Star.
London, England, 1825-08-09 00:00:00

. commiMpAr- OF LUNACY.
fa Tim arATT4st ,01/ TRO Lev. ili/WARD FRANK (A
• ambroatb .LUNATIC).
• SEVENTH DAY.
The Osmtnissioners and the Jury took their mats at eleven o'clock.
Mr. Cd'incnissionei Pinr.Ltuotta said, that he wished
to ask a question of 'the Counsel for Mr. Frank ; as
to whether the, license of dispensation which had been
obtained by Mr. F. in 1614, had ever been renewed ?
Mr. %Vaitantras replied, that he bad never since
bten called upon to act.
The Coetstissromen asked when it was that Mrs.
Frank returned to live with her husband ?
Mr. WAREFIIILD.—On the last Thursday in No-
vember, 1821.
Mr. PEPTE, as Counsel for the eldest son of Mr.
Frank, observed, that he was anxious to correct an
error which had gone abroad. Mr. Brougham, in ad-
dtessixg the Jury, had drawn a picture of a young man
wheel could sit calmly by and listen to evidence of his
father's guilt and his mother's shame. The picture was
an imaginary one, but some persons had conceived that
it actually alluded to Mr. Frank's son. This young
Gentleman was only not present at the investigation,
but had not been in London since the commencement
of the case. He was desirous also to observe, that so
tar as be could understand, no one could feel more for
the situation in which his parents were placed than the
young man felt.
Mr. SPENCE then addressed the Jury. His object
was to state the due effect of the facts adduced, and
also t,n comment•on the evidence of the medical men—
the effect of facts, in the first instance, and of opinion,
in the second. He regretted, as Counsel for Mr. Frank;
that he was obliged to admit there was evidence to
prove him a 'very profligate character; but such an
acknowledgment was very different to an admission,
that such profligacy proceeded from unsoundness of
mind. That such evidence had been greatly exagge.
rated, he had no doubt. The witness Mr. Badham had
sworn, that when he dined with Mr. Frank at Cam-
bridge, no Gip had been present, and that there was!
nothing incoherent or improper in his manner; so that
if by chance (for such was the case), they kid been able
to get one witness to contradict such a state rnent,he might
fairly suppose that many other statements had been
equally exaggerated. The evidence of Mr. Badham
went to prove, that while Newby was present at the
taveuti, and Mr. Badham was by, there was neither
incoherency nor impropriety in the conduct of Mr.
Drank. He would have the Jury to recollect that Mr.F.
was a man who had obtained a considerable fortune,
having before been in straightened citcumstances,yet al-
ways looking up in expectancy to that fortune which heal-
terwards succededed to, and under these circumstances,
there wete great allowances to be made, because
he was a man never educated for business, and
not at nil calculated for the settlement of accounts.—
Mr. Propert, however, said that he had called fur
vouchers, and this set the Solicitor-General on fire-;
but Mr. Frank would not trust to any man's honour,
and therefore in a:l his pecuniary transactions, called for
receipts of voucher s. Another material point of his
particularity in money matters, was, that when a hack-
ney coachman had charged him too much, he pointed
out the overcharge, and the coachman acquiesced by
abating sixpence. This point was only material as con-
ratted• with other circumstances—hut it 'hewed that his
habits had been always the same,• and that he was now
what he was in 0316, a most important consideration
indeed. How did Mr. Fra k behave when Greaves
went to take a farm from him? So far from Greaves
conceiving that there was anything improper or Inc t-
httent in kis manner, he went again, and again entered
into a discussion on the subject of letting the farm. In
this ca-e he acted as every other individual would have
done, and no one could have acted with more propriety
or consideration both for himself and for his tenants.
One of the most important facts was that which related
to taking back his wife without inquiry, and employing
the person who was said to be her paramour. But it
was of great importance to consider on what evidence
he had supposed his wife to have been unfaithful, and
the Jury would be convinced that that evidence was
such as he might have subsequently disbelieved. He
was induced to believe it in consequence of the infor-
• elation of a man whom he afterwards knew was
not his friend. Roebuck was the only man who as-
serted he had seen what was represented—for Bellamy
and Mainwaring communicated only what they had
beard. It had been proved by several witnesses, that
in the presence of Mr. Frank the conduct of Mr. Dic-
kenson towards Mrs. Frank was always respectful. It
bad therefore been proved, that whatever had been
going on behind Mr. Frank's back, he might have
been reasonably expected not to know anything about.
There was sufficient proof that Mr. Frank's affection
was very great, and when to this overpowering regard
was added, the careful propriety which was kept up in
his presence, and the character of the individuals who
communicated the circumstances to him, the Jury
would perceive how natural it was that he should have
disbelieved her criminality. Mr. Spence then proceeded
tit canvass the evidence as •to the sanity or insanity of
Mr. Frank ; and in proof of his sanity in 1817, read the
following letter :
"My dear Sister—l am sorry to hear from. Mr. Bellamy that
you are unwell, but I rust this will find you in better health. Un-
derstanding my mother and yourself are anxious to have my second
little girl, Rosalie at Doncaster this winter, I can have no objection
to the request. While I live I shall be truly gratified in endeavour-
ing to promote the comfort and enjoyment of my only remaining
patent, and, as far as in my power, study to cheer and enliven the
calm and cheerful close of her well.spent life. I think my Rosalie
a most bewitching child, and though I mast feel dull and low-
spirited at the loss of her lively endearing society, yet, under your
benignant care and protection I am satisfied she will be truly
happy, and stimulated to learn as far as her age and capacity will
prink. Should I fortunately live till she is eight years old, it will
be my most earnest desire; and I resolve to place her atMissPoivis's
school, with her charming and amiable sister. Ere this epistle
reaches thee, you may have heard that I am going to let C. (mean-
ing Campsall) as soon as possible. The magnitude of the man-
sion, and the serious expense of supporting the same, co-operat-
ing with the badness of the times, and my most lamentable do.
mettle misfortune, all tend to render my firm resolution most
advisable. I had once flattered myself that I might perhaps pass
many joyful and many happy years at our much attached native
place, but that dream of fancy, like many more, has vanished for
. ever. I never can look back on the many delightful and pleasing
days .I have spent with her, who was the object of my tenderest
affect len, at a period when we were contending with the direful
of adversity, without the most poignant regret; and al-
though our hush separation for ever was unavoidable, I must con-
sider that measure a serious misfortune to myself and family—more
jespeciany as I fear, under existing circumstances, no divorce can
take place, neither now nor hereafter—when you are ready to re-
mylittle girl, you win perhaps let me know, that I may make
some arrangement for the journey, before the winter is more ad-
• wanted. Perhaps yon could procure a good tenant for my house,
AS I tear 1 shall meet with some difficulty in letting it. I should
wish it to be fawned in the Doncaster and York Papers, and also
, .in the Morning Post. With very best love to my mother and to
)oluself, " I remain your affectionate brother,
" EDWARD FRANK."