The Statesman.
London, England, 1810-12-19 00:00:00

mer period laboured? No; I •Sio• not apprehend
there is. •
You have said, that.yon are• not less sanguine of
his Majesty's •ultimate recovery, than you were
when you gavu your evidence before the Privy
Council ; are you. less sanguine a • his Majesty's
speedy recovery 'than • you were 'at *Oat petiod ?
Yes, of his Majesty's speedy revovery ; from the
relapse which took: place immediately afterwards,l
we certainly have not so fair a 'prospect..
Can you state any iirobable time for his Wes.'
ty's altimate recovery ? No, 1 cannot indeed ; I
think the King is very much in the saute state that
saw him in. the latter end of the year 1788, and
the beginning of the year 1789; but it varies so,
there are so many fluctuations, that when we see
the King a little better, and going on, a little better,
for two or three days, we are sanguine, and if:
there comes a relapse it throws as hack again ; there,
ate such fluctuations, it is Impossible to give any
positive and decided opinion ; and indeed in this
ease there is no definitive time in the nature of the
maim!? ; you can very seldom • say ; when men
have a common fever, after the symptoms' have been
formed three or four days, ono can form a pretty
good judgment as to the duration of diedisease; but
In this,. I believe, nobody has ever been able to
ascertain any precise time.

,Than I understand, from the nature of the ma.
lady, It is impossible, far medical skill to sseertaio
the time of recovery„-,a. Outstays! or other ordinary
tlhluttsa ? Just so.
Atteiountuktlnion that thattlifficulty is Increased
by Ids. Male-stye
:w n* io asp, and .by a other
infirmity' that May hive" attached. to his Majesty?
The King is a eon_ iOd age; therivip *0 much ap.
parent integrity of constitution abontkiia,. that I:
think that that certainly does not operate upon my
mind ; and I believe not, upon.ths of any, so
much as it would in the ease df any other person. .1
h Do you know how Ging the Chancellor remain.
ked with the. King ? Very little inore than a quarter.
of an hour; I think Sir. Henry Halfwit said he
minuted him, and that it was 18 minutes.
You hare stated, that When Lord Marlow saw
his Majesty, in 1788, and when Mr. Pitt saw his
Majestrabout the same time, you were 'present at
those interviews? . I was present when Mr. Pitt
went in, and 1 think I was once present when Lord
Thurlow went in. .
Nobody was preeini the day before yesterdey,
whoa the Lord Chancellor went in ? No.
Was the absence of the Physciaus, upon this.
occasion, at the Physicians' own suggestion, or at
the request of the Lord Chancellor ? At the Phy.
sicians' own suggestion, that the Chancellor should
form his own opinion.
Did not the duration of his continuance depend
upon the opinion of the Physicians ? Entirely :
the stipulation of the Physicians was, that he
should see his Majesty for a quarter of as hour.
It was of Sir" Henry Raiford'; owe potion, that
he proposed to the King to see this Lord Chancel.
for ; and, having so proposed to ;the tin& be eons.
municated to the other Physicians that he had so
proposed, and they after,some discussion consent,.
ed to it ? Yes.
But It was net first of ail proposed to the Phy:
slates OS -a measure by Sir Henry Halford ? It
had beeWdiseussed among us some time before, and
Sir Hehry Halliard at that time thought ho saw the
**King in such a state in which we all said if we had
seep him we should hip) wished its there was nu
blame in the world attached to Sir Henry Belford.
When his Majesty's Physicians, occasionally, in-',
their daily reports, describe his Majesty as being
better, do they mean to confine themselves exctu.
sively to his mental disorder, or to combine with it
any considerations of his bodily state? To cunt.
bine them, when they say he is better, they mean
both.
Fever, in the bulletins? means not merely fever,
but the mental disorder aggravated by fever ? At.
those times the King has had fever, and it has perhaps
been the most prominent part of his disorder ; there
have been periods when the King was very serious. ,
ty ill with fever. Withdrew.

Dr. MATTIM, BAILLIE called in, and Examined.
Lrhe first eight questions were similar to,those
print by the Privy Council. 3
y"usign the present disorder of his Ma.
`Met to any particular cause? I have no doubt in
my wee mind, that his complaint arose out of the
treat affection that his Majesty had for his deceased
*tighter, and the great affection that he felt during
'ter long and tedious illness.
Whets were you first called to see the King ? I
Relieve it was the 25th of October. .••
"Were you in the habit or attending on the King
*fere his Moen? No, not at all. - •
Did you ever visit the King., as a patient, before
this illness ? No, never. ;
In ordinary CIIICS NOUN yet oppose that a pa.
tient was more liked tot fiom a mental ma.
tidy, haring been s with mental malady three
or four limes previously, than if he had never been
tie affected ? Ido not know very well what answer
'Ai give to that question : I think it hears two ways;
lit appears to me, that where a person has had at
indisposition with certain symptoms three or fuer
times, and has recovered, it always gives a md.
dyeable presumption, provided the constitution is
not much weakened in its pollen, that the, person
will recover again ; at the seine time it may be said,
that the susceptibility to dine*, ii increased by the
number of attacks, and he that point of view the
rim' might notbesolikely to recover. Lthink,
however, that the other reasoning has more power
altogether than the last, and thaefore I should
say? that if the constitution is not much weakened,
[it gives a presumption, if a person has recovered
front a similar disease three times, that he his a
Considerable chance of recovering the fourth time.
When you talk of the King's recovery, and
competency to public business, you mean, the com-
plete recovery, as you would speak of another pa.
tient, to be competent to the management and di.
faction; of all his affairs ? I think so. I do not
say that the King might not fall back and be liable
to any future attack of a similar indisposition ; but
as far as I can judge ofit,'it is most probable,
that if he does recover, he will recover with the
same power of performing his duties, as a SOM.
reign, as before.

