862-12-02 00:00:00

THE RUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, DHUMiglt 2, 1802.

vice in the North American and West India station,
was inspected on Saturday last by Capt. William
G. Luard, of her Majesty's ship Formidable, 26,
flagship of Vice-Admiral Sir William G. Hope
Johnstone, Commander-in-Chief at Sheerness. The
inspection was made previous to her departure for
Plymouth en route for Cuba. She left Sheerness
yesterday.
The Conquestador, fourth-rate sailing vessel,
which has for some time been used as a powder ship
at Woolwich, has recently been repaired and re-
fitted at Sheerness dock. She was towed by the
Medusa, paddlewheel tender to her Majesty's
ship Cumberland, Master Jabez Loane, from
Sheerness for Plymouth, on Saturday last, where
she will be employed as a powder vessel at that
station.

Rear-Admiral of the Red Sir Thomas Sabine
Pasley, appointed Dec. 4, 1857, Admiral Superin-
tendent of the dockyard at Devonport, retires from
his duties there to-day (Monday), and will be suc-
ceeded by Rear-Admiral of the Blue Thomas
Matthew Charles Symonds, C.B. _

The large target erected at Shoeburyness for the
recent experiments with the 70-pounder, 120 poun-
der, and other Whitworth guns, is to be at once
repaired with the iron plates used in the construc-
tion of the Achilles, 50, and the Royal Oak, 34, at
Chatham Dockyard, in readiness for some further
experiments which will be made under the direction
of the Ordnance Select Committee. The target is
to be repaired under the superintendence of Mr. W.
Baskcamb, one of the foremen of shipwrights at
Chatham Dockyard.

have hit you !" Mr. Leigh said, " I will show
you." He unbuttoned his trousers, and I saw that
he was wounded. The blood was flowing, but not
to any extent. *I took Mr. Leigh into a private
room, and sent for a doctor (Mr. Dunn), who dressed
the wound. By Mr. Dunn's advice he remained at
the hotel. He died on Sunday morning about a
quarter after 11 o'clock. They had not quarrelled.
They were laughing and joking with each other all
the dinner-time.

Mr. Corrie—As far as you can judge—indeed,
you say so—it was an accident ?
Witness—Purely so.

Inspector Brimacombe said that Mr. Leigh, the
elder brother of the deceased, was in court. He
knew nothing of the facts of the case.
Mr. Corrie—There seems to be no doubt as to the
facts of the case. The witness saw the whole trans-
action. Of course I shall require more evidence.
You know nothing of the case, Mr. Leigh ?
Mr. Leigh—No. My brother said nothing to me
about it. I believe he told the surgeon it was more
his fault than that of Mr. Morris. My brother was
24 years of age, and was reading for the Bar.
Mr. Corrie—l will remand him. I will take bail
for his appearance. (To the prisoner)—Can you get
bail?

The Prisoner—Yee, sir.
Mr. Corrie--I shall require two sureqes in VO
each, and your own recognizance in £lOO.
Ultimately Mr. Corrie accepted one bail in £lOO
instead of two in £5O, and, the recognizances having
been entered into, the prisoner was liberated.

LAW INTELLIGENCE, Dec. 1.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Sittings at Nisi Prius, after Term, at Westminster,
before Mr. Baron Martin and a Special Jury.)
BITEM A.N V. IN INDRAM-MR. AND MRS. WINDHAM

