Star.
London, England, 1820-12-13 00:00:00

~
~'.

I :

j

.1 ''LAIC' iIh'ELLIGENCE.

COURT OF JONG'S BENCH. DECEMBER 12.
DENNIS V. TALBOT.
This was an action of trespass for breaking and
entering the plaintiff's dwelling-house on the <2d of
June last, in the Parish of St. Matthew, Bethnal-
green, and assaulting, and falsely imprisoning .his
person fdr the space of three days.
The defendant pleaded a justification, that the
plaintiff, at the period in question, was a lunatic, and
unfit to have the management of his own affairs.
The case proved on the part of the plaintiff was
in substance this :—The plaintiff was a young Gen-
tleman, brought up to the profession of the law, in
the office of Mr. Thomas Nathaniel Williams, a re-
spectable Solicitor, and one of the Attornies of the
Lord Mayes Court, who, in consideration of the
plaintiff's faithful services and ability, articled him
without a premium, and, after the expiration of his
articles, admitted him to a full partnership in the
Chancery and Common Law departments of his
office. In May, 1819, the plaintiff, in consevence
of close application to business, was afflicted with a
nervous fever, which ultimately terminated in lunacy,
which bereft him of sanity fur several weeks, during
which he was attended by a Medical Professor,
named Salmon, now deceased, and taken care of by
two keepers, servants of the defendant, who keeps a
licensed Lunatic Asylum, at Bethnal-green. When
the plaintiff recovered, his partnership with Mr.
Williams was dissolved, and he went with his mother
to the sea-side fur the benefit of his health. His
mental faculties seemed to be perfectly restored, and
he applied with great assiduity to the winding up
the accounts between himself and his partner.—
Shortly after the dissolution of the partnership, he
acquired considerable property by the death of a
brother, and, on the decease of his mother, at the
close of 1819, his property was greatly augmented.
He commence,' housekeeping in Bethnal-green, close
to the defendant's house; but finding that his bodily
health was still infirm, in the month of June, in the
present year, he determined to sell his property, and
travel on the Continent. His next of kin was a per-
son of his own name, a half uncle, who carried on
the business of a bricklayer, and was in needy cir-
cumstances. This person was employed to collect
rents both for the plaintiff and the defendant, who
appeared to'be on intimate and friendly terms with
the plaintiff, so muds so, that the latter was the re-
ceiver of his rents when collected by Dennis the
uncle. It was proved that the plaintiff, from his ear-
liest infancy, had an uncommon fondness for fire-
works and fire-arms—that when he used to go from
Bethnal-green to his partner's office in London, he
used to carry loaded pistols about him for protec-
tion, part of his road being considered lonely and
dangerous at nights ; and that for amusement, he
frequently let off fire-works and discharged fire-arms
in the garden at the back of his house. On the 2d
of June last, the defendant sent two keepers to the
plaintiff's house for the purpose of securing his fire-
arms, the plaintiff being then absent from home.
The arms were secured, and the keepers waited in
the house until the return of the plaintiff, who had
been spending the day out. When he returned, he
was immediately secured by the keepers, who told
him that they had orders to confine him to his house,
in consequence of the derangement of his intellects.
Next day he was visited by Mr. Salmon, who was
with him for about twenty minutes, and then certi-
fied to the defendant that he was a person fit to be
put under restraint. The plaintiff being surprised at
this extraordinary proceeding contrived to write two
letters, one to his further partner, and the other to a
young Gentleman who had served his clerkship with
Mr. Williams, desiring them to call upon him. They
accordingly did call, and Mr. Williams immediately
expressed his indignation at the defendant's apparently
unjustifiable conduct. He waited upon the defendant
to know the cause of this pioceeding, and demanded
by what authority he had sent the keepers into the
plaintiff's house? The defendant hesitated a good
deal, and at length said he had a written authority
for the proceeding, which he declined to produce.
Being asked what acts of lunacy were imputed to
the plaintiff to justify such conduct? he said, that he
had been firing a pistol in the garden behind his
house, whirl' alarmed his neighbours; that he had
been laughing at the Jews' Chapel; and that he had
been shooting at a chimney-pot. These supposed,
acts of lunacy were explained in this way :—a day
or two before the 2d of June, the plaintiff and a
young friend of his had been trying a pistol in the
garden of his house, by firing at a mark, the latter
intending to buy the pistol; a considerable time be-
fore the 2d of June, the plaintiff, who had been a
constant attendant at the Jews Chapel, in Bethnal-
green, happened to be present one Sunday when some
books fell from :tr. eminence upon the heads of the
congregation, which produced a laugh ; and at an
equally distant period, when the plaintiff's uncle com-
plained of the want of work, the plaintiff, out of fun,
shot several bullets from a cross-bow, at a chimney-
pot, saying, that he would find him work by break-
ing the pot. Mr. Williams, finding that he could
get no satisfactory explanation from the defendant,
returned to the plaintiff, and desired him to keep
himself quiet, cool, and collected, until he should see
justice done him. He was going away, when he
heard that four Doctors were coming to the house to
inquire into the plaintiff's case; upon which, he staid
to receive Dr. Powell, Dr. Dunstan, Mr. Salmon,
and Mr. Warburton, the Keeper of a Lunatic Asy-
lum at Hackney. The moment these Gentlemen ar-
rived, Mr. Williams, with considerable vehemence,
demanded their names, their business, what brought
them there, threatened actions of trespass, and de-
sired them to be gone about their business, suffering
only one question to be put to the plaintiff. These
tientlemen were accordingly compelled to retire
without effecting the object of their visit. A consi-
derable body of evidence was adduced to shew that
the plaintiff, for several months prior to the 2d of
Julie, and down to the present moment, was of per-
fectly sane mind and sound understanding. On the
2d of June, he had written several letters on business,
in the most perfect and collected manner. On Sun-
day evening, the 4th of June,: the keepers demanded
some supper of the plaintiff, who declined the re-.
quest by saying, that. they were uninvited guests, and
they immediately lift the house without assigning
any reason for their departure. Under these circum-