•;;

_ VIE ..STATESMAII._

Hate any of the anyal ramify seen the Kin,
since his indisposition ? No as fir as I know ; I
believe at the time he was beginning to be hurried
at first, his family saw him ; 4ut since the disease
established ils character, I blieve none of the Royal
Fancily have seen him. I believe nobody since the
251 it of October.
Is the hurry of which you speak, to be under.
Main eibsequent of anterior to the 25th of Oc to.
ber ? He was certainly Very much hurried on the
25th of October ; 'heti believe there were little
marks of thallium sort before that ; and that they
were observed by his family, before they were ob-
served by strangers.
Did yon observe any symptom; of it lief Ore the
25th of October ? I think once or twice I observed
a little; but it did not strike me much ; on the 25th
it. Wis very well Marked.' C saw the King twice a
day, before the 25th, to give an account of his
daughter.`
Can any persons have any access to his Majesty,
without the knowledge and consent of his Physici.
ans ? I. believe not ; there are certain persons of
course 'established about his Majesty, but there is
nu stranger ; occasionally One Or IttO of his con.
"Wendel pages have come into the room fee an lea
',state, hut I do net know that 'any body else has.
Has any perste], other than the Royal Family,
or his proper attendants, seen the King, since you
:inteelreen in-attendance epee his Majesty ? Yes,
the fiord Chancellor sew Isis Majesty the day before
yesterday. •
Were you commlted on the propriety of the Lord
Chancellua 'a seeing the King ? It made a part of
general conversation, among the Physicians, the
;day before the Lord Chancellor saw the King; and
it was thought upon the whole, perhaps, that it,
would be more satisfactory that the Chancellor
should see the King, so as to give an account of him
from his own observation.
Was that a matter that suggested itself to the
Phypiciansintheir medic4l capacity,or was it thrown
out from any other quarter ? It wis not thrown
out from any other quarter so far as I know. •
From which of the Physicians did the first sag.
gestion come, of the propriety of the Chancellor
seeing the King? I believe it was from Dr. lie-
berden.
What reasons did Dr. Heberilen assign, for wish.
big the Chancellor to sec the King ? There was no
reason assigned, but that I have assigned now, that
it was thought desirable Parliament should have,'
not 'simply the report of the Physicians, but the
report of the Lord-Chancellor, from his own obser..
ration. •
Did the Physicians consider it any part of their
duty to discuss what would be most satisfactory to
Parliament ? I really do not know, whether they
may not have gone beyond their duty; I do not
pretend to say whether it was wisteor not.
De you know that his Majesty. bad been inform.
ed, previously
.to such consultation among the Phy.
SiCiallS, that On that day the Chancellor would be
at Windsor ? Yes, he was informed.
By whom was be so informed ? I believe by Sir
.
Halford.
Was such intoning* communicated by Sir. D.
Ilslford ito the Ka t Ii consequence of any dis-
euasion amongst the PtysicianO, There was ne
discussion, es far " is' I recollect, by Which.. Sir
Henry Was empowered to make any communica.
tion teethe King • and the fact is, I believe it was
thought afterwards better that the communication.
hail nut been made.
llas his Majesty been subject to .any bodily in.
disposition within the last fortnight ? His body,
has hardly been at any time perfectly free from in.
disposition.
' Do you attach any importance to the indisposi.
Lion to which his Majesty has been subject, in the
course of the last foitnight, as affecting his general
health ? I should not, I think, attach much
im-
portance to it; the idea that naturally occurs to the
mind, in considering a small defect of bodily health
is this, that as the King during the whole of this
indisposition has had more or less of bodily in.
disposition, though sometimes very little, yet it be.
comes an additional,..though a slight proof, that
he may probably. recover, that he has that bo-
dily ailment': if there was precisely the state of
mind which the Kiag has without bodily ailment,
we should say, there was altogether a less chance, of
the King's recovering, than if he had the bodily
ailment just stated ; at the time time, I think it
right to say, that sometimes that bodily ailment
has been very little.-
Does the King's age 'render his recovery more or
less probable, than if lie were • yeupger person ?.
It certainly renders it less probable; at the same
time age is a relatita term ; the King, •at 72, is
stronger and younger, if one may use that expres-
sion,
than many persons of 62, and therefore may
have a better chance than most persons would have
at the same period Orlife. •
• Does the King's defect of sight at all influence,
in your opinionethe probability, or improbability
of Meting's ultimate recovery ? I have really no
experienca stall, and therefore what I shall say to
the committee mast be considered as a conjecture,
and therefore peobably of little. value. 1 should
conceive that, in the earlier periods of an Wis.
position like the King's, blindness would probably
be an advantage, that it would lessen the excitement ;
butwlseti a person, afflicted like the King, goes on
towards recovery, I conceive that the want of sight
would be a disadvantagee.becaute be would be de.
prived Luf Many amusements that would occupy his
mind and assist- ke the complete recovery. I con.
ceivee that whin a person, similarly situate with re-
Ord to complaint as the King, has got into a state
,of convalescence se as to be able to take exercise,
perhaps, the having sight would be then be a disad-
vantage again, te:catise* he would-be roused by a
great many objects and take. violent exercise,
high might possibly bring beck a return of the
complaint. AVliat I ray now, however, is altoge. '
ther conjecture.
Do you 'think that the King's defect of sight is
less likely to havitan iulluence upou the ultimate
1. m:evertor the 'King, than upon the duratiop.of
, his disorder I I slimly think it less likely to have'
an inflactice upon the positive recovery of.the Wing,
than upon' the duration of his illness.
Can yon, undeethe circumstances which Peculiarly
attach to the King's situation, his defect of sight