t)50\ 
 
 

■..«..». Cornell University Library 
 arW9501 
 
 The Lady Mordaunt divorce case. 
 
 „ 3 1924 031 444 437 
 olin.anx 
 
® » Cornell University 
 VB Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924031444437 
 
-#■ - 
 
 
 J^1V^!S;(SS.HSSSS0. 
 
 THE 
 
 i 
 
 LADY MORDAUNT 
 
 DIVORCE CASE. 
 
 FULL EEPOET OF TEE PEOCEEDINGS. 
 
 LETTERS FROM THE PRINCE OF WALES. 
 HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS IN THE WITNESS-BOX. 
 
 EVIDENCE OF THE NURSE AND THE DOCTORS. 
 
 THE TEMPLli: EDITION. 
 
 PRICE THREEPENCE. 
 
 TEMPLE PUBLISHING OFFICES, FLEET STEEET, LONDON. 
 
 m. 
 
President White 
 
 Library 
 
 A,^it 
 
GREAT SCANDAL IN HIGH LIFE. 
 
 MOKDAUNT t. MOEDAUNT, JOHNSTONE, AND COLE. 
 
 About a. year ago, a Jaint whisper of a great scandal, implicating some of the 
 highest and noblest ia the land, ran through society, increasing into a rumour of a 
 very decided character when certain organs of the press, possessed of authentic 
 information, ventured to name some of the great persons who would figure in it in 
 a very unenviable mannei. But rumour, like mist upon a glass, is fleeting ; and 
 the case faded away from all those but who were personally concerned, until the 
 morning of Wednesday, February 16, when a crowded court listened eagerly to the 
 opening details of the story destined to run like wildfire throughout the length 
 and breadth of the land. The following careful report of this causes ccUbre has 
 been compUed from the pages of the Thue's, Standard, Daily Telegraph, and other 
 papers of acknowledged high position ; and in addition to the trustworthy infor- 
 mation derived from these sources, the report will be interspersed with a few 
 remarks from our own commissioner who attended during the trial. 
 
 This much-talked-of and now celebrated case came on for trial this morning, Feb. 
 16, on'.the issue of the sanity or insanity of the respondent. Lady Mordaunt. The suit 
 was instituted by Sir Charles Mordaunt, on the ground of his wife's adultery with 
 the co-respondents. Sir Frederick Johnstone and Viscount Cole. Lady Mordaunt 
 entered no plea, and in consequence of her alleged madness the Judge Ordinary 
 directed a jury to try the special issue — viz., whether she was sane or insane at 
 the time and since the citation on the petition was served upon her. As neither 
 of the co-respondents were involved in this issue, they did not enter an appearance. 
 The interest taken in the case was fully demonstrated by the numbers of people 
 anxious to gain admission into the court. In anticipation of the expected crowd, 
 additional poUcemen were placed on duty at the various approaches to the court, 
 so as to give access and egress to the counsel, attorneys, witnesses, and others 
 interested in and connected with the case. 
 
 Mr. Serjeant Ballantine, Dr. Spinks, Q.C., and Mr. Inderwiok, were counsel for 
 the petitioner. Sir Charles Mordaunt ; Dr. Deane, Q.C., Mr. Archibald, and Mr. 
 Searle for the respondent, Lady Mordaunt. Mr. Lord held a watching brief for 
 co-respondent. Viscount Cole, but not for the purpose of taking any part in the 
 case. 
 
 Dr. Deane, Q.C., opened the case on the part of Mr. Robert Moncreiffe, Lady 
 Mordaunt's guardian, and said that the issue to be tried was whether on a certain 
 day, and at the present time. Lady Mordaunt was of sound mind. There were two 
 theories, upon one of which he would have to speak, the other would be taken up 
 by Mr. Serjeant Ballantiue. The theory of the other side, he apprehended, would 
 be to the following effect — viz., that although there were certain symptoms which 
 would lead casual observers to the conclusion that Lady Mordaunt was insane, yet 
 those appearances were all feigned, and only put on for a purpose — that those 
 symptoms only appeared before certain persons — that they only appeared before 
 her relations and friends, but not before others. The answer to that would be that 
 it was very strange that a person charged with such a crime as Lady Mordaunt was 
 in this ease, should put on these appearances for the purpose of deceiving those 
 who were most interested in her innocence, and in having her innocence established. 
 If she had deceived other persons generally, it could be understood ; but it 
 appeared to him a strange thing that before her father, for instance, she should 
 seem to be out of her mind, and that before comparative strangers, and others, she 
 should appear quite sane. His theory would be that Lady Mordaunt was in truth 
 and fact suffering from a disease which, whether it had primarily affected her 
 blood, or her braia or nerves through thespinal cord, had gradually proceeded from 
 
a given time, was existing from the .SOth of April last year, and had, down to Saturday- 
 last, the 12th. On the 6th of May she was seen by Dr. Priestly, Dr. Tuke, and Sir J. 
 Alderson, at Walton. Between the 16th and the 18th of May, whilst she was in 
 London, shejwas seen by Dr. Priestly and by Dr. Tuke. From the 17th of May down 
 to the 18th of August, when she removed from Worthing, she was constantly 
 attended by a local medical gentleman of the name of Harris. The 5th of August 
 last was a very material date. On that day, or shortly after, Lord Penzance, 
 before whom the matter had been brought in various shapes, was pleased to direct 
 that Dr. Wood should -see this unfortunate lady, and accordingly this was done — 
 not at the instance of interested parties on either side, but by order of the Court. 
 From the 25th of August down to this date, a gentleman named Hughes, of Bromley, 
 had paid her no less than fifty-one visits ; and on Saturday last, he 12th instant, 
 she was seen by Sir James Simpson, of Edinburgh, a gentleman whose reputation 
 reached far beyond the United Kingdom. On one occasion she was asked by Dr. 
 Wood to sing a baUad, entitled, " Strangers yet," the words of which were by Mr. 
 Monckton Milnes, now Lord Houghton, and the first verse of which ran as 
 ollows : — 
 
 " Strangers yet, after years of life together ; 
 
 After fair and atormy "weatlier ; 
 
 After travel in far lands ; 
 
 After toucli of wedded hands. 
 
 Why thus joined ? Why ever met, 
 
 If they must be strangers yet,; 
 
 After childhood's winning ways, 
 
 After care and blame and praise ?" 
 
 She had been in the habit of singing that ballad before all these troubles came 
 upon her, and on that occasion the words evidently struck some chord in her 
 heart ; she burst into a flood of tears, and said she could not sing it. She 
 showed extraordinary docility in anything she was asked to do by Dr. Wood ; 
 for instance, such as his asking her to take a piece of china off the mantel- 
 piece, and to hold it first in one position and then another ; and yet when she 
 was asked to sing a song she utterly broke down. Subsequently, however, when 
 Dr. Wood asked her to sing this same song, she sat down to the piano and 
 sang it right off. These symptoms showed the utter vacuity of her mind, and 
 the absence of anything like sanity. He should also call before them those of 
 her relations who were constantly with her, and had the fullest opportunities 
 of observing her, and whose testimony woiild be entirely to the same effect ; 
 amongst them Sir Thomas Moncreifie, her father. It was utterly incredible that 
 a yoimg woman of twenty-two years of age could have had sufficient strength 
 of will and mind to keep up a settled pl^ of deceit, imposture, and delusion 
 for such a length of time. By what stratagem could such a person succeed in 
 imposing upon the medical men 1 By what cunning artifice could she so modify 
 the temperature of her body that the perspiration of disease should stand upon 
 her skin — her head hot, and her feet cold? The question for them was to try 
 whether Lady Mordaunt had been carrying on a system of delusion so artful as to 
 take in eight or ten of the wisest and most experienced medical men in the tJnitee 
 Kingdom, or whether she was really suffering, as he had described, from thj 
 effects of this direful malady. He was satisfied he had said enough to ensure thei 
 attentive and impartial consideration of the question. 
 
 The learned counsel ceased, and a hushed whisper passed through the Court, 
 and Jane Lang was immediately called, who deposed : — -In May, 1869, I became 
 lady's companion to Lady Mordaunt. She was then in Belgrave-square. I atocom- 
 panied her from Belgrave-squaie to Worthing. I have gone out walking with 
 her. When we were out she was in the habit of/picking up dirty articles from the 
 street — mud and such like. She would carry it in her hand, and would not put it 
 down. She had also a total want of modesty. She would go about the house 
 without anything on her. She was also often dirty in her habits. She was so in 
 bed and about the house. In the morning we took her up and washed her like a 
 child. Sometimes she would not speak for days. She was also in the habit of 
 wandering about the house at night, and went into the servants' bed-rooms. The 
 bed-room doors were locked day and night, and she would call for a hammer to 
 break them open, as she believed Sir Charles Mordaunt was in the room. On one 
 occasion she came down'with nothing on but her stockings and an old cloak, and 
 walked about the house. When out in the carriage driving she would try to throw 
 herself out, and I had to watch her. She often complained of pain in her head, 
 and I applied eau-de-Cologne to it. When she got hold of the bottle she would 
 place it at her feet. She was sometimes very irritable in her temper, and was 
 
jnuoh annoyed by any noise. Even people talking on the road opposite the house 
 annoyed her. She often spoke about her dress, and said it wag contemptible. 
 She also complained of its being dirty. She destroyed her hat in consequence. 
 She would also pick up pennies if she could get them and hide them. I had 
 difficulty in getting her to take her food, and I had to feed her. She wag always 
 excited after seeing strangers. She told me that she had discovered a plot 
 against her, and that she had done so in a miraculous manner. Lady Mordaunt 
 left Worthing two days after I left her, and went to Bromley, I have seen her 
 once there. She was then stronger and stouter. She threw herself about the 
 room, and ate coals and cinders. 
 
 In cross-examination by Mr. Serjeant Ballantine, 
 
 The witness said : During the time I was with Lady JMordaunt her mother 
 Tisited her twice. It was Lady Mordaunt's vsdsh that I should attend her. 
 
