The Sun.
London, England, 1850-12-03 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Dcc 2.
(Sittings at Nisi Priu3, at 'Westminster, before Lord
CAMPBELL and a Special Jury.)
DRYDEN V. FRYER.

/This was an action to try the validity of a will made
by the late Sir Gregory Page Turner, and the question
of his competency to make a testamentary document.
Mr. Montague Chambers, Q.C., Mr. Peacock, QC.,
and another Learned Gentleman were counsel for the
plaintiff; and the defendant was represented by a per-
fect legal phalanx, consisting of the Solicitor-General,
Sir Frederick Thesiger, Sir Fitzroy Kelly, and Mr.
Barstow.
Mr. MONTAGUE CHAMBERS opened the plaintiff's case,
the particulars of which will be collected from the evi-
dence given below.
Mrs. Eliza Chumley, examined by Mr. PEacocre, de-
posed that she was the widow of the late Sir Gregory
Page Turner. She had since married again. Was
married in 1818 to the tettvor, and had been ac-
quainted with him since he was seventeen years of age.
When witness married him he was in a very good state
of mind, though he was an eccentric man. Witness had
only one surviving daughter by him. She was born in
1820. Under the commission of lunacy witness was
appointed one of the committee of her husband's person,
and a Mr. Dryden was another. In 1838 her daughter
was married to the Rev. Mr. Fryer, who had engaged
to settle twenty thousand pounds upon her. Mr. Ma-
t erhy had at first be en ealiloyed as solicitor, to see the
reil,inents prop rly executed. fir. Fry er wished to
substitute some other property instead ; f lecriey,;o which
witness objected. Her dauehter slid she would marry
en a particular day, and witness allowed her to do so. Mr.
Fryer took witness and her daughter to a Mr. Barney,
a solicitor, on the 19th August, her daughter being mar-
ried on the 22d. Mr. Barney prepared some articles,
dared 21st August, 1838 (produced). Witness's hus-
j band's seat was Battlesden House, in Bedfordshire. Mr.
Fry. r furnished it and went to reside there: Sir Gre-
gory Page Turner was displeased at their going there.
Mr. Maberley wrote to them, and Mr. Fryer and his wife
left the house. After the commission in 1823 two keepers
were appointed to reside with witness's husband, and
witness ceased to reside with him. Her husband soon
after went to reside in the Alpha-road. His mind began
to improve in 1840. Witness went back to live with him
on the 7th May in that year, and continued to do so
until his death in 1843. His mind appeared to improve,
and he talked rationally with her. Both keepers were
removed on the 12th February, 1841. all restraint having
been taken away on the 6th February. In November,
1840, Sir Gregory dictated a paper to witness (produced).
He afterwards read it over. (The paper purported
to be a memorandum of a will which Sir Gregory, the
testator, intended to make.) On her marriage witness had
a jointure settled on her of 2,0001. On the 23d February,
1841, her daughter came to visit her father and witness.
Sir Gregory instructed his daughter what to say when
she appeared before the Master of the Rolls, with
respect to her wanting settlements. She said she
would not go against the wishes of her husband. In
1842 Sir Gregory had a severe epileptic fit. He had had
a fit on the 9th May, 1841, and then he had ono about
once a month. Bat after May, 1842, he was subject to
more violent fits. After that time Rook, one of the
keepers, came back. In June, 1841, witness's husband j
told her to write to her daughter, saying that be should
be at all times happy to sea her, but that he and witness
declined visiting Mr. Fryer until his marriage
settlements were satisfactorily arranged. Witness
wrote the proposed letter. On the 21st of July,
1841, witness and her husband removed to
Montagu-square.i and in the following January they
went to live at 104, Gloucester-place, Portman-square.
Her husband had told her he had made his will, in which
he had taken care of his daughter. He kept his bedroom
from October 22d, 1842. Witness thought her husband
was quite capable of performing a rational act on the
15th June, 1841. He was in the habit of talking ra-
tionally.
Cross-examined by the SOLICITOR-GENERAL—Witness
was married again in August, 1844, to Mr. Chumley,
who is the son of a surgeon in Nottingham-place.
Witness continued to live with Sir Gregory till within a
few months of the commission. He was in great pe-
cuniary difficulties before the issuing of the commission,
in 1823. Wituess did not live with him afterwards till
the 7th May, 1840. Constantly saw him during
the intervening time. Witness lived with Mr.
and Mrs. Fryer after their marriage. Went
with them to Battlesden, and lived with them there.
Sir Gregory had considerable estates in Bedfordshire,
Oxfordshire, and Kent, besides a little property in Lon-
don. Witness went from Battlesden to London. Before
witness went to her hubaud she had had a quarrel with
Mr. Fryer about the marriage settlements. When she
went to her husband she was on good terms with Mr.
Fryer. The house in the Alpha-road belonged to one
Holmes. Did not know that Holmes was a professed
lunatic keeper. Rook afterwards took the house when
Relines lett it. One William Paxton was sent for in
1841; he had been the steward of Sir Gregory's estates
in Bedfordshire, and Sir Gregory was much attached to
him. When witness went to live with Sir Gregory "he
had lost his fancies." Witness was not present at the
trial at Bedford. Sir Gregory had a peculiarity of not
liking to shake hands with people. In 1850, however, he
shook hands with any one he liked. He shook hands
with the plaintiff and his sister in 1841; -witness had no
(It uht or that, but she could not remember. Witness
mploved a lady named Neale as her amanuensis. Sir
Gregory did not sleep in his clothes in 1840; nor did he
pick op pi,ces of paper to be taken care of. Had not
heard him say that he would bring an action against the
Lord Ch for continuing the commission. Witness
Ras trying to get the commission superseded in 1840.
1)1(1 not t-11 him he must leave off doing certain things
before strangers. Sir Gregory was remarkably fond of his
daughter. Witness stayed with Sir Gregory at his own
request. His features became drawn together one day
rs'hil.t he was in witness's room, which lasted for about
a day. His speech was affected in consequence. The
next day, however, he was as well as ever. Did not
remember what salary she paid to Rook. Rook left
in February, 1841, and returned in October. Roek
was not in the habit of watching her hus-
band during the interval. Witness did not
employ him to watch him. The restraint was re-
moved to try how Sir Gregory would conduct himself,
and he behaved himself so well that witness had no doubt
the commission was in the course of being superseded.
Witness had very little communication with Mr. Ma-
berley respecting the removal of the commission. About
1841 an application was made to the Court of Chancery
to increase the allowance. Went upon an excursion into
Bedfordshire in 1841; the party consisted of Sir Gre-
gory, witness, Wm. Paxton, Mrs. Neale the amanuensis,
King the coachman, and Sutton, who was a hairdresser,
but acted as a valet. Sutton shaved Sir Gregory, who
did not attend to his personal appearance at all; he wore
very shabby, but she could not say greasy clothes.
lie spotted his clothes with grease in eating;
ho was, however, very clean in the matter
of his linen. John Adams and witness's maid
Also went with the party. Sir Gregory and witness tra-
velled in a carriage and four "of course." They went
to Luton, in Bedfordshire, and put up at an inn there.
Sir Gregory had a fit there, but it was not a bad one, and
he was better in the evening. When a fit was upon him
he made a noise, his countenance was extremely dis-
torted, and perhaps be might foam at the mouth. From
Luton they went into Cambridgeshire, thence to Lon-
don. Sir Gregory then went to Brighton, but witness
did not accompany him. Mrs. Graves went, as did
also Sutton, Martin King, the page, a maid, and
Wm. Paxton. They went to Brighton on the 18th Octo-
ber, 1841, and returned on the 3d November. When Sir
Gregory returned to London Rook came to sleep
in the house, which was in Montagu-square. They
afterwards left the house somewhat abruptly, and they
had to pay for leaving it so suddenly. Sir Gregory did
not leave Montagu-square because he fancied the house
was haunted by the former occupier, Sir William Bloom-
field. Witness did hear a foolish story about a ghost,
but it Lever affected her.—(Laughter.) In the autumn
of 1841 the fits became a great deal more frequent and
violent. Those fits had a tendency to impair pis mind.
Sir Gregory had some pocket-money allowed him, which
was given him by Mr. Maberley at one time and witness
at another. Witness certainly did not allow him a little
pocket-money " to please his fancy;" that was certainly
no exereesiore of hers. (Shown a document signed by her
in which the expression occurred of her having let Sir
Gregory have a little pocket money to please his fancy.)
That paper was signed by her. She perhaps allowed
him 10/_ at a time; was certain she allowed him more
than a sovereign at a time. He had pocket money when
he wanted it. Witness gave ten suits of old clothes ht.
longing to Sir Gregory to an old woman servant of hers.
They were in very good condition. Did not give them
to a servant who afterwards sold them for 10s. Witness
thought she Lad given a bond to indemnify the plaintiff
in the present action, in which she had engaged to free
them from loss. She supposed she did that soon after
the Chancery proceedings were instituted. It was not
atter, telt before her second marriage that she did
that ; it was after Sir Gregory's death. Was
quite a consenting party to the marriage of her
daughter with Mr. Fryer. Mr. Fryer agreed to
settle 20,0001. upon his wife, but he afterwards proposed
to substitute other property for that sum, to which wit-
ness objected. Being afraid however that her daughter
would marry without settlements, witness consented to
the marriage, for her daughter came singing into the
room one day and said " settlement or no settlement, I
shall bo married."—(A laugh.) Mr. Dryden who was
named with witness as a committee of her husband was
first cousin to Sir Gregory. Sir Gregory told witness
he had made his will soon after he made it, and that he
had taken care of his daughter.

