The Sun. — 1862-02-11 (London, England)

EDWIN JAMES.'  " I was quite startled. In the same packet were other letters from Mr. James, which I produce. These things set me to inquire. I asked at Mr.  Ingram's office, of Mr. Begbie, his cashier, if they could trace any money passing from Mr. Ingram to Mr. James, and they could not. I then went to Mr. —, who was very intimate with Mr. Ingram, and made the same inquiry of him. Mr. told me that in the interval between the first and second trials of the case of ' Scully v. Ingram,' Mr. Ingram came to him and said, in a state of great excitement, I must lend Mr. James some money.' Mr. replied that he did not see that he must. Mr. Ingram answered, I must—l am so afraid of him—l must do anything he asks, and you must lend him the money for me.' I produce various letters which I have subse quently found, from Mr. to Mr. James, with reference to two bills, each of the date of July 30, 1859—one for £750, the other for £soo—accepted  by Mr. James, not made payable at any banker's. Having ascertained these facts, I had an interview with Mr. James at the Euston Hotel. My impression of the manner in which Mr. James crossexamined Mr. Ingram at the trial was that it was excessive, but I may not be competent to form an opinion upon that point—but of the effect I am certain, that after it Mr. Ingram was in a state of totally shattered nerves, and utterly broken down. Upon my meeting Mr. James at the Euston Hotel I said to him, ' It is a singular accident that it was into this very room I with difficulty led poor Mr. Ingram after your cross examination of him, and I must tell you that if ever a man had a narrow escape of causing another man's suicide, you had it on that occasion.' I then mentioned to him my discovery of the debt, and that it was my duty to ask him for payment. Mr. James admitted he had had the money, sayiLg that it was only £l,OOO, that his election expenses had been very considerable, that he was very poor, but he would give me two other bills, which he did. I said I must give  my opinion of the transaction ; that as regarded the loan it was altogether discreditable ; that he was Mr. Scully's counsel, and it could not bear the daylight that he should be found borrowing money from Mr. Ingram. Mr. James replied that he did not see it in that light, as Mr. Ingram had offered him the money. I replied that I could not think that to be the case.  " Mr. Ingram had told me that Mr. James had spoken to him very kindly, advising him to settle the action. The two bills given me by Mr. James have been dishonoured. The date of the two bills given to Mr. --, July 30, 1859, was after the first and before the second trial." Mr. James, who of course was furnished with a copy of this statement of Mr. Watkins, offered no substantial contradiction to its contents. In effect, he wished the benchers to believe that Mr. Ingram, as his friend, offered, in conjunction with " three or four other friends," £l,OOO each for meeting the expenses of the learned gentleman's second return for Marylebone in May, 1859. Such " offer," be said, had been "communicated" to him ; but he did not inform the Bench of the communicant's name, nor the names of the other friends who he alleged, "did assist me by loans which I have since repaid !" We have heard of men rushing to newly •discovered gold diggings, but never before of idiots offering loans to such a notoriously involved man as Mr. James. But this justice we do him—that in his " Statement of Explanations" of the Ingram transaction he writes that he should " ever regret the indiscretion of accepting the loan," though " there was nothing of a dishonourable character ever intended or• thought of on the part of Mr. Ingram or myself, either in its proffer or acceptance." It may be doubtful whether the benchers on this disreputable transaction alone would have done more than reprimand the unscrupulous debtor. There were, however, other ample grounds for erasing his name from the books of the inn.  To contivue our narrative, we will now succinctly  state the evidence of Mr. Tallents, whose examination on June 18th followed the above interlude of " Scully v. Ingram." This witness's testimony and documentary proofs clenched the nails. It is unnecessary to give a long correspondence in 1857 between the late Earl Yarborough and Mr. Tallents with Mr. James ; it forms, however, an important element in the history of Mr. James's first use of Lord Woraley. By the last act of that year the learned gentleman thus addressed his lordship's solicitor : " Pall-mall, Monday Evening, Dec. 7,1857. " My dear Mr. Tallents,—l beg you will convey to Lord Yarborough my very deep regret that my pecuniary transactions with Lord Woraley should have caused him one moment's uneasiness, and to convey to him my assurance that the amount for payment of which Lord Woraley is security shall be punctually discharged by myself. Lord Yar borough has been so kind a patron and friend to me that I am under deep obligations to him, and would make any sacrifice rather than occasion him annoyance or discomfort.—Believe me, yours faithfully, "