The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-11 00:00:00

THE WINDHAM CASE.

The adjourned inquiry—into the state of mind of
Mr. W. F. Windham, of Felbrigg-hall, Norfolk,
was resumed yesterday, in the Westminster Ses-
sions-house, before Mr. Warren, Q.C., one of the
Masters in Lunacy, and a special jury.
Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C., Mr. Field, and Mr.
Hume Williams appeared for the petitioners ; Mr.
Charles Russell for Lady Sophia Elizabeth Giubilei,
the mother of the alleged lunatic; Sir Hugh Cairns,
Q.C., Mr. Karslake, Q.C., and Mr. Milward for Mr.

William Frederick Windham ; and Mr. Coleridge,
Q.C., for Mrs. Windham.
The removal from the Court of Exchequer to the
Westminster Sessions house is a most unfortu-
nate one. We believe it was compulsory, but that
is all that can be said in its favour. In point of
accommodation and convenience the new court is
almost as bad as could be imagined. Yesterday the
jury were crowded upon the bench like herrings in
a barrel ; counsel were separated from their solici-
tors, and the public were virtually excluded alto-
gether. To make matters worse, there was nobody
present acquainted with the ventilating arrange-
ments of the court, which seem to be of the most
elaborate description, and during the day the seeds
were sown of many a severe cold and sore throat.
At one moment the atmosphere was close and hot
as that of an oven ; in the next it was cooled and
agitated by numerous contending breezes, which,
rushing in from different points, played in the most
lively manner about the heads and legs of all who
had the misfortunate to be present. Mr. Kerslake,
who has been suffering from a cold for several days,
had a small hurricane blowing in to his right ear for
five hours. He bore the infliction with exemplary
patience and fortitude; but it would not be surpris-
ing if he should appear to-day with a peculiarity
in the sound of his voice as strange and striking as
that attributed to his client.

It was arranged that counsel should be present
at the interview which the Master and the jury
propose to have with Mr. Windham at the close of
the case.

Captain Ives, examined by Mr. Karslake—l am
a county magistrate and deputy-lieutenant of Nor-
folk, and have known the Windham family for
many years. I first met young Windham about two
years ago at a dinner party in Norwich. At that
time Mr. Horrocks was living with him. Mr.
Windham acted like any other gentleman in the
room. Shortly afterwards he invited me to Felbrigg
to meet the hounds and asked me to send my horses.
I accepted the invitation, which was given through
Horrocks, and went to Felbrigg on the 10th
of January, 1860. There was nobody in the house
except Mr. Horrocks. I stayed three days and four
nights. On one of the evenings Mr., Mrs., and Miss
Scott and Captain Windham dined there. One day
Mr. Windham went out to dine with Lord Suffield ;
Mr. Horrocks remained with me. I went out with
the hounds twice; Mr. Windham accompanied me.
Ho rode a horse belonging to Lord Suffield. He
dined at my house at the end of January. During
my stay at Felbrigg he behaved like a gentleman,
as far as I could judge, and he rode very well
with the hounds. Lord Suffield lent him a horse on
two occasions while I was there. I went into the
stables several times with Mr. Windham. Neither
there nor in the hunting-field did I ever .see any
cruelty on his part towards the horses. Last sum-
mer I met him frequently in London. Mrs. Ives
was in London at the time, and was in the habit of
riding with me in the park. We used to see Mr.
Windham frequently in the park riding. He
joined us once or twice. I liked the look of the
horse he was riding one day, and asked him whether
he would sell it. He said he had just bought it for
X4O, and seemed disinclined to part with it. As
an inducement I offered him £5O for the animal,
thinking he could easily get another for himself,
for I considered him to be a good judge of horses.
I have seen him driving once since he married. I
Was going through Aylsham, and I saw him driving
n four-in-hand down the Norwich road. I over-
took him very soon. He pulled on one side, and I
drove up alongside of him. I asked him about the
horse I had fancied in London, and he told me it
had met with an accident and I could not have it at
all. He drove very steadily on that occasion. I
believe him to be a person of sound mind.
Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers—l had an im-
pression that he was a fast driver, and thought he
might try to pass me on the Norwich road, but he
made no attempt to do so. I had heard that he
had driven the mail cart once from Cromer to Ayls-
ham, and that circumstance may have given me the
notion that he was a fast driver. I was invited to
Felbrigg by Mr. Horrocks at the request of Mr.
Windham. I had gone to bed when Mr. Windham
returned from the dinner at Lord Suffield's. When