stances the present action was brought. It was sug-.
gested, as a motive tor the defendant's conduct, that
he had lent himself to certain alleged sinister views,
which the plaintiff's uncle had towards his nephew'i
property; but there was no direct proof upon this
part of the case. The witnesses called in support of
the plaintiff's case were, Mr. T. N. Williams, Dr.
IPett, a Physician, Mr. Wildeboar a Surgeon, Mr. R.
Wolsey, Mr. Edward Boucher, Mr. Burgess, Mr. R.
Russell, and Mrs. Harris.
Mr. DENMAN addressed the Jury on behalf of the
defendant, and Called the following witnesses:
Joseph Dennis, half uncle to the plaintiff, stated,
that he was employed by the latter to collect his
rents. The plaintiff was ill in May, 1819. He vas
strapped down to the bed. He asked witness how he
was? and he answered very well. That was al: that
passed. In October of that year, the plaintiff and
his mother went to Margate, and stopped about three
weeks. His mother died on the 13th of November
in the same year. In March of this year, witness
went to plaintiff's house on business. Charlotte Or-
ton, the servant, was present. The girl was throw-
ing some cinders on the fire, when the plaintiff put
some powder into a fowling-piece, and fired it at her.
There might have been shot in it, but he did not
know that there was. It frightened him and the
girl. He had occasion to go to the plaintiff every
week, of a Monday, to carry his money. One morn-
ing in May, this year, the plaintiff came down stairs
with a loaded gun in his hand, and he asked witness
where he would have it ? Witness got out of the
way of the muzzle; and then the plaintiff said he
would open the street door, and see if there were any
sparrows. He begged him not lo shoot at the spar-
rows. He then said, he would shoot a._ the trees, and
see how the leaves would fall. Witness begged him
not to do so, because it would cause an alarm in the
neighbourhood, but he said he would, because g‘ they
say I am mad, and rii make them think so."-
-He did not fire. He had no coat or waistcoat on.
Witness said what he had to say to him, and then
went away. This was either on a Tuesday or Wed-
nesday, about the beginning of May, or it might
be about the middle. The impression on witness's own,
mind, from what he saw, was, that the plaintiff was
a deranged man. Witness applied to Mr. Salmon,
knowing that that Gentleman had attended the plain-
tiff in his former illness. He applied to Mr. Salmon
about the Ist of June. Recollects that in the month
of May, about the beginning, the plaintiff fired twelve
shots, from a cross-bow across the green, at a chim-
ney pot. It was a paddock, or green field, facing his
door. Some hit the chimney, others went over the
house towards the foot-path. They were leaden bul-
lets, about the size of a marble. He said he did this
to make witness a job, he being in the bricklaying
line. Saw Mr. Salmon at Mr. Talbot's, and told him
the circumstances as they occurred. He asked him
what was the best way to take care of him, to see
that he did no violence to himself or any body else ?
-Mr. Salmon said he would not do anything until the
firearms were removed-from the plaintiff's presence,
so that he could not get at them. In consequence of
that witness told Mr. Talbot, and it was agreed to
send some men to set the fire-arms and put them
away when the plaintiff was out. Some men were
accordingly sent on the Friday evening, 23 of June,
the same day he had so spoken to Mr. Talbot. Wit-
ness told the latter when the plaintiff went out.—
Witness told the defendant that he believed the plain-
tiff to be insane.