MORE DISCLOSURES.
This was an action brought by Mr. Bramston
Bateman, a livery-stable keeper and jobmaster, re-
siding at Radnor -mews, Paddington, against the
defendant, :Mr. William Frederick Windham, late
of Felbrigg Hall, Norfolk, to recover a sum of £9
165., for hire of broughams and horses, under cir-
cumstances detailed in the subjoined evidence. The
defendant paid 30s. into court, and as to the rest
pleaded never indebted.
Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., and Mr. Lloyd were coun-
sel for the plaintiff ; and Mr. Kerslake, Q.C., and
Mr. D. Keane for the defendant.
Mr. Huddleston, in opening the case, said the
sum sought to be recovered was for broughams used
by Mrs. Windham from Jan. 31 to Feb. 8 in the
present year, and during the time the investigation
was going on at Westminster into the sanity of Mr.
Windham, her husband, whose history was so well
known to the public. The carriages wore supplied
while Mrs. Windham was living with her husband
at 34, Clarendon-gardens, Paddington. She some-
times went in them shopping, sometimes to her
solicitor's, and on other occasions to Westminster
Hall, to hear how the inquiry was going on. On
the Bth Feb. she was driven about town all day,
and then to the Eastern Counties Railway Station,
for the purpose of going to Felbrigg Hall. The
learned counsel said he should be able to prove, an
expressed or implied contract on the part of defen-
dant, and that he had himself promised to pay the
plaintiff.
Mr. Bramston Bateman, the plaintiff, said he
knew the defendant, Mr. Windham, but not his
wife. In January last a servant, who said he was
,Mr. Windham'a pad groom, called and ordered a
carriage to go to 34, Clarendon-gardens. That was
on the 31st. He sent the brougham with a single
horse and the coachman. It was away five hours
and a quarter, and the charge was lls. 6d. for the
carriage and 3s. 6d. for the coachman ; from the 2d
to the Bth he sent a carriage and pair each day. His
whole charges were reasonable. He sent his bill, by
order, to Clarendon-gardens. Afterwards he re-
ceived a letter from Mr. Windham's solicitors re-
questing him to send another account, and he did
so. On Feb. 28 he met Mr. Windham in Clifton-
gardens and asked him to pay his bill, and he said
if he would send it next day to 10, Clifton-gardens,
where he was then living, he would pay it if it
were £lOO, adding, " thank God I am not broken
yet." He sent him the bill but he never got the
money.
Cross-examined—l had seen Mr. Windham be-
fore. I met him in Clifton-gardens. I had met him
four years before at Hampton races. He was with
a friend of mine. I do not know who else was with
him. He was getting into a Hansom cab. When
I met him in Clifton-gardens he was coming out of
a public-house.
J. Lucy, a coachman of the plaintiff's, said he
drove the brougham on the 31st of January, and
also from the 3d to the 7th of February. He drove
Mrs. Windham and, he believed, her sister.
Sometimes he had two, sometimes three, and
sometimes four inside. Sometimes he drove her to
her solicitor's, Clifton-street, Bond-street, and to
various shops. Once there was a gentleman in the
brougham, but he could not say whether it was
Mr. Windham, as he did not know him.
Cross-examined—I do not know whether he was
a foreigner. He was a dark gentleman, and came
from Clarendon-gardens.
William Wright, another coachman, said that on
the Bth of February he drove Mrs. Windham to
several places about town, and finally set her down
at the Eastern Counties Railway. There was a gen-
tleman inside with her. Mrs. Windham told him
to send in the bill on Monday, and it should be
paid. The pad groom went in a cab with her lug-
withwitness that Mrs. Windham
him on the box of the
wbg
raaogsuegg,
going
m
brougham.
by caHe
t
h came with
train.
told
Cross-examined—I did not know who the gentle-
man was inside. He was not, I think, a foreigner.
I brought him back, and I put him down in South-
ampton-street, Fitzroy-square.
George C. Bateman, the son of the plaintiff, said
he took the bill to No. 10, Clifton-gardens, and
gave it to the footman. He said Mr. Windham was
at home, and went into a back room on the ground
floor. Witness heard some one say, " If it is cor-
rect, I will send a cheque in the morning." Sup-
posed it was Mr. Windham, but did not know. The
footman came and told him what he had heard.
John Smith, a builder, said he knew the plain-
tiff, and while working at a house in Clifton-road,
on the 28th of February last, he saw him talking to
a gentleman. The gentleman, whom he did not
know at the time, was getting into a cab, and he
heard him say to the plaintiff, " If she does not
pay I will."
Cross-examined—l was in the balcony of a house.
Chichester-re
eersgteAstPlient, a cheesemonger and poulterer,
Westbourne-terrace, said he knew
Mr. Windham, and the person they called Mrs.
Windham. (Laughter.) He supplied them with
goods at 10,Clifton-gardens, but he never saw them
there. They afterwards took a house at 3, West-
bourne-terrace, and he saw them there several
times. When he stood at his shop door he could
see all that was going on at their door, and he could
also see into the dining-room. He had seen them
dining together. He took proceedings in the county
court for his bill against Mr. Windham. Before
that he saw him, and he said he was going to his
solicitor's, and if he (witness) called next morning
he shoald be paid. He went next morning and saw
a lady who answered, he supposed, for Mrs. Wind-
ham, but he did not know her. He did not get his
money on that occasion, but it was paid before the
case came to trial in tne county uoott. Tie seemed
a cheque, but he could not say whose.
By Mr. Baron Martin—At this time were they
living together?
Witness—Yes. I saw them walking together,
reading together, and in the carriage together, fre-
quently.
Mr. Angell, an attorney, proved having sued Mr.
Windham for debts contracted with several trades-
men who supplied goods to the house at Clarendon-
gardens, and that all these debts had been paid.
This being the evidence for the plaintiff,
Mr. Kerslake, in opening the case on the part of
the defence, said that though the sum claimed in
this action was trifling, it was only one of a series
of claims against Mr. Windham, and therefore in-
volved an important principle. He would not go
through the history of the early connection of
Mr. and Mrs. Windham. They were all aware
who Mrs. Windham was, and what her life
was before Mr, Windham became infatuated with
her and married her, and the only question
was whether Mr. Windham was liable far this and
the other debts which she had contracted under
similar circumstances. He contended that he was
not liable. Mrs. Windham was a lady living under
the protection of a gentleman or gentlemen when he
hr
ieecda mh
eeraitnt r ct ed
August, by h
18e6r b
1, eauty
wasty; and
minorwhen o
rh m
ae a
wardr-
in the Court of Chancery, or had only just escaped
from that court. For what purpose that marriage
was brought about was not material to the present
inquiry ; but there could be no doubt that it was
with the view of getting the extravagant settle-
ment made on that event. In addition to other be-
nefits she derived under such settlement an annuity
of £BOO a year settled on her until 1869, and after
that period she was to receive £1,500 a year,
charged on the Felbrigg and other estates in
Norfolk. Almost up to the moment of her mar-
riage she was living with some other gentle-
man, but she accompanied her husband abroad
and remained with hm a week in Paris. From
the moment he married her he had no control over
her of any sort or kind, She did what she liked,