 Dr. Tuke, examined by Mr. Archibald : On the 4th May I accompanied Dr. 
 Priestley to Walton Hall. I have heard the examination of that gentleman. I 
 made an examination of Lady Mordaunt. I had seen Lady Mordaunt before, and 
 it wag from the two visits I formed my certificate. I had no doubt that Lady 
 Mordaunt was suffering from a species of insanity and catalepsy. 
 
 Cross-examined ; My opinion is that from the confinement up to the time I saw 
 ier she was sufEering from insanity. I inquired what the circumstances of her 
 confinement were. I heard the whole of the statements she had made. I went 
 fully into her history. I never heard that she had made any statement to Lady 
 Moncreiffe. I never had any communication with Lady Louisa. The statements 
 she made I thought were delusions. If Lady Mordaunt had acted in that way 
 with one person, it seemed J» me incredible that she could have done so with half 
 -a dozen within so short a period of her confinement. I had evidence of several 
 delusions, and thinking the lady insane, I thought it better to omit that particular 
 delusion, because it involved third persons. She had delusions about dead bodies. 
 I asked her, " Had you not some alarm about dead bodies being in the room here ?" 
 ■and she asked whether there were not dead bodies there. Another delusion was 
 that she had been poisoned ; and when I asked her about it, she said she had been 
 poisoned by laudanum. I was first told about this by Mrs. Forbes. The delusion 
 about the poison existed when I last saw her. The delusion with reference to the 
 dead bodies "had gone on the 6th of May. 
 
 Dr. Wood examined by Mr. Searle : I examined Lady Mordaunt, and found that 
 she was of unsound mind. I saw her again on the 3rd of July last, when she was 
 .at Worthing, and I was of the same opinion then. The bodily symptoms were 
 stronger marked than on the former occasion. She had a vacant look, cold, damp 
 lands, and feeble pulse, a white tongue, and the general atmosphere about her 
 was exceedingly characteristic of insanity. She always had fixed attitudes. 
 I could not get a single rational answer out of her, although I tried to converse 
 with her, and asked her many questions. She attempted to speak, but appeared 
 "to lose the thread, and ended in a silly laugh. I saw several scraps of her writing, 
 but I never actually saw her write. I last saw her at Worthing. 
 
 Cross-examined : My experience is that there is a peculiar atmosphere about 
 lunatics — a peculiar odour. 
 
 Mr. Serjeant Ballantine : You never acted upon it, I hope ? 
 
 Witness : No, never (a laugh). 
 
 By his Lordship : In ordinary cases the species of insanity comes shortly after 
 confinement. 
 
 His Lordship : Is it a fact that women suffering from this peculiar insanity do 
 •accuse themselves ? 
 
 Witness : I have no experience in the matter. 
 
 Dr. Gull deposed : In May I was called in to see Lady Mordaunt, and I saw 
 her on the 18th and 24th May. I went again to Worthing in the beginning of 
 -June, and a third time in July, I have subsequently seen her on several occa- 
 sions, and I do not think she has any mental comprehension at aU in the ordinary 
 sense. I questioned her in every way. She rarely used more than two words 
 consecutively. I remember on one occasion questioning her as to her unfortunate 
 position, and asked her what could be done, and she replied that a dose of castor 
 oil would put it all right. I saw no delusion, but there was a general absence of 
 mind. I examined her on more than one occasion as to her physical state, and 
 I found she had feeble pulse and clammy hands. I have questioned her, and 
 instead of answering she would burst out in a meaningless laugh. I think she is 
 ,now incapable of mind. I saw her last about three weeks since. I have heard 
 he evidence of one of her attendants, the nurse. 
 
Cross-examiued : Sometimes she would sit whilst I was talking to her ; some- 
 times jump up, and sometimes sit down upon the floor. I should not think she 
 could draw a cheque properly. 
 
 Three cheques drawn by Lady Mordaunt were produced, and the witness said 
 that they appeared to be properly drawn. 
 
 Mr. Serjeant BaUantine : I ask you whether they are not rather inconsistent 
 with the state of mind in which she appeared ; in fact, whether they were not 
 consistent with sham. 
 
 Witness : I was called «n to ascertain whether there was any shamming, and 
 my mind was specially drawn to the matter. 
 
 By his Lordship : The greatest proof that she was not shamming was the re- 
 markable uniformity of her mind. I felt her pulse most accurately, and then put 
 the most searching questions, which I ought not, perhaps, to have put, but there 
 was not the slightest nervous action. I spoke of her child, of her husband, and of 
 her position before the world ; but I might as well have spoken to a piece of wood, 
 for it had no effect upon her whatever. 
 
 The first day's proceedings closed, and an intimation was given that, although 
 Dr. Forbes Winslow and Dr. Tyler Smith had examined Lady Mordaunt on 
 behalf of her husband, and visited her upon several occasions, they would not 
 be called upon to give evidence, being probably reserved to give evidence when 
 the case becomes a question of divorce. 
 
 SECOND DAT. 
 
 As on the previous day, the body of the court was exceedingly crowded, and 
 the visitors in the gallery were very numerous. 
 
 Mr. Serjeant BaUantine, on the sitting of the Court, applied that the evidence 
 of Mr. Haynes, a witness for the petitioner, might be forthwith taken by com- 
 mission. He was in London at the Brunswick Hotel, Hanover-square, but was 
 BO ill as to render it improbable that he could attend for examination in Court. 
 
 It was arranged that the evidence of Mr. Haynes should be taken before a com- 
 mission at half-past four o'clock. 
 
 The forthcoming witnesses were then called and examined on behalf of the 
 respondent. 
 
 Mr. Harris : I am a surgeon practising at Worthing. On the 22nd of May, 
 however, I was called in to attend Lady Mordaunt. I continued to attend her 
 whUe she was at Worthing, about twice a week. I was in Court yesterday, and 
 agree with the other medical witnesses as to the state of her mind. 
 
 Cross-examined: There is no doubt that her disease is puerperal insanity,, 
 commencing shortly after the birth of her child. I don't think the disease can 
 be mistaken. It comes on with perfectly recognised signs. The patients suffering 
 under it are frequently delirious and violent. I know nothing about Lady Mor- 
 daunt's delusions. If I heard statements by a woman in a course ^of puerperal 
 mania, I should attach very little importance to them. After the birth of the child 
 the first indications of the disease would be a hot and painful head, and " mutter- 
 ing " delirium. I never knew a case in which there were not these symptoms. 
 There would also be a feverish pulse, and the patient would ' go on in that state- 
 for days. 
 
 Ee-examined : The symptoms vary much in different cases, but not the universa 
 or permanent symptoms. I never met with a case of what is called hysterical 
 catalepsy. 
 
 Dr. Wm. Wood : On the 5th of August I was named referee by the Court, with 
 Drs. Gull and Eeynolds, and have seen Lady Mordaunt five times. 
 
 Dr. Deane proposed to put the witness's report in evidence. Dr. Wood having 
 been appointed by the Court ; but his Lordship explained that he had simply 
 named him, having heard him give evidence in other oases, and knowing him to- 
 be a most competent person, and Mr. Serjeant BaUantine objected to the report 
 being put in. 
 
 Examination resumed : The first visit was on the 18th of September, at Page 
 Heath, near Bromley, with Mr. Hughes. She came down dressed as if for a walk. 
 I had never seen her before. On Mr. Hughes introducing me, she said, somewhat 
 sharply, " I am very well," as if there was no occasion for my visit. I asked how 
 long she had been there, and she at last said, " I don't know exactly." On pressing 
 her, I could not get any intelligent answer. I felt her pulse, and found it very 
 weak, suggestive of a feeble circulation. Her hand was cold and clammy ; also 
 
ter feet. I got replies with diifioulty aa to her health. I asked her to sing a song, 
 and I selected a song from a pile of music. She played imperfectly, but after cor- 
 recting her mistakes, started fairly with her song, which was "Strangers yet." 
 It was manifestly applicable to her position, and, after singing the first verses, she 
 burst into tears. I pressed her to continue, and she did so, though her tears were 
 falling so. She broke down again. On my asking what distressed her, she said, 
 " Oh, it's all nonsense, hysterical. She began again, but her feelings quite over- 
 came her. I. pressed her again, however, and she continued. She obeyed 
 unhesitatingly anything I told her to do, however unmeaning. 
 
 I proposed to her to give me a cheque, having arranged that a cheque-book 
 should be brought in. On my suggestion, she asked the butler to bring it, and it 
 was put before her. She filled one up in the usual way, drawing it on herself, the 
 amount (30?.) being suggested to her. I suggested that it required endorsing, but 
 she only added two letters, and on my telling her this was insufficient she inserted 
 her initials. 1 had to teU her how to endorse it, and she did so. 
 
 Cross-examined : The witness said he thought Lady Mordaunt could not have 
 spontaneously drawn cheques correctly. He should thictk it improbable for her to 
 ■draw cheques without being roused, but if she had done so that would not shake 
 his opinion. She " revoked" at whist in a way no sane person would have done. 
 He had himself sometimes revoked. (Mr. Serjeant Ballantine remarked, amid 
 laughter, that he hoped this was not an indication of insanity.) I did not take any 
 single circumstance as proof of insanity. Her bursting into tears at the song was, 
 as far as it went, an indication of sanity, and, therefore, inconsistent with the 
 theory of shamming. It was her docility in the matter which was most 
 remarkable. 
 
 Sir Thomas Moncreiffe : I am the father of Lady Mordaunt. On the 10th of May 
 I saw her alone at Walton. I found her in the luncheon-room. I stayed all night, 
 and left the next afternoon. I was with her most of the time. I have often 
 attempted to converse with her without succeeding ; sometimes she answered 
 questions briefly, sometimes not at all, and sometimes did not seem to understand 
 them. She often seemed indifferent to my visits, and when I asked whether she 
 wished to see her mother or sisters, would sometimes reply in the affirmative, at 
 others in the negative, and at others seemed indifierent. On the 15th of May I 
 removed her. After staying a few days at Belgrave-square she was taken to 
 Worthing, and afterwards to Bickley. I frequently visited her. At times she 
 showed gleams of understanding, but usually appeared imbecile. On the 9th of 
 February she appeared in the same mental state, but her bodily health has 
 improved. Dr. Gull recommended Worthing as a quiet place, and said her mind 
 required rest. 
 