lady at Torquay. I have not heard that he was in
the habit of falling m love with young ladies.
By the Master—l never saw him waiting at table
in the dress of a page.
Re-examined—l should call old Mr. Windham a
hasty man.
By the Jury—l know General Windham very
well. He has never expressed hims3l t in an un-
kindly manner tonards his nephew in my hearing.
Sir Henry Robinson—l live near Felbrigg, and
made Mr. Windham's acquaintance about a year
ago at a dinner given by the last witness. I spoke
to him about shooting and other matters. His con-
duct during the evening was that of a gentleman.
I was present at a review near Cromer. Mr. Wind-
ham was mounted and acted as aide-de-camp. He
rode rather fast, and was not quite careful enough
of the spectators, but otherwise his conduct was
quite proper. In August last I gave an archery
ball. Mr. Windham was invited, but did not come
in consequence of his marriage.
Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers—Mr. Wind-
ham talked rather loudly at dinner, but not so
as to attract attention. The review near Cromer
was not an important affair. The mounted force
consisted of about half a score of irregular cavalry.
(A laugh.) Mr. Windham was aide-de camp to the
commander, Mr. Charles Buxton, and carried his
orders from one part of the field to another. (A
laugh.) He did not wear a cocked hat and feathers,
but he had a sword by his side. He rode at a brisk
trot, and when the coast was clear he broke into a
gallop. I believe the troops ultimately made a
eharge. (A laugh.)
Mrs. Voysey said she had kept a boarding-house
at Eton for eight years. Mr. Windham came to her
house in the Easter quarter of 1855, and stayed till
July, 1856. She had from 16 to 20 boys in her
house when he was there. She saw them daily, and
was always present with them at dinner and supper.
Windham was a decidedly noisy boy, but he was
always obedient to witness and treated her with
respect. No complaint of his conduct was made to
her personally. He associated with the other boys
in the house on equal terms. She heard of his
being called "mad Windham," That was a very
common thing at Eton. At the present moment
there were several boys called "mad." He was not
extravagant, rather the contrary. After he left her
house she saw him from time to time in the street,
and she had seen him once since he left Eton. On
that occasion his manner was perfectly gentlemanly
and proper. She considered him to be peculiar, but
he was decidedly a boy of sound mind. She had
appeared as a witness much against her will.
Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers—Windham
was noisy and rackety in the house, but he was not
in the habit of slamming doors and shouting about
the passages. He was once rude to one of the ser-
vants, and was punished for it. She did not think
he swore at the servant. The epithet "mad" was
not one which they paid much attention to at
Eton. She did not remember receiving a complaint
about his doing injury to his bed. When he was in
her house he could take care of himself, but she
might have said that it would be advisable to have
some one to look after and guide him.
Re-examined—She had read a good deal about
him in the newspapers. When she last saw him he
was quite able to manage himself.
By the Jury—Windham left her house in conse-
quence of a misunderstanding between Lady Sophia
and herself. She thought he was a boy who would
be easily led.
Mrs. Sophia Gibson, examined by Sir H. Cairns,
said she was head boys maid at Mr. Balston's, one
of the masters at Eton, when Mr. Windham lodged
there. She never saw him at all extravagant—in-
deed, quite the reverse ; and she heard him say that
he had been warned by his father not to get into
debt at Eton. Lord Marsham was his most intimate
friend. On one occasion Lord Marsham fell upon a
knife which Mr. Windham held in his hand, but
that made no difference in their friendship ; it was
always considered an accident. Windham was
rough and rude, but nobody brought his best be-
. haviour to school. She considered him to be of
perfectly sound mind.
Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers—Windham
was not particularly noisy. She never heard him
called " mad." Many boys were called mad at Eton
and it was generally the more clever boys who were
termed so. (A laugh.) Windham was not the
cleanest boy at Eton, but he was not particularly
dirty in his habits. There was something peculiar
in the sound of his voice, but she did not recollect
seeing the saliva running from his mouth. She had
seen him with a dirty face and hands, but Eton
boys were very often dirty.
Re-examined—lt often happened that the ring-
I leader was called mad.