went where she liked, and would listen to no re-
monstrance on his part. They came back from
Paris in the early part of September, and lived
together at Felbrigg for a short time. He wished
her to remain there and be the mistress of his
house, but she went against her will, and the object
of her leaving afterwards became apparent. She
was acquainted with a person of whom she was
much fonder than Mr. Windham, and went with
him to Dublin and elsewhere, and lived with him in
open and barefaced adultery. At the latter end of
December, 1861, proceedings in lunacy were com-
menced against Mr. Windham, and continued
through the whole of that month and January fol-
lowing. During the whole of that period she re-
mained away from Felbrigg against Mr. Windham's
will, though every comfort and luxury were provided
for her there, including carriage and horses. She
chose, however, to remain away, but she was pro-
vided with ample funds, and besides the proceeds
of the settlement she had jewels of great value. She
lived in open adultery with the person in question,
a singer of great eminence, at Clarendon-gardens;
and if she chose to leave her husband, and more
especially for the purpose of committing adultery
with other men, she could not legally pledge her
husband's credit for debts contracted by her while
living in that immoral state. She actually drove
about in these very broughams with her paramour.
Mr. Windham during this time remained at Fel-
brigg, and was totally ignorant of the career she
was pursuing. Under these circumstances he was
clearly not responsible for the debt now sought to
be recovered.