 Cross-examined : Lady Louisa Moncreiffe went to Walton the second day after 
 her daughter's confinement, and after leaving went again. I heard from Lady 
 Louisa and Mrs. Forbes of statements made by Lady Mordaunt; also partially 
 from Sir Charles I heard that Lady Mordaunt had told her mother that the child 
 was not Sir Charles'. She also said it was not hers ; indeed, she made all kinds of 
 statements. I think she told me Lady Mordaunt had told her the child was not 
 her husband's, and that she had mentioned a gentleman as the father. The witness 
 was here questioned respecting a letter written by Lady Mordaunt on the 9th of 
 October, 1869, to her mother, and the production of which had been called for by 
 the other side. It was accordingly produced and read, being as follows : — 
 
 "Octobers. 
 
 " My dear Mother,— I am at last able to write a line, to tell you that 1 am at liberty to wxite to you, 
 
 and say I am quite well. Bird has taken a journey home to-day ; has become very cockey of late. 
 
 I hope Bunchey was not any the worse for her visit. She seemed in good spirits, but did not divulge 
 
 much home news. I should be much surprised at a frost if it came. Good bye. — Yours affectionately, 
 
 " H. MOBDAUNL." 
 
 " Bunchey ' means my daughter Blanche, and Bird is Sir C. Mordaunt's butler. 
 Blanche had been on a visit to her sister for a month. Lady Louisa is in 
 town. Mrs. Forbes was confined about three weeks ago, and cannot yet leave the 
 .house. 
 
 This closed the case on the part of Lady Mordaunt's guardians. 
 
 Mr. Serjeant Ballantine then opened the case on the ODher side. After remarking 
 on the gravity and novelty of the case, and on the compassion which could not but 
 be felt for a lady, whether culpable or innocent, of whom such harrowing details 
 had been told, he remarked that, on the other hand, there were heavy interests 
 at stake. Sir C. Mordaunt was a man of honourable name, belonged to an honour- 
 able family, had represented his county in Parliament, and was looked up to with 
 
lespeot by all acquainted with him ; and this inquiry was an attempt, by pre- 
 cluding an investigation, to embitter his whole life, by binding him to a woman, 
 whom he believed to be unfaithful, and requiring him to recognise a child which 
 he believed not to be his own. Proceeding to open his own case, the learned counsel 
 stated that Sir C. Mordaunt was 32 or 33 years of age, Lady Mordaunt at the 
 time of the marriage being 19 or 20, and possessing great personal attractions. 
 Her parents quite approved the match, the settlement was a very liberal one, and 
 until these unhappy occurrences burst upon him. Sir Charles believed his wife's 
 virtue to be unspotted. Hysteria not uncommonly afflicted her, and she had two 
 miscarriages. In June, 1868, Sir Charles resolved to spend a few weeks in Norway, 
 fishing, and was anxious for his wife to accompany him, but she refused 
 to do so. The keystone of the inquiry would be the statements made by Lady 
 Mordaunt to the nurse who attended her during her confinement, to 
 her husband, to the wife of the rector, to her mother, and other persons. 
 At one or two interviews with her husband. Lady Mordaunt had made statements 
 which he at first looked upon as the efEect of some strange delusion, and which he, 
 therefore, disregarded, until, by repetition and the apparent confirmation of 
 circumstances, the belief was at length forced upon him in all its crushing weight. 
 When he entered the room, she burst into tears, and said, " Charlie, I have been 
 very wicked ; I have done very wrong." He asked her who with? She replied,. 
 "With A, and B, and C, and with others, and in open day." Taking into consi- 
 deration what she said on other occasions, there was a material distinction to be 
 observed between the first three and the fourth person mentioned. The words, 
 were, " I have been very wicked, and done very wrong." These words " done very 
 wrong " might imply great impropriety without actual criminality. He would' 
 show that they were perfectly true as regarded her conduct with that gentleman. 
 The next person to whom he proposed to call attention had been made a party ta 
 the suit — he meant Lord Cole. It would be sufficient to say that either in that or 
 a subsequent conversation she imputed to Lord Cole the paternity of the child, 
 and he would show that they were together under circumstances which gave themi 
 abundant opportunity for committing adultery. Lord Cole would be shown to 
 have stayed in the same house with her until the very day her husband was 
 expected to return, and then to have left. Another piece of very extraordinary 
 evidence was in the handwriting of the young lady. In her diary of 1869 was an 
 entry as follows :— " 3d April— 280 days from the 27th June." That was exactly 
 the day on which Lord Cole had last seen her, and it would be proved that he was 
 on that occasion alone with her until one o'clock in the morning, and Sir Charles- 
 .did not return until the 15th of July. With regard to Sir Frederick Johnstone, 
 there was no doubt that she was with him in November, and under circumstances- 
 which tended to confirm the truth of her statement. 
 
 The following evidence was called — 
 
 Elizabeth Hancox : On the night of the 27th of February I was sent for to 
 attend Lady Mordaunt as nurse. She was confined on the following afternoon. E 
 took charge of the baby. The child was very small, and weighed scarcely 3 J "lbs. 
 I should say it was nearer an eight than a seven months' child. I sat up with her. 
 
 anything the matter with it, except that it is very tiny." She went to sleep. 
 There v»as no excitement about her. She was very comfortable during the day. 
 At night she spoke again to me. She said, " Now, are you sure there is no disease ? 
 Did Mrs. Cadogan or Mrs. Cabom see anything of it?" I said there was nothing 
 more to see than in a common birth. Mrs. Cadogan is the vicar's wife. Mrs. Cabora 
 was the housekeeper. I said, " It looks nearly an eight months' child, although 
 you told me it was seven months." " How do you know ?" she said. I gave her 
 my reasons. I slept in her room that night. She went to sleep, and was very 
 comfortable— not at all excited. Mrs. Forbes, her sister, came on the Monday. 
 On the Tuesday evening Lady Mordaunt talked b, good deal on the same subject. 
 I begged her to be quiet, telling her it would make her ill. She said, " If you don't 
 let me talk, I shall go mad. I have something I must say, and I will tell it yon 
 to-night." I asked her if I should fetch Sir Charles, and let her tell him 
 She said, " Not to-night. I will tell him another time." She then said 
 " This child is not Sir Charles's at all, but Lord Cole's." I said, " For good'- 
 ness' sake, be quiet, and say no more." She said, " It took place the last 
 week in June. When Sir Charles was in Norway Lord Cole visited 
 me, in the very last week ia June." I said, " It is almost an impossibiUty 
 
for you to say it was the last week in June." She said, " I do know 
 it is Lord Cole's." She was then quiet for the night. On Friday, the 5th, she 
 spoke to me ; Lady Louisa was there then, and remained till Saturday. The baby's 
 eyes began to be bad on Wednesday. Lady Louisa said she was anaid the child 
 would be blind. Lady Mordaunt said she should like to have the chUd baptized. 
 She said to me on the Friday, " I know Sir Frederick Johnstone is a fearfully 
 diseassd man." She first mentioiied his name in reference to the disease. She 
 ■asked why I did not tell her the child was likely to be blind. I said I thought it 
 <;ould be cured. She said to me, " From the child's eyes being bad I must do 
 something." Lady Louisa was not present. Mr. Solomon, the oculist, came and 
 examined the child. Mr. Orford was also present. On the Saturday after Lady 
 Louisa left, I sent for Sir Charles, and he came to her bedroom. I left them to- 
 gether. After he had left I again went up to her room. I asked whether she had 
 told Sir Charlesi. She said that she could not tell him ; that she had tried to do bo, 
 but the words seemed as though they would choke her. She pretended to nurse 
 the child before Sir Charles, but not at other times. She did not really nurse it. 
 She asked me to let no one see the child, as it was not fit to be seen. She said, " I 
 am sorry I have brought such a poor, miserable, little, horrid thing into the 
 house." There was no wet nurse for the first few days. On the evening of 
 Sunday, Sir Charles went up to see her, and I left the room. When I 
 returned she was excited. She said, " I have not been able to say much, 
 but the time is come when he must know, and I must and will tell him. On 
 Monday, the 8th, she was rather poorly. Towards seven o'clock she got excited, 
 and asked me to fetch Sir Charles upstairs. He came up. On the Tuesday evening 
 I was in the room with her and Sir Charles. She took hold of my hand and said, 
 ^' Charlie, this child is not yours at all. I have been wicked, and done very vTrong 
 with more than one person." I slipped my hand out of hers, and left the room. 
 She told him in my presence that it was Lord Cole's child. He said, " Nonsense, 
 nonsense." After Sir Charles left she told me what she had told Sir Charles. On 
 the morning of Saturday, the 13tk, Sir Charles was with her. They were together 
 some time. On leaving the room, Sir Charles said to me, " Why, nurse, her lady- 
 ship tells me just the same as before. What am I to believe?" When I went into 
 her room she said, " I made him understand at last. I said, " Suppose he makes 
 ineiuirios ?" She said, " Why there will be an awful row." I said, " Whatever you 
 do, speak to him again ; don't let him go further if you can stop him." She said, 
 " I, shall humble myself to no man." On the Friday evening I suggested to her 
 that I should ask Lady Louisa to stay a few days longer if she was going to be 
 ill. I said, " May I give her a hint to stay a few days longer ?" She said, "No ; 
 let her go, by all means ; I am better without her." I said, " What do you intend 
 to do ?" She said, " I have not made up my mind just yet." At two o'clock in 
 the morning she awoke, and she sai'd, "I can see it all quite plain now; I have 
 <iuite made up my mind as to what I shall do. I am going to be poorly, or some- 
 thing else. Sir Charles and my father will make it all right, and I shall go 
 ■abroad as soon as I can get away." She cried sometimes when she looked at the 
 •baby's eyes." 
 