I overtook him on the Norwich road ;07,11;; was by
himself. I have not seen him since that day. When
I met him in the park last summer he was gene-
rally riding alone. He joined Mrs. Ives :and
me once or twice, but generally if I wanted
to speak to him, I turned and rode with
him. He rode rather faster than we did. I
saw him ride once with a lady who breaks in
horses. It was not Miss Gilbert, but I think it
was a lady of good character. That was the only
time I saw him riding with a lady. Mr. Horrocks
and he did not seem to be on very good terms. Mr.
Windham did not appear to like his tutor. At the
dinner party of which I have spoken Mr. Horrocks
sat opposite Mr. Windham.
Re-examined—l formed the opinion that Mr.
Windham and Mr. Horrocks were not very good
friends from what the latter told me.
By the jury—Mr. Horrocks told me that Mr.
Windham was difficult to manage.
Major Glover, examined by Mr. Karslake—l re-
ticle near Felbrigg, and am major in the East Nor-
folk Militia. 1 was out with the regiment for train-
ing in 1860. I had known Mr. Windham for a
short time before that. I dined with him in Decem-
ber, 1859. During the training in 1860 he learnt
his drill very quickly, performed all his duties in an
efficient manner, and his conduct at mess was that
of an officer and a gentleman. I did not observe in
him any indication of want of intellect. When I
dined with him at Felbrigg he behaved himself pro-
perly. I have not seen him since the training in
1860.

Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers—Colonel Sir
Edward Lacon dined every day at mess and kept
very good order. I saw very little of Mr. Windham
except at mess and had no means of judging of his
truthfulness. I never saw him in the streets after
mess. At drill, as far as I saw, he was obedient,
and seemed to like it. I saw no difference between
his conduct and that of the other young officers. I
am not aware that he had any particular companion
iu the regiment.
Re-examined—Mr. Windham did not require to
be kept in order at mcss. lie was the youngest

(Tl, in the corps.
By the Master—l saw Mr. Windham at a
bail in Ylrmouth, but observed nothing par-
ticular in his behaviour. Any misconduct
on his part would have been noticed at once.
When I dined at Felbrigg the guests were Mr., Mrs.,
and Miss Scott ; Mr. Pears, Captain King, Mr.
Baring, and Mr. Horrocks. Mr. Windham and
Mr. Horrocks seemed to get on very well together
at dinner.

The Rev. Mr. Dolphin, rector of Antingharn, in
Norfolk.—l knew the late Mr. Windham very
well, and have known the present Mr. Windham
since his childhood. His father was a passionate
man. I made the remark more than once that I did

not think the present Mr. Windham would turn out
well in consequence of the contradictory and incon-
sistent control he received from his parents. In
December, 1800, he and Mr. Peatfield dined with
me. There were ladies and gentlemen at table.
IVlr. Windham talked in a loud tone of voice, but
there was nothing particular in his conduct. lam
chairman of the Board of Guardians. On one occa-
sion Mr. Windham came and spoke to me about a
pauper in one of his parishes. He said it was a
ca'.e deserving relief; the man had been idle for two
or three weeks, but as he was a single man Mr.
Windham thought he had not been attended to. I
told him that his statements would receive every
attention. An inquiry was made into the case.
Mr. Windham's representations turned out to be
perfectly correct, and the man was relieved. Last
swing I heard that Mr. Windham was about to be
married to a lady of good family. About that time
I met him near my own house and congratulated
him upon the proposed marriage. He replied,
I, Thank you," and upon my mentioning the name
of the lady he said, " Yes, that is the lady." Last
summer—in July--I saw Mr. Windham at Lord
Suffield's. He stayed and dined. Before dinner
Lord Suffield, Mr. Windham and I walked through
the grounds to the dairy farm. On that occasion I
was with him an hour. His remarks were perfectly
sensible and rational and he seemed to understand
the subjects of. conversation. From what I have
seen of him I believe him to be a person of sound
mind.