Mr. Frederick William Windham, the defendant,
was then called, and examined by Mr. Kerslake.
He said—l married my wife in August, 1861. Her
name was Agnes Ann Rogers, but she passed under
the name of Willoughby. Before then she had been
living under the protection of a gentleman. After
the marriage we went to Paris and remained there
a fortnight. The eldest sister of my wife went with
me. I was then on good terms with my wife. In
September we came to London, and stayed a night
at Morley's Hotel. Next morning we went home
to Felbrigg. That was on the 16th or 17th. We
remained together at Felbrigg until the beginning
of October. She then went away without me,
and went to Dublin. She said her doctor recom-
mended her to go there. She remained away a
fortnight or three weeks, and then came back
to Felbrigg. She remained there till the middle
of November, and then went away again. I
stayed at Felbrigg until the commission of lunacy
was issued in December. When she left she
did so against my consent, and I did not know
where she went to. The commission lasted
through December and January. I first met her
outside here during the inquiry. I requested her
to come back, and she said she would after the trial.
She kept away from me until the Bth of July last.
I did not know that she was living at Clarendon-
gardens until Mr. Davies informed me after the
trial. I had nothing to do with taking the house.
I had carriages and horses at Felbrigg, and also
some carriages in London. I had a phaeton in town
during the trial. I had also a brougham at my
house, 132, Piccadilly. She could have lived there
if she chose. After the Bth of February she re-
mained with me three weeks at Felbrigg. After-
wards she came to London to see the doctor, on the
groand of being ill. She went to a house I had pro-
vided for her in town in Clifton-gardens. When I
went up there she had gone. I understand that
she afterwards went to Spain. In August, 1862,
I was reconciled to her. She kept on writing let-
ters begging and praying me to let her come back.
At last I found it was impossible to bear
with her any longer. I lived with her. in West-
bourne terrace in July, and in August we went on
an excursion in a yacht to Boulogne. I know
nothing as to what she did between the 31st of
January and the Bth of February, or where she was.
I was never at Clarendon-gardens in my life. Ido
not know Mr. Bateman, the plaintiff. I never said
I would pay him the bill if it were £lOO. I once
met a man dressed like a Norfolk pig-dealer, who
informed me that he had received a cheque from
Mrs. Windham signed by me. (Laughter.) I said
that was very probable, but I knew nothing about
it. I took the house at 10, Clifton-gardens for her
for a month. That was in February last. I paid
twenty-one guineas to the auctioneer for the month.
She went there on the Saturday and left on the
Monday. I never saw the plaintiff at Hampton
races. I left Eton at Christmas, 1856. I was with
my mother at Torquay in 1857, and in 1858 I was
at a private tutor's. lam now 22 years of age.
Cross-examined by Mr. Huddleston—l was at
Hampton races with my mother about three years
ago, that is the only time I ever was there. I do
not know that my wife's illness was caused by me.
Were you not labouring from disease P—l might
have been.
Were you not ill at the time you married Miss
Willoughby—l decline to answer any such ques-
tions. They have nothing to do with this case.
Was it not in consequence of her illness commu-
nicated by you that she came up to town. I decline
to answer the question.
Mr. Baron Martin—l think he is quite justified
in saying so.
Defendant—The first time she left me she went
to Dublin, and not to see a doctor. The doctor saw
her at Felbrigg Hall first, and she came to town to
see him in February. I believe she was ill while
she was away from me.
Mr. Huddleston—Was she ill when she was
with you ?
Defendant—l shall not answer the question.
Yates, my pad groom, did not come to London with
Mrs. Windham. She would not let him go with
her. Ido not know if Messrs. Gregory, my solici-
tors, have applied to the plaintiff for the amount of
this bill. I gave them instructions after the trial
to get in all my bills and settle them. I assisted to
get out a list, and we put down Mrs. Windham's
debts as far as we could ascertain. I cannot recol-
lect if the plaintiff's bill was amongst the lot. My
solicitors were instructed to get in all the bills and
discharge them. I heard from Mr. Davies of
Mrs. Windham's leaving Clarendon-gardens. I
saw her twice during the trial. She drove down
in her brougham to Westminster Hall. I spoke
to her on each occason in presence of my solici-
tor, but I do not recollect if I shook hands with
her. She told me she was staying at the Euston
Hotel, but I did not go there to see her. I
did not see her after she left Felbrigg Hall
till I saw her in the brosgham ; in fact, I
made no inquiries about her. I hired a house in
Clifton-gardens. When she saw me she asked me
how the trial was going on. I did not make a dis-
turbance at Clifton-gardens. There was no party
there at the time I went there, only my servants.
My footman was there in possession of the plate. I
was not going to leave it there except in charge of
my servant. I had no chance of living there with
Mrs. Windham. She went there on Saturday. I
went back to Felbrigg Hall, and when I came up
again on the Monday she was gone. (Laughter, in
which the defendant heartily joined). I think her
running away from Clifton-gardens is the same as
her running away from Felbrigg Hall. I went to
live with her at Westbourne-terrace in July, in
consequence of the letters I received from her solici-
tor, and also from herself, in which she begged me
to come back and she would live quietly with me.
I remained there with her about two months, till I
found what she had been at again. (Laughter.) I
afterwards learnt that she had been to Spain and
Dublin. •
Mr. Huddleston—Did you know who she had
been with to Dublin ?
Defendant—She said with the opera company.
(Laughter.) That is all I know about it.
Had you heard that she had been living with
Giuglini ?
I heard many reports, but nothing positive. I
made no inquiries. I did not troable myself about
it. I did not inquire where she had been before. I
went back to live with her. She asked me to forgive
her for what had passed.
For what were you to forgive her ?—That I can't
tell.

Had you not karnt that she had been living with
this opera singer ?—Not positively.
llad you not reason to believe it P—l never saw
them together ?
Did she promise to give him up ?—She said
nothing to me about it. (Laughter.)
Did you not make inquiries about it P—No, I
minded my own business, not hers. When I went
back to her in July I did not ask her where she
had been. I had signed a deed of separation, and I
had no reason to ask her. I heard she was living
in Westbourne-terrace alone.
Who did you hear she had been in Dublin with P
—Her sister and a servant.
Not with Giuglini ?-oh, yes, with the opera
company. There were reports that she had been
seen with Giuglini. Having signed a deed of sepa-
ration I had nothing more to think of her. I heard
enough about Giuglini during the trial. I have
heard that Giuglini used to visit her in the day
time. I suppose at Clarendon-gardens. I do not
know where she was living.
Did you not think it worth your while to inquire?
—Certainly not. During the trial I was advised by
my solicitor not to:do so. I had my interest to look
after then, not hers. (Laughter.)
Were you at Clifton-gardens on the 28th Febru-
ary ?—I was there about two hours. I never saw a
soul there except the footman, and I went back to
Shoreditch station. I recollect a shabbily-dressed
man, looking, as we should say in Norfolk, " like a
pig dealer," who said something to me as I got hin to
the cab. It might have been the plaintiff, but eis
dressed differently now. Ido not know the plain-
tiff. I do not recollect what I said to the person
who accosted me on that occasion.
Re.examined,--Mrs. Windham had left me before