 Cross-examined : She always appeared excited before Sir Charles. I never saw 
 her before I was called ip to attend her. She spoke freely to me at intervals during 
 the day on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd of March. I am quite sure she made use of the ex- 
 pression, the " complaint." The witness was then cross-examined as to Lady Mor- 
 daunt's bodily condition after the confinement, but her recollection was uncertain. 
 She said that her ladyship had only attempted to suckle the child when Sir Charles 
 and Mr. Orford were present ; and, on being cautioned by the Court to be careful 
 in her answers, she at last asserted that her ladyship never suckled the child. 
 She used to tell me to bring the child into the room five minutes before Sir 
 Charles came, and to ask me to say she had been nursing it. When I brought it, 
 she put her hand to her eyes, and said, " Horrid little thing ; I can't bear it lo 
 touch me." On the 1st of March she again used the word " complaint." I am 
 quite sure the two words " complaint " and "disease," were used at the same time. 
 When I made my affidavit I did not mention the word complaint. 
 
 On the 7th she asked me . to give the ohild laudanum before Solomons saw it. 
 I removed the laudanum, and locked it up, as I was afraid she might take it. 
 After the interview on the l.Sth, Sir Charles said to me, " I find her [much better 
 this morning — she is quite herself, still slie says the same things tome." On the 
 same day she wished to take a cold bath. She said, " I will do anything rather 
 than be exposed to the world — a cold bath, or anything." She was rather 
 ■excited, because Sir Charles had then realized what she had said. She begged 
 
10 
 
 me to give hsr laudanum more than once. Mrs. Caboru was a good deal witli ier. 
 She has said to Sir Charles, " Charlie, you are not the father of the child ; it is 
 Lord Cole's, and I am the cause of its blindness." I told Dr. Wood that at times 
 she appeared not to be herself. I dare say I told him I believed she wouldkiU the- 
 c'liM. „ ^,., , 
 
 Ee-examined : Lady Louisa had said to Lady Mordaunt that it would most hkely 
 come to a divorce. 
 
 To the Court : When she had the conversation with me which I have stated, at 
 two in the morning, I understood her to mean that she hoped to make it up with 
 Sir Charles. She hoped Sir Chailes would forgive her if she was poorly, that he 
 would " take it better " if she was ill. Her meaning, I thought, was to pretend 
 to be worse than she really was, in order to soften his heart. There was no appear- 
 ance of " putting on " until the hysteria. 
 
 Lord Penzance : But that was not in Sir Charles' presence. 
 
 The Witness : Perhaps you don't understand me. 
 
 Lord Penzance : I do not. 
 
 The Witness : I understood her to mean that by being hysterical, and pretending 
 to be ill. Sir Charles' heart might be softened towards her. I thought she didnot 
 intend to make him. disbelieve her statements, but to induce him to take a lenient 
 view of her offence. 
 
 The Court adjeurned at the close of this witness's evidence. 
 
 THIRD DAY. 
 
 The public interest in these unhappy disclosures appeared to increase as the 
 evidence went on, and the court was more crowded than on the previous days. 
 
 Sir Charles Mordaunt : I am the petitioner and husband of Lady Mordaunt. I 
 had known her a considerable time before the marriage, which was celebrated on 
 the 6th of December, 1866, at Perth, with the consent of both families. I made a 
 liberal settlement on her. I had previously gone eight times to Norway for fishing,, 
 as Lady Mordaunt knew. I believed my happiness to be perfect up to the very 
 hour when it was ruined. I never denied her anything in reason, and consulted 
 her wishes in every way, especially as to the visits of friends and relations. I had 
 heard her speak of Captain Farquhar, Lord Cole, and Sir F. Johnstone as friends 
 of her own and of her family. I received them after marriage into my own circle. 
 I had a slight acquaintance with Lord Cole and Sir F. Johnstone. Sir F. John- 
 stone, at the suggestion of Lady Mordaunt, was invited to Walton. I was also 
 aware that the Prince of Wales had an acquaintance with my wife. I had spoken 
 to his Eoyal Highness, but was never intimate with him. I was aware that he 
 was on visiting terms with her family. He never came to my house at my invita- 
 tion. I warned my wife against continuing the acquaintance with his Eoyal 
 Highness for reasons which governed my own mind. I told her I had heard in 
 various quarters certain circumstances connected with the Prince's character- 
 which caused me to make that remark. I did not enter into particulars. At that 
 time I had seen the Prince once at my house. I was M.P. for South Warwickshire - 
 for nine years and until the last dissolution, in 1868. I was not aware till after 
 my wife's confinement that the Prince had been a constant visitor at my house, 
 nor that any correspondence existed between them. I never knew at that time of 
 any correspondence indicating 
 
 Mr. Serjeant Ballantine : That is not answering my question. Were you aware 
 before the confinement that any corrrespondence had passed between them ? 
 
 Witness : I was not aware before her confinement of any correspondence what- 
 ever between Lady Mordaunt and the Prince. 
 
 Mr. Serjeant Ballantine : Supposing the Prince of Wales had visited your wife 
 during your absence in Parliament and elsewhere, you were not aware of the fact ? 
 
 Witness : No. I knew from no source at that time of the frequent visits he paid. 
 On the 8th of November, 1867, Lady Mordaunt went to London with her maid, 
 Jessie Clarke. I wished to accompany her, but she said she was going to shop, 
 and I should be rather in her way than otherwise. While she was in London I 
 received a letter from her. (The letter, which was read, was as follows) : — 
 
 " Palace Hotel, BuoKngliain-gate, Friday, Nov. ?. 
 
 "My darling Charlie,— One line in great haste to say that I shall not be able to leave here by the 
 12 o'clock train to-mon-ow, but wUl come by the one that leaves Paddington at 3.50 if you will send 
 the brougham to meet me. I felt horridly dull all by myself yesterday evening, but have not had so 
 much time as yet to-day, as I have had such lots to do. I have seen Priestley, and will tell you about 
 it when I come home.— Ever yours afteotionately, Harhiett Mobdaunt." 
 
11 
 
 At that time Captain Farquhar had paid me several visits. I had no notion tiU 
 afterwards that she met the captain while in London. She never said a word to 
 me about it. She returned the day after the letter was written. On the 15th of 
 June, 1858, I left London for Norway. I was anxious for her to accompany me. 
 I went in a chartered steamboat, and she would have had every accommodation. 
 She seemed indisposed to go, and Sir T. Moncreiffie objected to our going, but 
 ultimately consented to my going. I arranged with her that she should go down 
 to Walton within a week after I left. Her relatives were then in London. I 
 returned on the 15th of July. I heard three times from her during my absence, 
 and wrote to her. I first learnt that she was in the family-way in the first week 
 of August. That excited no suspicion in my mind. We returned to Walton in 
 the beginning of September. The November following Sir F. Johnstone visited 
 me. Previously to that my wife asked me why a man in his position had not yet 
 married. My answer was I had heard there was a reason. She pressed me to tell 
 her the reason. I showed great reluctance to do so, but I -ultimately told her I 
 had heard he had a disease, which he had frequently had, and that if he married 
 it was possible such a disease might be conveyed to his children. On several 
 occasions I asked what caused her to be distressed. She made a similar 
 statement, without entering into particulars. On the 8th, the nurse sent for me 
 again. I waited for my wife to begin the conversation. She appeared distreBsed, 
 but composed. She said, I' Charlie, you are not the father of that child ; Lord 
 Cole is the father of it, and I am the cause of its blindness." She was silent a 
 <iuarter of an hour, and then burst into tears, and said, " Charlie, I have been 
 very wicked; I have done very wrong." I said, "Who with?" She said, 
 " With Lord Cole, Sir F. Johnstone, the Prince of Wales, and others, often, and in 
 -open day." There was nothing to indicate insanity ; she spoke as though suffering 
 irom remorse. I made no reply, being much distressed. I cannot say I thoroughly 
 believed, even then, but my suspicions were aroused. 
 
 Cross-examined : I did not go to Norway in the summer of 1867. We spent it 
 in Switzerland ; partly on account of Lady Mordaunt's health, and by the advice 
 of Dr. Priestley. From the marriage down to November, 1869, she often 
 consulted him. I had heard it was for ulceration of the womb. Sir Thomas did 
 not object to my going to Norway on account of her health, but because 
 he thought the accommodation would not be good . Hg ultimately consented to my 
 going, without her. I understood my wife went back to Walton ten days after I left. 
 I believe her sister Frances and Miss Scott, an intimate friend of hers, stayed 
 with her. Lord Cole, I understood from my wife, was conditionally engaged to 
 Miss Frances MoncreiflEe, but that his father would not consent. There was great 
 intimacy between Lord Cole and his wife's family. The Prince of Wales came to 
 my house in London in the summer of 1868, three weeks before I started to 
 Norway. I had returned from shooting, and was lying down when Bird came and 
 told me the Prince was in the house, and I went down and saw him. It was after 
 that I told my wife not to receive visits from him. I also found in the desk 
 letters from Lord Newport, Mr. George Forbes, and a few others. Her bodily 
 health was satisfactory, but Dr. Jones was not called in on account of the state of 
 her mind. I understood she was hysterical at times. I remarked on her silence 
 to Dr. Jones, and he said that was a state best described as mental or hysterical 
 catalepsy. 
 
 The witness then admitted several letters, of which the following are the most 
 important. 
 
 " Waltoa Hall, Warwick, Wednesday. 
 
 " My dear Lady Louisa, — Harriett had a very good night, having slept for eight hours ; but she 
 still has those nervous attacks, during which her mind wanders very much. Altogether she is much 
 better than yesterday, and Orford thinks her strong enough to get up ; but at present it is dijBacult to 
 get her to understand what is said to her, and she appears to have forgotteil about the baby. Feihaps 
 that is as well, as the poor little thing, though still alive, is nearly blind ; and should that be the 
 case, we cannot, of course, wish that it should live in such misery. 
 