Re-examined by Mr. PEJ.COCIL—Did not know the
rentals of her late husband's estates. Sir Gregory
would shake hands with people ho liked, but refused to
do so with people whom ho did not like. Slept in the
game room with her husband on the 14th June, 1841, at
Belvidere, on which occasion he was ill from intoxica-
tion. He awoke the next morning perfectly wvll. Could
not say when she first employed Rook on account of
the fits.

The witness retired, having been about three hours
under examination.
Mr. Joseph Maherley called and examined by Mr.
RICKARDP. He said—l um a solicitor of many years
standir:g. I and my father have been solicitors to Christ's
Hospital and to Sir Gregory Price Turner and his father
before him for many yes . From the time of Sir Gregory
coming into possession of his property in 1806, I was
solicitor nearly all the time until his death. I knew him
from his childhood, and up to the week of his death. I have
had opportunities of seeing him in various states of mind
and fortune. I was privy to the circumstances which
led to the commission of lunacy on Sir Gregory in 1814.
I conducted the inquisition. I was also acquainted with
saetcot
hn
examination
the proceedings taken to supersede that commissionoi in
Sirl 93G, r rn
ae
j
by the uror& Th fi
tepdretsheen t
-7e first commibsion was super-
-181.5. I c Linrcljucas
ss
olicitor.
ceded at the instance of Lady Say and Sele, the aunt of