Mrs. Cockburn, head boys maid at Mrs. Drury's,
in Eton, when Mr. Windham was there, said she
attended to him and looked after his linen. He played
with the other boys, and always behaved like a
gentleman. Many had been called " mad" as well
as he. He did not get into more scrapes than the
other boys. He was arwayslull of spirits, but ara-
not give unusual trouble. He had visited witness
several times since he left Eton, and always ap-
peared like a gentleman. She believed he was as
sound in his mind as she was herself. (A laugh.)
Cross-examined by Mr. Field—Mr. Cheales, the
tutor, lived in the house with Windham. The lat-
ter was not particularly rough and rude, and she
never heard him speak strangely. There was no-
thing peculiar in his voice; in fact, he was in all
respects like other young gentlemen.
Miss Kate Archer, the 100th witness, examined.
by Mr. Karslake—l live in George-street, Portman-
square. At the beginning of the summer of 1860,
contrary to my usual practice in town, I was riding
one morning in the Park without a servant. My
horse became restive. Mr. Windham rode up and
assisted me, as any gentleman would have done,
and he has often since visited me as a friend. On
Sept. 28 last, General Windham called at my house,
and I had a conversation with him.
Mr. Karslake—What did he say ?
Mr. Chambers did not know what was coming,
but he submitted that a conversation between Gene-
ral Windham and Miss Archer could not be ac-
cepted as evidence in this case.
Sir H. Cairns maintained that he was entitled to
place before the jury evidence of the conduct pur-
sued by General Windham, one of the petitioners,
during the getting up of the case against his
nephew. Supposing he could prove that General
Windham had either tampered with witnesses, or
declared that he thought his nephew to be perfectly
sane, surely that would be strictly relevant to the
present inquiry.
Mr. Karslake and Mr. Milward were heard on
the same side.

Mr. Chambers contended that as they were not
trying General Windham, but the sanity or in-
sanity of his nephew, the evidence was not admis-
sible.

The Master said that if he was trying General
Windham for mal;ciously obtaining a commission
of lunacy against his nephew he would admit the
evidence, but as the question before the Court was
the state of mind of Mr. Windham he was bound
to reject it, because it would raise a collateral issue,
and lead them beyond the limits of the present in-
quiry.
Sir 11. Cairns stated that the question put to the
witness was the beginning of several which were
meant to show, first, that General Windham, being
one of the petitioners, had actively interfered in
getting up the case and evidence to support it ;
secondly, that he had attempted to induce a witness,
against her opinion avowed to him, to give evi-
dence in favour of the petitioners ; thirdly, that he
had stated that, whatever might be real facts as to
the sanity or insanity of his nephew, he was deter-
mined to prosecute these proceedings in order to
prove his nephew insane and to obtain control of
the property ; and, fourthly, that Mr. Windham
having stated, as appeared from Dr. Tuke's evi•
dence, that he believed General Windham would
not venture to go into the witness-box, the evidence
of Miss Archer would have shown that the facts
stated by her were communicated to Mr. Windham,
and, among other matters, naturally influenced him
to make that statement to Dr. Tuke.
The Master asked Mr. Chambers whether he was
prepared to take a decision in his favour, and thereby
risk the ultimate issue of the inquiry ?
Mr. Chambers replied in the affirmative.
The Master then decided that the evidence was
inadmissible on the ground that the conduct of
General Windham, whether good or bad, was not
the question before the Court.
Mr. Henry Drake, examined by Mr. Milward,
said he was a barrister and belonged to the Norwich
family of Drakes. He was with Mr. Windham at
Dr, Badham's school at Blackheath. He was much
older than Windham, who was about 10 or 11 years
of age. He saw Windham every day at meals and
other times, and thought he behaved himself much
like other boys. He saw nothing to induce him to
believe that he was an idiot. At that time Wind-
ham was quite as capable of taking care of himself
as other boys of his ago. Witness had been at Eton,
and had known several boys and one master called
"mad."
By Mr. Coleridge—When witness was at Eton
promotion was obtained by examination, and not
by favour. If at Christmas, 1856, Mr. Windham
was in the upper remove of the lower division of
the fifth form, he must have been doing fifth form
work for several months.
Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers—Windham
was a dirty boy at Blackheath.
quartered
__
cLord Claude Hamilton, M.P., examined by Sir
ilw
hichairwa Cairns —I ain
colonel
at
y aorfmtohtte
hi n
1
Donegal.B6o I
made Militia,
the acquaintance of Mr. Windham in that year. I
first met him on the
railway at Norwich. We were
both going to Yarmouth. I happened to mention
that I had spout a few days in
shooting at Felbrigg

Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers—And as
capable of managing his estate as many others who
come into their property without knowing
value of money. Old Mr. Windham was
a t
pas-
sionate
man,7and on two occasions he exhibited hisßvision at the board of guardians. I think he
swore. I have seen him angry with myself about
politics, Young Mr. Windham, as I predicted, has
not turned out very well. I never saw his parents
severe to him. He was an affectionate boy, and I
never saw him in a passion. His parents treated
him irregularly and capriciously. When he came
down after dinner his father would tell him one
thing, and the nest minute his mother tell him the
very reverse. I hale not heard at different times
that he was about to be married to different ladies.
Besides the occasion I have mentioned there was
aim° talk of his going to be married to a young

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Baron Martin.)