 " I am writing to Helen." 
 
 " Walton, Friday. 
 " lly dear Lady Louisa,— My darling Harriett remains much the same. She has taken more food, 
 sleeps very well, but remains quite still, without ever speaking, and without understanding anything. 
 She is out of bed and in the sitting-room, and we have do^e all that is possible to rouse her from this 
 apathetic state. The doctors say it is entirely hysterical, and not in the least dangerous, but very 
 distressing to see. The baby gets better and worse alternately, and 1 am afraid the improvement 
 which took place is not decided. A wet-nurse is regularly with it. Ever yours aifectionately 
 
 " C. MORDAUNT. 
 
12 
 
 '• Walton Hall, Warwiok, Friday. 
 "My dear Helen, ^Harriett remains in just the same state. The doctoi'S still say that it is- 
 hysteri'cal, and that there is no danger, although it is more distressing to her, poor darling, day after 
 day* They call it cataleptic hysteria. She eats and sleeps well, but never speaks, and understands- 
 nothing. She has been moved to-day into the sitting-room. Dr. Jones says that if it would be 
 possible for you to come it might have the efEect of restoring her, as she has not seen you quite lately, 
 but we who have been so regularly with her she scarcely knows, and cannot understand a word we 
 say. I hardly like to ask you to come, as it is so inconvenient for you to travel all the way again so 
 soon, but it would be a great blessing to my poor darling. If Charley would not like you to come 
 without him, I should, of course, be delighted to see him. Ever your afEectionate brother, 
 .Djm jy,ro<;, I." 0. MOKDAUNT." 
 
 The witness was cross-examined as to the meaning of the statements contained 
 in these letters as to his wife's condition. He said : I wrote them under the 
 impression that my wife, had some guilt on her mind. I beKeved that her state- 
 ments were not true, and I clung to that belief as long as I could, in the hope 
 that the ruin which threatened my home might be averted, 
 
 Be-examination continued : The communications she had made caused me to 
 feel very unhappy, and I did not enter into fuU particulars on the subject with 
 the doctors. I told Dr. Orford that I was afraid, on account of Lady Mordaunt's 
 long silence at times, and owing to her having said these things, that there must 
 be something on her mind which was giving her great distress, and I feared that 
 it might cause her health to become worse. I merely said she had made state- 
 ments which had caused me great uneasiness. I treated them to the doctors as 
 statements which I utterly disbelieved. They were called in upon that inform- 
 ation, and attended her upon that assumption. 
 
 The court then adjourned. 
 
 FOUKTH DAT. 
 
 Sir C. Mordaant was recalled, and, in reply to questions, said : I mentioned the 
 name of Captain Farquhar, among others, to my wife in relation to the question 
 whether or not there was any guilt between them. She gave no answer even 
 when I repeated the question, but appeared so conscience-stocken that I drew my 
 own conclusion. She mentioned in her first admission only the names of the 
 Prince of Wales, Lord Cole, and Sir F. Johnstone. 
 
 Jessie Clarke was then called, and deposed : I was lady's maid to Lady Mor- 
 daunt from her marriage till she left Walton. In the autumn of 1867 Captain. 
 Farquhar came on a visit, and stayed about a week. He and Lady Mordaunt 
 were very much together, and the day before he left I noticed something suspi- 
 cious on her day linen ; on two subsequent visits of Captain Farquhar I noticed 
 the same marks, which were not observable at any other time. In arranging her 
 toilet table I found a letter, not in an envelope, under a pincushion. I read it. 
 (Notice to produce the letter was here proved. Dr. Deane stating that he knew 
 nothing of it). I replaced it, and a few days afterwards showed it to the butler 
 then putting it back again. I afterwards saw her ladyship take it and put it into 
 the fire. It was dated from " The Tower, Saturday," and said " Darling, I arrived 
 here this morning about a quarter to nine, very tired and sleepy as' you may- 
 suppose." It added that he had seen his name inserted in the Post as Farmer 
 instead of Farquhar, and said, ■' So it's all right, darling, as I was afraid Charlie 
 would be suspicious if he saw my name in the arrivals at the hotel with yours "' 
 The letter was signed "Yours, Arthur." The Prince came about once a week 
 In March, 1868, 1 attended Lady Mordaunt whUe on a visit to Lady Kinnoul in 
 Belgrave-square, Sir Charles beiag then at Walton. The Prince came there one 
 Sunday, for I met him leaving as I was coming in. Lady Mordaunt showed me- 
 a letter from the Prince before she was married, and I have delivered letters to- 
 her in the same handwriting ; six or seven, perhaps, in 1868. I also received two 
 or three letters from her addressed to -the Prince, which! gave the footman 
 (Johnson) to post. 
 
 Cross-examined : I first spoke of Captain Farquhar in the autumn of 1867 to 
 the housekeeper and butler, and it was often a subject of conversation I men 
 tioned it to nobody else but Lady Louisa until Mr. Haynes, Sir Charles' lawver" 
 questioned me, the third or fourth week in March, 1869. I told him all the -nar- 
 ticula-TS I have now stated, and also as to Lord Cole and the Prince of Wales 
 
 Henry Bird : I am butler to Sir C. Mordaunt, and have been in the service of 
 the family nearly 30 years. Lord Cole, Captain Farquhar, and Sir F. Johnstons^ 
 visited Walton-hall. In the autumn of 1867 I accompanied Sir Charles and Ladr 
 
13 
 
 Mordaunt to Scotland. Captain Farquhar was staying at the same place, and I 
 noticed that he and her ladyship were very often together. Lady Mordaunt was 
 more frequently with him than with other people. A few days after we returned 
 to Walton he came on a visit. He was often in her sitting-room, generally alone 
 with her. Sir Charles was frequently out shooting at the time. Jessie Clarke 
 made a communication to me, and showed me a letter. That was about ten days 
 after Lady Mordaunt's return from London. In January,' 18G8, Captain Farquhar 
 visited Walton, and stayed about a week. There were other visitors, and there 
 was not so much opportunity for him and Lady Mordaunt to be together. I once 
 found them together in the billiard-room, standing close together near the 
 billiard-table ; they seemed startled, and I apologized and left. In 1867 and 1868 
 the Prince of Wales called at Sir Charles's London house — ^in 1868 about once a 
 week, but one week twice. He came about i p.m., and stayed from one to two 
 
 ours. 
 
 Cross-examined : I went with Lady Mordaunt to Bickley, and remained there 
 six weeks. She then appeared more absent, and conversed less than before her 
 confinement. One night, between 10 and 11, she came into my bed-room. I was 
 sitting there writing. She was in her night-dress. She was taken away. I asked 
 the nest morning whether she recollected it, and she said, " Yes, it was a mistake." 
 I should say no person in her right mind would do so, and I do not think she was 
 then in her right mind, . 
 
 Ee-examined : I mentioned the letter to^ Mr. Haynes after writing to Clarke 
 upon it and getting an answer. I wished to copy the letter, but Clarke would not 
 let me. When Lady Mordaunt came into my room I asked her the reason, and 
 why she was not in bed. She only laughed, and the maid led her away. If her 
 aote were done without a motive I should judge her insane. I had now fully made 
 up my mind before I left Bickley whether she was shamming or not. She did 
 nothing of the kind before leaving Walton. 
 
 The further hearing of the case was then adioumed. 
 
 The following letters were then put in, but not read until a later stage in the 
 trial : — 
 
 " Sandringliam, King's Lynn, January 13, 1867. 
 
 "My dear Lady Mordaunt, — I am quite shocked never to have answered your kind letter, written 
 some time ago, and for the very pretty mufEetees, which are very useful this cold weather. I had no 
 idea where you had been staying since your marriage, but Francis KnoUys told me that you are in 
 Warwickshire. I suppose you will be up in London for the opening of Parliament, when I hope I 
 may perhaps have the pleasure of seeing you, and of making the acquaintance of Sir Charles. I was 
 in London for only two nights, and returned here Saturday. The rails were so slippery that we 
 thought we should never arrive here. There has been a heavy fall of snow here, and we are able to 
 use our sledges, which is capital fun. — Believe me, yours ever sincerely, Albert Boward." 
 
 " Monday. 
 " My^dear Lady Mordaunt, — I am sure you will be glad to hear that the Princess was safely deli- 
 vered o'f a little girl this morning, and that both are doing very well. I hope you will come to the 
 Oswald and St. James's Hall, this week. There would, I am sure, be no harm your remaining till 
 Saturday in town. I shall like to see you again. — Erer yours most sincerelj', Albert Edward." 
 
 "Marlborough-house, May 7, 1SG7. 
 " My dear Lady Mordaunt, — Many thanks for your letter, and I am very sorry that I should have 
 given you so much trouble looking for the ladies' um^treUa for me at Paris. I am very glad to hear 
 that you enjoyed your stay there. I shall be going there on Friday next, and, as the Princess is so 
 much better, shall hope to remaia a week there. If there is any commission I can do for you there, 
 it will give me the greatest pleasure to carry it out. I regret very much not to have been able to 
 call upon you since your return, and hope to do so when I come back from Paris, and have an oppor- 
 tunity of making the acquaintance of your husband. — Believe me yours very sincerely, 
 
 '■ALBERT BDWARD." 
 