Cross-examined. —Witness was a bricklayer by
trade, and had collected rents both for the plaintiff
and the defendant. The rents of the latter were
handed over to the plaintiff. Those rents were col-
lected up to this affair. He now collected rents for
the defendant, but had received notice from the plain-
tiff that he should not collect for him any longer
after this affair. Did not recollect, to his knowledge,
saying to Mrs. Harris, or anybody else, that he had
nothing to do with this business, but that it was all
the defendant's affair. Might have said so to Mr.
Wolsey, because that Gentleman conducted himself
in such a manner that he was afraid for his life, and
therefore he could not recollect what he might have
said. Did not recollect saying anything of that kind
to Mr. Roupell, or Mr. Boucher ; in fact, did not
say so in the presence of either of those Gentlemen.
Might have said so to Mr. Wolsey. He knew that
the plaintiff had been in partnership with Mr. Wil-
liams. Witness was the only nest of kin to the
plaintiff. " We were all the same family by three
mothers !"—(Laughter).
Dr. Powell, Secretary to the Commission for visit-
ing Lunatic Asylums, under the Act for regulating
Madhouses, said he knew the defendant's receptacle
at Bethnal Green. Had known him there as long as
twenty years. Should not know the plaintiff it he
saw him now, but went to his house on Sunday, the
4th of June, at the request of the defendant. Went
with Mr.Warburton, Mr. Dunstan, and Mr. Salmon.
The two latter Gentlemen were in partnership. Mr.
Salmon is dead within a few months. They went
into a parlour, where the plaintiff was sitting at a
desk with law papers before him ; there were two
other Gentlemen, Mr. Williams and Mr. Wolsey, with
him, and the keeper. Witness went for the purpose
of inquiring into the state of the plaintiff's mind,
and began so to do, but was immediately interrupted
and frightened by Mr. Williams, though his nerves
were pretty strong, but had not been in the habit of
experiencing such a reception as Mr. Williams gave
him, who came down upon him with all the legal
artillery of trespasses, indictments, and prosecutions;
asked him who he was ? took down his name, and
prohibited the plaintiff from giving any answer to
any inquiries, the plaintiff appearing to stand in con-
siderable awe of Mr. Williams. In consequence of
this, witness thought it his immediate duty to with-
draw, having no with to interfere, and having no in-
terest upon the subject, and was indeed very glad to
get away. He had not the least opportunity of form-
ing any judgment as to the state of the plaintiff's
' mind. So placid and quiet are lunatics at times,
that it would require many hours to make out a
case of insanity.
The CHIEF JUSTICE said, it was an unfortunate
circumstance in the case that Mr. Salmon was dead.
Thomas Dolby, one of the defendant's servants, as
a keeper, for fourteen years, had been in the habit
of attending insane persons at their own houses. In
May, 1819, attended. the plaintiff at his brother's
house, and had him under his care for some time.
He had overtaken the plaintiff in Bishopszate-street,