1856. He expressed great gratification at meeting
a friend of his parents. We talked for about an
hour and a half, and he conversed in the most cor-
dial, rational, and gentlemanly manner. When I
knew he was young Windham I immediately
watched him, because I had heard he was fond of
low company. On arriving at Yarmouth he walked
with me to my hotel, and afterwards I met him
once or twice in the town. In September I saw him
at a full-dress ball in Yarmouth. On that occasion
he was decidedly intoxicated. He recognized me
and spoke to me, complaining 1 hat the young ladies
would not dance with him, and I advised him to go
home. He was not making any noise. Ido not con-
sider a taste for driving railway engines a proof of
insanity, and such is the opinion of many who hold
a distinguished rank in society. Many years ago
I joined with half a dozen others in studying the
great motive power of modern times. We attended
a course of lectures at the Polytechnic, and went
into the matter as thoroughly as wo could. After a
time we were allowed, under proper supervision,
to drive engines on railways. I must say, however,
that we were not permitted to experiment with
passenger trains, but were restricted to ballast and
coke trains. I can assure you that it requires a
good deal of skill, self-possession, coolness of head,
and delicacy of touch to drive a railway engine. It
is decidedly an intellectual study.
By the Jury—l do not know that Mr. Windham
has gone through the same course of study as I did.
If he can drive an engine—a point upon which I
know nothing—he must have received instruction.
Wm. Badcock, examined by Mr. Karslake, said
he was now valet to Mr. Windham. He entered
his service in Sept., 1861. At one time he was a
guard on the Eastern Counties Railway, :and
on many occasions Mr. Windham travelled in his
van. He had seen him on the engine with the re-
gulator in his hand: Mr, Windham generally
talked about the management and working of rail-
ways, and seemed very anxious to obtain a thorough
mastery of the subject. He gave a dinner to between
30 and 40 people on Christmas-day. There was a
dance in the evening. Witness, by his orders, sang
negro melodies to amuse the company. During the
evening when the fun'was at its height, Mr. Wind-
ham put on a pair of hunting-breeches, and blacked
his face on the cheeks and chin, to resemble whiskers
and an imperial. He remained thus for two hours.
He was not noisy. The company were very merry,
but there was nothing like disorder. Mr. Windham
retired about a quarter past 2, and then the house
shut up.
Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers—Mr. Wind-
ham was not a queer or odd sort of young man. As
far as conduct and behaviour were concerned, he
was like others of his age. Witness never saw
him in the uniform of a guard, but he had seen
him with a belt and pouch and a common dog-
whistle. Mr. Windham often blew the whistle before
the train started. He did so under the directions
of witness. Some of the railway officials must have
seen him. He frequently told the passengers to
take their seats, and called out the names of the
stations. Witness could have trusted him with the
management of a train. Sometimes ho sorted the
parcels in the van, and he did the work remarkably
well. He never paid anything for the privilege of
riding in the van, nor did he ever take champagne
or any other kind of drink into it. Occasionally he
treated witness at the stations. On the occasion of
his marriage he gave witness a silver watch and
guard, with the following inscription—" Presented
to Wm. Badcock, by W. F. Windham, Esq., in ac-
knowledgment of his civility and attention." Wit-
ness never saw him covered with dirt and soot like
a stoker. Stoking would be a strange occupation
for a young gentleman. Witness did not know how
his master spent his evenings:when in London. He
lived with Roberts, in Piccadilly. Sometimes he
would go out after dinner, but witness always found
him in his room in the morning. Witness did not
know at what hour he returned home. He never
accompanied him to the Haymarket. Witness
blacked his face to sing the negro melodies at Fel-
brigg on Christmas-day. He had a banjo, and wore
a characteristic costume—a white shirt, knee-
breeches, and low shoes. The coachman was dressed
in the same way, and later in the evening Mr.
Windham made his appearance in a similar costume
and joined in the chorus, but ho did not throw him-
self upon the floor and imitate the action of swim-
ming. The refreshments consisted of champagne,
cherry, ale, and a bowl of punch. The company
were merry and applauded the singing, but witness
did not think that the applause was monopolised by
Mr. Windham. (A laugh.) Mr. Windham went
to bed himself quite steadily, and roso next morn-
, ing about 5 o'clock. He was now at Feibrigg, but
when in town he stayed at Morley's Hotel, having
broken off his acquaintance with Roberts. Witness
had not seen that person lately, nor had he seen
Mrs. Windham to speak to her since Christmas.
Re-examined—There was no pretence for saying
that Mr. Windham was drunk on Christmas-day.
He used to be fond of putting on a guard's belt, be-
-cause he thought it gave him a kind of military
appearance.
By the Jury—Witness was not a valet before Sep-
tember last. The railway directors objected to his
accepting the watch and guard presented to him in
August by Mr. Windham, and, as they made some
difficulty about it, Mr. Windham agreed to take
him into his own service. His wages were £4O a
year. He kept a petty cash book, and his master
regularly looked over and checked the items.
Sir H. Cairns said there was one head of evi-
dence which he would wish to avoid, if possible. It
would be recollected that Mr. Windham, in conver-
sation with Dr. Take, spoke of certain circum-
stances connected with the conduct of two of his
uncles which led him to believe that they would not
come forward as witnesses, or prosecute their peti-
tion before a jury. Nothing could well be more
irksome than to adduce evidence for the purpose of
showing the grounds which Mr. Windham had for
believing in the truth of those statements, and he
should gladly refrain from doing so if Mr. Cham-
bers would give an assurance that ho did not intend
to allege that the assertions of Mr. Windham were
altogether without foundation.
Mr. Chambers was prepared to say that he would
not use the statements in question as at all militating
against Mr. Windham's sanity,but, on the contrary,
he would deal with them as statements which might
fairly come out of the mouth of a rational man.
Sir H. Cairns expressed himself satisfied with the
assurance of his learned friend; and
The Master congratulated all parties upon having
got rid of what might have been a painful and em-
barrassing head of evidence.