 " Thursday. 
 " My dear Lady Mordaunt,— I am sorry to find by the letter that I received from you this morning 
 that you are unwell, and that 1 shall not be able to pay you a visit to-day, to which I had been look- 
 ing forward with so much pleasure. To-morrow and Saturday I shall be hunting in Nottingham- 
 shire ; but if you are still in totra, may I come to see you about 5 on Sunday afternoon ? and hoping 
 you will soon be yourself again, believe nie, yours ever sincerely, Albert Edward," 
 
 " Sunday. 
 " My dear Lady Mordaunt,— I cannot tell you how distressed I am to hear from your letter tliat 
 you have got the measles, and that I shall in consequence not have the pleasure of seeing you, I have 
 had the measles myself a long time ago, and I know what a tiresome complaint it is. I trust you 
 will take great care o£ yourself, anl have a good doctor with you. Above aU, I should not read at 
 all, as it is very l^fd for the eyes, and I suppose you will be forced to lay up a time. The weather 
 is very favourable for yeur illness ; and wishing you a very speedy recovery, believe me, yours most 
 sincerely, Albert Edward." 
 
14 
 
 " Sunday. 
 " My dear Lady Mordaimt, — Many thanks for your kind letter. I am so glad to hear that you l^vo 
 made so good a recovery, and to be able soon to go to Hastings, which is sure to do you a great deal 
 of good. I hope that perhaps on your return to London, I may have the pleasure of seeing you. 
 Believe me, yours very sincerely, Albert Edwakd." 
 
 FIFTH DAY. 
 
 As on previous days, the proceedings created great interest, and by half-past 
 nine o'clock — one hour and a half before the court opened — a large crowd had 
 gathered round the doors. Several ladies and gentlemen occupied seats in the 
 gallery of the court, which was inconveniently crowded. Just before the judge 
 took his seat. Sir Charles Mordaunt, General Arbuthnot, the Eev. Mr. Cadogan, 
 and several members of the aristocracy, took their seats in the gallery. 
 
 The first witness called was Mrs. Charlotte Murray, who was examined by Mr 
 Inderwick. She said : I am the wife of Mr. Herbert Murray, and my husband is 
 a relation of the MoncriefEe family. My husband is also connected with the 
 Mordaunt family. On the 17th November I went to Bickley to see Lady Mordaunt, 
 and stayed there till December 28. Lady Mordaunt received me very well. I 
 spent the whole of the day with her, and I had conversations with her. I went 
 with her to the Crystal Palace on December 21st. I said to her, " I hope you vrill 
 come to London in the winter, that I may be able to see more of you, you will 
 be so dun." Lady Mordaunt replied, " I hope I shall ; I do not want to 
 be dull." Witness further detailed a conversation, but her replies to the 
 learned counsel was quite inaudible. One part of the conversation was that Lady 
 Mordaunt said to her, "What business had Charley to go jabbering about to other 
 ladies ?^-do you call yourself a lady ?" Witness replied, " I hope so," and then her 
 ladyship accused her of coming " ferretting about here," and she (witness) replied, 
 " I do not come ' ferretting' about here." She said to Lady Mordaunt, " How came 
 you to do such a foolish thing 1 Surely you could not have cared for aU those men V 
 Lady Mordaunt made no reply. 
 
 Cross-examined by Dr. Deane : While at the Crystal Palace Lady Mordaunt 
 behaved rationally, except that she sat on a weighing chair. She (Lady Mordaunt) 
 afterwards sat down on the ground in the garden, and she remonstrated with her, 
 and she arose when Bird (the butler) told her to get up. This was on the 21st of 
 October. From the 17th of September to the 28th I do not think Lady Mordaunt 
 was insane. I think she might have been "shamming" to a certain degree. Her 
 mind was not fully capable as it would be if she had been dn perfect health. I 
 think she was " shamming" to a certain degree on account of those conversations 
 I had with her. Her acts were always sensible, but her manner was not. Lady 
 Mordaunt sometimes made long pauses, and her laugh was sometimes peculiar and 
 hysterical. She would laugh very wildly. 
 
 Cross-examined by Dr. Deane : You say you went to the Crystal Palace with 
 Lady Mordaunt ; did any one else go with you ? 
 
 Witness : Yes, her maid went. 
 
 How long were you at the Crystal Palace with her ?— I should say about two or 
 three hours. 
 
 Did she behave rationally whilst you were there ? — Perfectly. 
 
 Did you think from the 17th September down to the 28th, that Lady Mordaunt 
 was perfectly in her senses 2—1 did not think she was insane. 
 
 Lord Penzance ; You are asked if you thuik Lady Mordaunt, from the 17th 
 September to the 28th, was generally in her senses 1 
 
 Witness : I did not think she was insane. 
 
 Lord Penzance ; That is your answer ? — Yes. 
 
 Cross-examination continued ; You think she was not shamming?— To a certain 
 degree she might have been ; but I think her mind was not so capable as my own. 
 
 Lord Penzance : You mean her mind was not so fuUy capable as if she was in- 
 perfect health ? 
 
 Witness : Yes. 
 
 Cross-examination continued : You have said you think she was shamming to a 
 certain degree. Why do you think so ?— On account of the conversation I had 
 with her. 
 
 Did she do anything which led you to think she was shamming ? — Kothincr. 
 Her acts were as natural as my own. °' 
 
 If her acts and conversation were sensible, what made you say she was 
 shamming? — Her manner was not sensible. Her manner was altered, but her 
 ;onversation was rational, and her acts were always so. 
 
15 
 
 Lord Penzance : Do you call sitting down on the ground a sensible act ? 
 
 Witness : Yes, if you are tired. 
 
 Were there not other seats to be had 1 — No, nothing except the weighing chair. 
 
 Was she much amused ? — She was not so much amused. She said it was not so 
 good as she had seen at the Alhambra ; the rope was too close to the ground. She 
 wore a hat, and was much annoyed because she was the only lady with a hat on. 
 We afterwards went into the china and glass court. 
 
 Mr. Frederick James Orford, M.R.C.S., was called and examined by Mr. Serjeant 
 Ballantine. — You are in practice at Walton ? 
 
 Witness : I am in the vicinity of Walton. I have been in practice 13 years. 
 
 And you have been in attendance on Sir Charles Mordauuf s family ? — Yes. I 
 knew Lady Mordaunt immediately after her marriage. 
 
 Did you ever attend her previous to her confinement ? — Yes. For trifling 
 matters. I believe I attended her once for a miscarriage. 
 
 Was she a person of hysterical temperament ! — She might be ; but I cannot say. 
 I considered her so. 
 
 Had she any symptoms of fever ? — Certainly not. 
 
 No symptoms of any kind ? — No. Certainly not. 
 
 Had she any symptoms of mania ? — I should say certainly not. She did not 
 show any signs of delusijpn. 
 
 Did she require any unusual quantity of medicine ? — Eather less than usual. 
 
 What was the state of her pulse ? — I had no reason to pay particular attention 
 to it ; I cannot speak positively. 
 
 Were there any signs of fever, burning, or anything of the sort ? — Not to my 
 knowledge. 
 
 Were there any indications which are to be found in cases of fever ? — Cer- 
 tainly not. 
 
 Lady Mordaunt's mother came shortly after the confinement ? — Yes. 
 
 And remained how long ? — I cannot say. I should think about a week. 
 
 When you left, was the daughter, as far as you could observe, in a satisfactory 
 state ? — Yes. As regards confinement she was. 
 
 Cross-examined by Dr. Deane : When did you last see Lady Mordaunt ? — 
 Witness : On Thursday. 
 
 In what state did you find her ? — In such a state that I consider her mind gone. 
 
 Lord Penzance : Incurably so ? 
 
 Witness : No, my lord. 
 
 Dr. Deane ; Have you seen her between^the 10th of July and last Thursday ? 
 
 Witness : I have not. On the 10th July I saw her on three occasions, twice of 
 about five minutes each, and on the third occasion the interview extended from 
 ten minutes to a quarter of an hour. Drs. Keynolds, Burroughes, and Jones were 
 there. 
 
 On the 10th July was Lady Mordaunt in her senses ? — Perfectly. 
 
 Nothing wrong with her mind at all ? — No. 
 
 How long were you there altogether — I do not mean with Lady Mordaunt, but 
 at Worthing? — About two hours. 
 
 How came you to visit her last week ? — I went by Mr. Serjeant Ballantine's 
 request. 
 
 You stated you could not teU the age of the child ? — I could not. 
 
 Are there not in the profession generally received and scientific ideas as to the 
 weight of a child I — I believe there are. ,. 
 
 According to your experience is it not so ? — I could form no idea from my own 
 experience. 
 
 Did you tell Sir Charles that her state was entirely hysterical, and not the least 
 dangerous ? — I did not. 
 
 Did you not tell Sir Charles so on the 12th March 1 — I did not. 
 
 Now, what is cataleptic hysteria? — I should say it was a form of hysteria 
 resembling catalepsy. 
 
 What is catalepsy? — It is a condition to which' the patient is conscious, but 
 unable to move or speak. 
 
 Would immoderate laughing be a form of cataleptic hysteria? — No. 
 
 Did Lady Mordaunt suffer under cataleptic hysteria ? — She did not. 
 
 Did you tell Sir Charles it was cataleptic hysteria ? — I did not. 
 
 Did you ever mention the term cataleptic hysteria to him ? — Not in recording 
 my own opinion ; but in reference to the opinion of Dr. Jones, with whieh I did 
 not agree. 
 
 Did you teU Sir Charles that you did not agree with Dr. Jones? — I did. 
 
IG 
 
 Now, as regards tlie child's eyes, did they not get perfectly well ? — They did. 
 
 In no very long time ? — I considered it a long time. 
 
 "What was the time ? — Twenty-four days. 
 
 I suppose you are well acquainted with purulent ophthalmia ? — Yes. 
 
 How many gases ? — Two. 
 
 And you formed your opinion in this instance on the two preceding cases and 
 your reading ? — Yes. 
 
 Now, you visited Lady Mordaunt up till the 18th March — did you discontinue 
 your visits then ?— No, not altogether ; but up to that time I visited her daily. . 
 (The details here given of medical examination are quite unfit for publication.) 
 