with a sword-stick in his hand ; told him that Mr.
Talbot wished to speakto him on particular business;
the plaintiff went to his office, and returned with wit-
ness to Mr. Dennis's house. The mother was in the
room at the time, and took the sword-stick from him,
and put away the fire-arms which were then in the
room. The plaintiff fell down upon his knees, and
began to pray. He was afterwards under witness s
care, and was very violent indeed. He attempted
to jump out of the window, having got loose from
his bed. He raved a great deal, and-was consider-
ably agitated in his mind ; and was, in short, raving
mad. It was religious madness. Asked frequently
for the Bible to pray, as he had done wrong. On
the 2d of June, of this year, in the evening, witness
went to the plaintiff's house, by orders of the defend-
ant and the plaintiff's uncle. The plaintiff was not
then at home, and witness took away a gun and a
pistol ; the former was loaded with powder and shot.
The plaintiff came home at ten at night ; he had
some gun-powder in his pocket ; it was about a
pound, in a flask : he laid it down on the table, and
witness took it away and locked it up. The door
was locked against him that night, and next morn-
ing he appeared to be a good deal agitated. Mr.
Salmon came that day, and staid about ten minutes.
Mr. Salmon desired witness and the other man to
stop. Remembered Mr. Williams coming in the af-
ternoon, and he appeared to be in a great passion,
and wanted to know their business. They would not
tell him, further than that they had orders to stay.—
Mr. Williams came again in the evening with another
Gentleman. Mr. Wolsey was there at the time whirr,
Mr. Williams first came. Left the plaintiff's house
on Sunday evening, with the other keeper. From
what witness saw, his opinion was, that the plaintiff's
mind was in a flighty, agitated state.
Cross-examined.—Mr. Salmon was the partner of
Mr. Dunstan, who was son-in-law to Mr. Warbur-
ton, the principal of the defendant. Plaintiff was
very flighty. Did not say to Mr. Williams, that he
did not dare give any opinion upon the subject, for
it was as much as his place was worth. He did say
it was no business of his to give any opinion. Did
not say, in answer to a question from Mr. Williams,
that he must confess he did not see any acts of in-
sanity in the plaintiff's conduct. Did not say to Mr.
Boucher, that he was in a sad scrape for what he
had done, or that he was in a shocking plight, and
was afraid he should be imprisoned next, nor any
thing like it.
John Foot, the other keeper, spoke to the same
effect as the last witness, with respect to being at the
plaintiff's house last June. In witness'sjudgment,
the plaintiff was not of sound mind. lle was very
much agitated, and threatened to shoot witness and
his companion, if he could lay hold of his fire-arms.
Mr. Salmon staid about 20 minutes with the plaintiff.
Cross-examined.—The threat to shoot was on Sa-
turday, the Sd of June last, in the garden. He was
very violent from the time witness came into the
house, until he left on the Sunday night, as often as
he saw him. Could not say that he observed any
particular acts of insanity: he was muttering and
speaking to himself. Did not discover his insanity
until the Saturday ; not on the Friday, though he
thought he was insane at that time. Plaintiff was
not violent on Sunday evening, when he left him.—
Remembered asking the plaintiff for some supper
that night. They went away of their own accord,
James Type spoke to the plaintiff's insanity in
May, 1819, having been employed as one of his
keepers.: he was with him three months, the plaintiff
was extremely violent; he used to speak of evil
spirits that were coming for him, and said he should
''ke to be saved.

Mr. Salmon's certificate of the plaintiff's insanity,
dated the 3d of June, was then tendered in evidence.

The plaintiff's Counsel objected that this piece of
evidence could not be received. The trespass was
alleged to have taken place on the 2d of June, whereas
the certificate was dated on the 3d of June, after the
trespass. There was no proof that it existed before
the trespass. The objection was, however waved.
It was proved that Mr. Salmon was the Visiting Sur-
geon of the defendant's house; it was a lucrative em-
ployment. The defendant's case here closed.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL then addressed the Jury
for the defence. _

The CmtEir JOsTicz summed up the case for the
Jury with great minuteness and impartiality.
The Jury retired for about half an hour, and found
a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, £3OO.