went to the residence of the prisoner Smith, who
carries on the business of a carman in Prince's-
street, Mile-end New-town, and asked him whether
he had been engaged in removing 10 bales of silk
in the previous ir °nth. in one of his vans. He at
first denied having done so, but he afterwards said
that he would tell the truth, but he then stated that
he had lent his van to Gillett, one of the other pri-
soners, for the purpose of removing the silk to the
railway station, whence it was conveyed to Derby.
In answer to a question put by Mr. Sergeant
Ballantine, this witness stated that ho told the pri-
soners he did not know what they might make of
him, or whether it was intended to prosecute him
for being concerned in the robbery or to make him
a witness when the conversation took place between
them.
Inspector Holloway, of the K division of police,
proved that he took Gillett into custody, and that
he denied having at any time been engaged in re-
moving silk. This witness also proved that a re-
ward of £OO was offered for the apprehension of
Agg and Hunter, and that in April last he went to
Calais and saw Agg at the Si:ip publichouse at the
place and ho also ascertained by the books of the
French police that the prisoner Hunter had also
been at Calais, and went by the name of James.
John Mark Bull and Knight, two of the city de-
tectives, were then examined, and they proved that
in March last they saw Agg and Hunter at a pub-
lichouse in London-wall. They said they were
aware that Agg was engaged in the silk trade, and
he introduced Hunter to them as his partner.
This closed the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine then proceeded to ad-
dress the jury for the prisoner Hunter. He com-
plained with much warmth of the most unfair man-
ner in which the prosecutors had conducted these
proceedings, against his client especially. The
charge which the speech of his learned friend dis-
closed against the prisoner Hunter was the reverse
of what it should have been. It was vague and
filled with generalities, and his learned friend
seemed at a loss as to what precise charge he should
ask the jury to convict Hunter upon. This mode of
conducting a prosecution rendered the position of
the counsel for the defence more difficult than it
otherwise would be. He begged the jury to dismiss
all the vague generalities and surmises of the pro-
secution,which had been thrown at them to make a
charge out of, and consider the real question, which
was whether the prisoner Hunter knew at the time
he was dealing with the silk that it had been stolen.
Whatever his indiscretion might have been in deal-
ing with it, and he (the learned counsel) admitted
that his indiscretion and folly had been great
through the whole of the transaction, yet they were
not to convict him for that. Beyond the sample
skeins of silk shown to Hunter, not one had been
traced to him. The learned sergeant carefully scru-
tinised the evidence of the accomplice Debock, who,
he said, was wholly unworthy of belief by himself,
and the corroboration was of an insufficient charac-
ter. He again condemned the prosecution for not
producing the invoice of the silk given by Agg to
Newton, as that would go to show that his client
had not sold the silk, and, in conclusion, urged that
Hunter had not been shown to have got anything
by the transaction.
Mr. Repton, for Turnbull, argued upon the in-
'
sufficiency of the evidence, and the danger the jury
would run in believing the evidence of a man like
Debock.
Mr. Kemp, for Gillett, briefly contended that the
part which he took in the matter could not be con-
strued into a guilty knowledge.
Mr. Best, on behalf of Smith, argued that the
evidence as far as he was concerned amounted to
nothing criminal, and he ought not to have been
sent for trial.
Witnesses were then called to character for each
of the prisoners.
The Common Sergeant then summed up, going
through the evidence, and commenting upon the
various points as they touched upon the conduct of
the prisoners. He defended the prosecution from
the attacks which had been made upon it, adding
that it was perfectly proper and legally conducted.
Great companies like these, with property from all
parts of the world, and worth thousands, ought to
avail themselves of every power which the law
gave them for the protection of property.
The jury then retired, and after an absence of
about an hour and a half returned, finding Gillett
and Turnbull guilty of stealing the silk, and Hun-
ter of receiving it, but acquitting Smith.
The Common Sergeant sentenced Gillett and
Turnbull to three years' penal servitude, and Hun-
ter to four years.
The Court then adjourned to Monday, January
27.