 Mr. Eobert Jonfts, examined by Mr. Serjeant Ballantine : I am a member of the 
 Eoyal College of Surgeons. I have practised at Leamington forty years. I waa 
 called in to see Lady Mordaunt. I know what cataleptic hysteria is, and think it 
 is easily distinguishable. Lady Mordaunt was not suffering from this when I saw 
 her, which was on the 10th and 11th of March. She was not sufEering.from puer- 
 peral mania. I saw her again on the 26th March, and considered that she was 
 then better than on the two former days. ■ I went into the sick room, and found 
 Lady Mordaunt without the least sign of fever. I felt her pulse and skin, and 
 thought she was getting on in a very satisfactory way. I questioned her, and 
 found she had taken no food. I desired some beef-tea to be made and brought to 
 her. I thought my visit altogether highly satisfactory. There was no appearance 
 either of fever or puerperal mania. 
 
 Cross-examined by Dr. Deane : I have never seen a deranged person exhibit 
 symptoms such as those shown by her ladyship. Her state was quite inconsistent 
 with any mania I ever saw. She did all sorts of strange things. Her ladyship, 
 when I conversed, gave rational replies to my questions. Her state on the 10th of 
 July, at Worthing, was inconsistent with any form of mania considering the ante- 
 cedent circumstances. She was suffering from cataleptic hysteria in March. When 
 I first attended her I did not find her nervous system prostrated. I considered my 
 visit to her at Worthing very unsatisfactory, so far as it enabled me to ascertain 
 the state of her mind. 
 
 It is understood that Sir Frederick Johnstone's evidence was given in conse- 
 quence of the following demand on the part of his solicitors : — 
 
 His Eoyal Highness the Prince of Wales then entered the court and went into 
 the witness-box. After he had been sworn, 
 
 Lord Penzance said : Before Dr. Deane asks his Eoyal Highness any questions, 
 it is my duty to point out to his Royal Highness his position under the Act of 
 Parliament passed last Session. It provides that no witness in any proceeding, 
 whether a party to the suit or not, shall be liable to be asked, or be bound to 
 answer, any question tending to show that he or she has been guilty of adultery. 
 Now, from the course which the case has taken I think it right to point this out to 
 his Eoyal Highness, and to tell him that he is not bound or required by law to sub- 
 mit to any interrogations on that subject. 
 
 His Eoyal Highness was then examined by Dr. Deane as follows : — 
 
 I believe your Eoyal Highness has for some time been acquainted with the 
 Moncreifle family ? — I have. 
 
 Were you acquainted with Lady Mordaunt before her marriage ?^I was. 
 
 On her marriage did your Eoyal Highness write to her and make her some wed- 
 ding present ? — I did. 
 
 Previous to her marriage had she visited at Marlborough House when your Eoyal 
 Highness and the Princess of Wales were there ? — She had. 
 , And has she gone to the theatre with both your Eoyal Highnesses ?— She has. 
 
 We are told that she was married at the end of 1866. In 1867 did vou see much 
 of her ?— I did. . 
 
 And in the year 1868 ? — I did also. 
 
 Were you acquainted with Sir Charles Mordaunt? — I was. 
 
 Have you frequently met him 1 — I have. 
 
 And with Lady Mordaunt ? — With Lady Mordaunt. 
 
 Your Eoyal Highness knows Hurlirigham 2 — I do. 
 
 Have you been in the habit of meeting Sir Charles there ? — I have. 
 
 On one occasion, I think in June, 1868, there was a pigeon match there between 
 Warwickshire and Norfolk ? — There was. \ 
 
 I believe your Eoyal Highness and Sir Charles were captains for each county 1 
 
 I believe so. . 
 
 Was Lady Mordaunt there ? — She was. 
 
 With her husband 1 — With her husband. 
 
17 
 
 Does your Royal Highness remember the date ? — I think it was about June. 
 
 Did Lady Mordaunt score for one side ? — ^Por both sides* I think. 
 
 And in the course of that match did you speak to Lady Mordaunt at times when 
 Sir Charles was by ? — I believe so. 
 
 We have heard, in the course of this case that your Boyal Highness uses Hansom 
 cabs occasionally. I do nst know whether it is so ? — It is so. 
 
 Dr Deane : I have only one more question to trouble your Royal Highness with. 
 Has there ever been any improper familiarity or criminal act between yourself and 
 Lady Mordaunt 1 
 
 His Royal Highness (in a very firm tone) : There has not. 
 
 There was here a burst of applause, which was at once repressed. 
 
 Mr. Serjeant Ballantine : I have no question to ask bis Boyal Highness. 
 
 The Prince then bowed to his Lordship and retired, amid another attempt at 
 applause, which was, as before, promptly repressed. 
 
 Sir Frederick Johnstope (to whom Lord Penzance gave the same intimation as 
 to his Royal Highness) ; I have been for several years acquainted with the 
 MancreifEe family. I knew Lady Mordaunt from a child, and till recent events I 
 have kept up acquaintance with her and her family. I was at school with Sir 
 Charles, but he was senior to me, and I did not know him till after he married. I 
 have visited frequently at Walton-hall. I keep ray horses in the hunting season in 
 the vDlage of Walton. Bi December, 1868, 1 dined at the Alexandra Hoteil with 
 Lady Mordaunt. Mr Forbes, whom I met in the street the day before, told me 
 she had arrived in London. I called, therefore, and stayed to dinner. I got there 
 at 8 o'clock, and left, as far as I can remember, about 12. I was in the sitting- 
 room. 
 
 Dr. Deane : From first to last, has there been any improper familiarity or 
 criminal act between you and Lady Mordaunt ? 
 
 Witness : Certainly not. 
 
 Dr. Deane : In the course of this case it has been stated that you have been 
 suffering from venereal disease. Is that true ? 
 
 Witness : A more unfounded statement was never made behind a man's back. 
 It is perfectly untrue. 
 
 Cross-examined . Tou do not mean to imply that you have never sufEered ? — 
 Certainly not ; I have had youthful indiscretions. 
 
 You mean that at this particular period you were not suffering ? — Nor for many 
 years previously. When I called on the Tuesday, Lady Mordaunt invited me to 
 dine with her the next day. 
 
 You knew her husband was not in town? — Yes. 
 
 You knew it to be a Ute-a-tcto dinner ? — I did not know whether I should meet 
 anybody. I did not know that I should not meet her sister, who I knew was in 
 London. 
 
 The invitation came from her, and not from her husband? — It could not, because 
 he was not in London. 
 
 Lady Mordaunt was with you the whole time? — Certainly. 
 
 Did you visit at Walton after this ? — Not afterwards. I never saw her again. 
 
 Did you ever tell Sir Charles of this dinner ? — I never saw him afterwards. 
 
 She was quite alone the whole evening 1 — Certainly. 
 
 The sitting-room was furnished as sitting-rooms usually are ?— Yes. 
 
 You are not in any way related to Lady Mordaunt 1 — No. 
 
 There have been ns business matters between you ? — None. 
 
 Re-examined : The waiter came in and out of the room. 
 
 Dr. Deane : That is the case, my Lord. 
 
 " 6, Victoria-street, WestminstCT Abbey, S.W., Feb. 22. 
 
 " Dear Sirs, — Before the Mordaunt case is again resumed, we address you.by desire or Sir Frederick 
 Johnstone. In the course of these preliminary proceedings to try the issue of Lady Mordaunt's 
 sanity, Sir I'rederick Johnstone's name has been mentioned, and charges have been made against him 
 in a manner the most unjustifiable, and as we believe, whoUy without precedent. We say nothing 
 of the hardship and injustice of having such foul imputations made against him in a proceeding to 
 which he is no party, and in which his counsel are precluded from interfering or uttering a word ia 
 his defence, but they have been avowedly put forth without a tittle of evidence to support them, 
 and Sir Charles Mordaunt's evidence negatives the possibiUty of their truth. Beyond this, as we are 
 instructed, they are absolutely and entirely false. As the only means of promptly contradicting 
 these charges, we are instructed to tender Sir Frederick Johnstone as a witness jn the present pro- 
 ceedings on Lady Mordaunt's behalf, and to call upon you, in the interests of justice and fair 
 play, to give him the opportunity he desires by calling him at the earliest possible moment, and 
 allowing him to offer, through your medium, such other evidence as his counsel may advise in con- 
 firmation of his own testimony.— We are, dear Sir, yours very faithfully, 
 
 " Baxter, Eose, Norton, axd Co. 
 
 " Messrs. Benbow and Saltwell, 1, Stone-buildings, Lincoln's-inn." 
 
18 
 
 SIXTH DAY. 
 
 The public interest in the f)rogress of this case, although unahated, was not so 
 especially manifest to-day as it was yesterday, when the anticipated examination 
 of the Prince of Wales attracted hundreds to the vicinity of the court who were 
 unable to gain admission. To-day a large crowd gathered round the doors of the 
 court as early as halU-past nine, and when the dooi-s were opened, just before 
 eleven, that portion of the court set apart for the public was speedily filled to over- 
 flowing. The gallery was occupied by a party of ladies and gentlemen, including 
 Sir Charles Mordaunt, Lord Cole, General Arbuthuot, Mr. Herbert Murray, the 
 Eev. Mr. Cadogan, and an aristocratie company. 
 The evidence on both sides having been completed on the previous day. 
 At the commencement of the proceedings, 
 ' A Juryman wished Dr. Jones recalled, in order to ask him to explain what he 
 meant by stating that Lady Mordaunt was " generally sane." 
 
 Lord Penzance referred to the short-hand writer's notes, from which it appeared 
 that in reply to the question, ""What do you mean by generally sane ?" Dr. Jones 
 said, " That all the peculiarities which she exhibited were produced by that crush- 
 ing weight upon her mind which the circumstances would produce." Dr. Jones 
 was then further asked, " Except the trying circumstances alluded to, was 
 there anything which could lead you to consider her insane ?" the reply was, " Cer- 
 tainly not." 
 
 The Juryman said it would be unnecessary, after the explanation given, to call 
 Mr. Jones. 
 