- -
CENT R. 4 L CRIMINAL COURT.—Jan. 10,

Win. Davis, who surrendered to take his trial,
was charged with the manslaughter of Maria Scholls.
Mr. B. Rigby conducted the prosecution, and the
prisoner was defended by Mr. Sleigh.
It appeared by the evidence for the prosecution
that the deceased was an old woman of 70, and that
on the 16th December she was in the act of crossing
the road at Highgate-street, St. Giles's, when she
was knocked down by a cart laden with bundles of
wood, of which the prisoner had the charge, with
a boy, and the vehicle passed over her and inflicted
injuries of which she died shortly afterwards. Ac-
cording to the evidence for the prosecution, the
horse was going at a very fast pace, and the prisoner
was whipping the horse, and that was the cause of
the accident. Several witnesses deposed to the fact
of the animal going very nst, one of them stating'
that it passed him " like a flash of lightning." Wit-
nesses were, however, called on behalf of the pri-
soner, who attempted to put a very different com-
plexion on the case, and from the evidence given by
them it appeared that the prisoner and the boy were
walking on the footpath, while the horse was not
going at a greater rate than five miles an hour, and
that while they were so going along some of the
bundles of wood fell off the cart upon the horse's
back and alarmed it, on which it started off, and the
accident happened before the prisoner could stop it.
It was also stated that the prisoner bore avery good
character, and was a steady, well-conducted man.
Mr. Baron Martin having summed up, . .

POLICE lINTELLIGENCE.—Jan. 10.

The jury retired to consider their verdict, and in
about a quarter of an hour they returned and found
the prisoner guilty, but recommended him to mercy
on account of the good character that had been
given of him.
Mr. Baron Martin said he quite agreed in the
verdict, and he believed the defence had been
made up to get the prisoner out of the scrape. If
he thought that he had been any party to getting
up that defence he should have passed a much heavier
sentence upon him than the ore he was about to
do, which was that he be kept to hard labour for
three months.

WESTMINSTER.—THE MYSTERIOUS SKELE-
TONS.—Agnes Renton, 28 years of age, was finally
examined, charged with concealing the birth of two
children.

The prisoner lodged in the house of Mrs. Eades,
No. 2, Oakley-crescent, Chelsea, and left there
about a month ago. The landlady detained a box
and some other things for a month's rent, and
opening the box, which merely had a rope
round it, shortly afterwards, Mrs. Eades found the
skeletons of two infants, which were dried up and
resembled mummies. When the prisoner was taken
into custody she said that she was not aware of the
contents of the box, which had been left with her
by a woman for a debt. The bodies were examined
by a medical gentleman who, in consequence of
their condition, was unable to say whether they
had been kept one year or three. It was proved
that the prisoner had had an illegitimate child nine
years ago, but that that had been buried by the
parish. vidence was given by the landlady where
she had lived three years and a half up to last
Whitsuntide, and it was clear that she had not had
any children during that time, but the landlady
(Rot Mrs. Eades) identified the box as one she had
sold the accused at the time of her leaving her
house; it was, however, a very common box, of
which thousands are made, and there was no par-
ticular mark about it by which it could be distin-
guished.
Mr. Dickie, barrister, instructed by Mr. Venn,
again appeared for the accused.
On the prisoner being placed in the dock,
Mr.-Arnold inquired of Inspector Tarlton, of the
V division, who had charge of the case, whether, in
the course of further inquiries since the last exami-
nation, he had ascertained that she had had any
children herself, or had been acquainted with any
other woman who had.
Inspector Tarlton replied that he had made the
most diligent inquiries, and had traced her from
lodging to lodging, without being able to gain any
such information.

Mr. Arnold said that, under those circumstances,
it would be useless at present to proceed any fur-
ther with the case. There was nothing to sustain
the charge against the prisoner for concealing the
birth of the children. low she got possession of
the children was a complete mystery. She was now
discharged, but if any further evidence were ob-
tained, she could be again apprehended.

EXTENSIVE ROBBERY OF VALUABLES.—Yeeter-
day (Friday) a well-dressed young man alighted at Read-
ing from the Great Western train from Weymouth, which
arrives here beeween 10 and 11 o'clock, having a ticket
from Weymouth to London. He stated that he had asked
for a ticket from 'Weymouth to Reading, but a mistake was
made by the clerk, ar-d he wished to be allowed to have re-
turned to him the va'ue of the fare between Reading and
Paddington, which was complied with, and he left. Directly
after his departure a telegraphic message was received,
stating that a person had left Weymouth by the early train,
with the produce of a robbery, and the number of the ticket
issued was given. The ticket taken from the young man
was examined, and the numbers were found to correspond.
He was traced to the station of the South-Eastern Railway
Company, and the police were immediately communicated
with, upon which Mr. Rice, one of the inspectors, went to
the station, and iu a carriage of the 12 o'clock train, which
was within two minutes of starting, ne found the young
man, whom ho took into custody. He then gave to the in-
spector a handsome antique gold watch, set with diamonds,
value about £lOO, and a number of other articles of jewel-
lery, which he took from his pockets, admitting that ho had
stolen them from Sir J. Dundas's, at Weymouth, in whose
service he had been as footman. He had with him a carpet
bag, which contained a quantity of plate, &c., to the value
of about £2OO. The prisoner, named Charles Edwd. Hart,
alias Hamilton, was brought before the Reading magis-
trates soon afterlhis capture, and remanded for the purpose
of communication being made with the Weymouth police.
THE ALPS AND THE ISLE OF WIGHT.—The Alps
aro a very singular range, for though the highest moun-
tains in Europe, they are almost the youngest, and as com-
pared with Snowdon or Cader Idris, are perfect infants in
everything but size. And yet the Alps were formed all at
once, but reveal on their broad flanks a series of formations
of the lias, oolite. chalk, and tertiary eras, which in many
places graduate insensibly into metamorphic rocks, pre•
renting all the appearances of extreme geological antiquity.
We find 10,000 feet above the sea, fossils of the same
recert age as the freshwater shells of the Isle
of "Wight, though they would have a wonderfully
different tale to tall about their respective situations. The
same character of organic life flourished in both places, and
the strata in which their remains were embedded were pro-
bably deposited under very much the same circumstances;
but how different the subsequent events I While the Isle of
Wight was only raised a few hundred feet above the sea, and
raised so gently that the beds lie one upon the other with
the greatest regularity, the Alps were subjected to violent
upheavals and convulsions, by which not only were the
tertiary beds raised many thousand feet, but were also over
turned and bent on each other in the most startling man-
ner. It is evident, therefore, that thls great volcanic
disturbance occurred after the disposition of the tertiary
beds, because the sea in which these shells lived never
could have covered what is now the Alps before their up,
heavab—Once a IVcck.

NEW COURT.
(Before the Common Sergeant.)
The trial of the prisoners Edwin Turnbull, James
Gillett, James Hunter, and Thomas Smith, for the
robbery of silk belonging to the St. Katharine's
Dock Company, was resumed shortly after 10
o'clock. The jury, who had been at the London
Coffeehouse during the night, were brought into
court in the charge of the officers of the sheriffs.
Mr. Hawkins, Q.C. (specially retained), Mr.
Giffard, and Mr. Poland again appeared for the
prosecution ; Mr. Sergeant Ballantine (also spe-
cially retained) and Mr. Metcalfe appeared for
Hunter ; and Mr. Ribton, Mr. Sleigh, Mr. Best,
Mr. Kemp, and Mr. Lloyd appeared for the other
prisoners:
The evidence for the prosecution was proceeded
_ _

•
with.
Walter Galloway, a police-constable of the K
division, proved that on the 14th of November ho

TIM SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JANUARY 11, 1862.