 Mr. Serjeant Ballantine complained of the publication of a letter in the papers 
 from an eminent firm of attorneys, having reference to Sir Frederick Johnstone. 
 That letter, in common decency, should not have been published ilntil the trial 
 was over. 
 
 Lord Penzance : I entirely agree with you. 
 
 Mr. Serjeant Ballantine commenced his address to the jury on behalf of the 
 petitioner, by stating that the case had been correctly described as a most painful 
 one. He was certain that in conducting it both his learned friend on the other 
 side and himself had endeavoured to render it as little painful as possible. 
 Interests so important were very seldom at stake in any court of justice, and, as 
 far as his client was concerned, on the issue of that inquiry depended the happi- 
 ness, the comfort, and the respectability of the remainder of his days. Although 
 Dr. Deane did not at an earlier period of the case appear to adopt the suggestion 
 made as to the jury finding a verdict vrith reference to the sanity of Lady 
 Mordaunt at the time that certain statements were made by her, no doubt they 
 would arrive at a conclusion after a careful consideration of the case. He thought 
 that this would be the last opportunity that Sir Charles would have of appealing 
 to a jury of his fellow-countrymen, and he (Serjeant Ballantine) believed that if 
 he was not successful in conducting the case to a favourable issue, a great and 
 terrible evil might befal his cUeut. He, therefore, felt the great responsibility of 
 the case, but he also felt solaced by the conviction that he should be assisted by 
 the judgment of the jury, and that any matter which might by any mischance on 
 his part be imperfectly described or dwelt upon, would, nevertheless, receive their 
 consideration and judgment, which would be formed on data uninfluenced by any 
 motives except a desire to do their duty in coming to a conclusion on the merits 
 of the adverse parties before them. With these remarks he would proceed to place 
 the issue before them in a clear manner ; and he should more particularly ask 
 them to dwell upon the events happening in the months of March, April, and May; 
 and what was the state of the lady's mind during that period. He should 
 subsequently call their attention to other matters of more or less im- 
 portance, and calculated to throw more or less light upon the circum- 
 stances of the case. He hoped to be able to convince their minds of the 
 entire truth of Sir Charles's story, and of his right to be redeemed from the 
 position in which he had been placed by the misconduct of his wife. It was for 
 the MoncreiHe family to prove the affirmative to the issue — to prove that the lady 
 was innocent. They had undertaken that affirmative position, and they must 
 assure the jury, either by evidence or reason, that at the time Lady Mordaunt 
 made the statements, and that, at a subsequent time, she was not fully enabled to 
 give instructions to her soUcitor for her defence. That was the question which 
 they were now called upon to try, and to which he should direct his arguments. 
 Let them consider for a moment the mode in which the case had been presented 
 
19 
 
 before them. He affirmed that, on the part of Sir Charles, every single atom of 
 evidence that it was possible to produce — although he had only been called upon 
 a3 it were to prove a negative — every single person that it was possible to call, or 
 who could by any possibility have any knowledge of this unfortunate affair, had 
 been placed before the jury, who had thus an opportunity of judging of the value 
 of their testimony. But on the other side this remarkable difference occurred — 
 and he characterized it as having been done deliberately — that valuable witnesses 
 had been kept back, and materials most calculated to enable them to come to a 
 conclusion had not been brought forward. He advanced that proposition after 
 grave consideration and in the broadest terms he could use. They had confined 
 their case in which they had to prove insanity at a particular period to the evidence 
 of four women servants, whose testimony in many respects was utterly incredible, 
 and whose evidence, as he thought he should be able to show by argument, if not 
 by direct contradiction, was utterly untrue. They had striven to overwhelm the 
 jury with a swarm of medical men, who had come forward with theoretical 
 opinions ; men who knew nothing of the case with reference to which they had been 
 called upon to give an opinion, but whose scientific testimony had been given with 
 a view of ovenvhelming the minds of the jury and influencing them to sacrifice 
 their own judgment on the merits of the case. Where was Lady Louisa Moncreiffe ? 
 She was in London, and had been in court during the trial. Where was Mrs. 
 Forbes ? Where was MissiBlanche Moncreiffe ? Where was Mr. Fieunes, by whom 
 Lady Mordaunt was advised for the purposes of this suit 1 Where were they ? 
 Would his learned .friend tell the jury why they were not called ? Dr. Deane 
 had been invited as plainly as possible to call Lady Louisa, and nothing could 
 excuse her absence nor dissipate the fact. They were trying the insanity of a 
 young woman of one or two and twenty years of age, who had been brought up in 
 her father's house, and under her mother's care, and who had such an influence on 
 her former life, habits, tastes, and demeanour, who could know them so well as 
 her mother ? Who could give them so clear an idea as to whether she was sane 
 or not at a particxxlav time as her mother 1 The mother's evidence was needed to 
 enable them to come to an effective conclusion. If in this case the mother had 
 been a mechanic's wife would not the jury have expected her to be present to give 
 evidence as to her daughter's condition before and after her confinement ? Would 
 they not also have expected the other relatives to be present ? His learned friend 
 knew very well that there was a reason in the background that made him afraid 
 to call Lady Louisa — a reason which would upset the whole case. There was no 
 solution to the mystery except that something might have been obtained from 
 Lady Louisa which would destroy the case. Mrs. Forbes would also have been an 
 important witness — almost as important as Lady Louisa. Except the mother, 
 who could know better the condition of Lady Mordaunt than her married sister? It 
 was said that she had been recently confined, but , he had failed to extract the exact 
 date. When Drs. Tuke and Priestley went down, they did not see Orford, Simp- 
 sou, or the nurse ; and, oddly enough, they seemed to have gone to the person that 
 knew nothing about the matter, and who carefully avoided communication with 
 those who could have told them anything about it. They saw Sir Thomas, who 
 knew nothing about it ; but never saw Lady Moncreiffe. They confined them- 
 selves to an examination of the delusions, and there could be no doubt that they 
 intended to imply that these delusions were the confessions, and that they arose 
 from the puerperal mania from which she was suffering. Dr. Priestley, a lady's 
 doctor in a lady's case, would, he should have thought, have gone to a lady. But, 
 no ; he learned what he did learn from Sir Thomas Moncreiffe, and therefore he 
 acted undoubtedly upon an imperfect knowledge of what had taken place. 
 Priestley ignored most of the delusions he had taken originally in his report, and 
 relied upon two only, both of which could have been very easily shammed by a 
 lady, and he conveyed to the jury that those were what governed his mind. Dr. 
 Priestley was asked whether, if he had heard of her having made other statement s 
 which were true, that would have had any effect on his mind. He said, " Nc, 
 certainly not ;" and yet he had based his report in the first instance upon those 
 statements which he said were delusions. When pressed further, and asked what 
 he would think if it were proved that what she said was true, he said, " He would 
 still think that she was suffering from puerperal insanity, and that which was true 
 was a delusion I" He said she had been suffering from great excitement. Who 
 told him 1 The delusions he referred to were that she still believed herself to be 
 mistress in her own house, and that she had been poisoned. He would not, how- 
 ever, go through that testimony further, believing that the illusory report which 
 those doctors made would not have any great effect on the minds of the jury. He 
 
20 
 
 would refer now to Dr. Tuke, who went down on his knees before Lady Mordaunt, 
 and said, " What can we do for you ? You would not like to go to a lunatic asylum, 
 would you?" What could they make of that? What did they think of it? 
 He had pressed attention to the evidence of these three, and he did not think it 
 unimportant to call attention to other evidence given at or about that period. 
 Time passed, Sir Charles left the house, she was visited by few medical men, but 
 she was visited by one lady, whose evidence was, he ventured to say, as clearly 
 and fairly given as any evidence ever given in a court of justice. He referred to 
 the evidence of the Dowager Lady Mordaunt. She gave evidence to several 
 interviews — the last on the 13th of May ; and unless that evidence showed Lady 
 Mordaunt was insane on that day, the verdict must be for him. Lady Mordaunt 
 sat on a coal-box ; but when told by the Dowager Lady Mordaunt that would not 
 do with her, she rose and gave up what he could not help thinking was a puerile 
 attempt at sham by that poor girl. Her evidence in that respect was a terrible 
 contrast to the certificate of the three medical men. One could not reconcile 
 the two things ; but, under every circumstance, the evidence of the Dowager 
 Lady Mordaunt was worthy of the gravest attention. It was unnecessary to 
 dwell further on that period. He called their attention to the general tenor of 
 the letter of Sir Charles, whom he described as a country baronet probably not so 
 over familiar witji fashionable life, a gentleman of very considerable fortune, 
 who had passed more of his existence in country than in town, who appeared to 
 be thoroughly simple-minded, devotedly attached to his lady, and who, in writing 
 the letters in question to Lady Louisa, exhibited in every line his disbelief that 
 anything of blame could attach to her, exhibited that kind of clinging hope that 
 one dear to him had not been guilty of grave crime, was willing in fact to 
 believe that the wife of his bosom and heart was a true one, hoping and believing 
 probably against conviction, taking signs exhibited by her from time to time 
 with a kind of hopefulness, writing to her mother that she was poorly, that 
 she was disturbed in her mind, and appearing to believe up till the 13th 
 of March, at all events, that she was not guilty. Probably not writing very logi- 
 cally, nor very truly, probably having a joint action existing mentally, endeavouring 
 to believe on the one hand that his wife was innocent, and at the same time not 
 endeavouring to convey any of the agony which his suffering would give rise to 
 among the expressions in those letters. His learned friend obtained the letters 
 from Lady Louisa, who dared not show herself, and who now handed them over 
 to him for the purpose, if possible, of damning Sir Charles in this suit. Returning 
 to the period of the confinement, he said that nothing had occurre-L up to the 3rd 
 of March, except the inquiries as to the state of the child, to indicate the circum- 
 stances which subsequently came out. Lady Louisa was there from the 3rd to the 
 6th of March, and whatever statements were made by the daughter to the mother 
 those who had charge of the case had taken care the jury should not know. He 
 could not ask a single witness what Lady Moncrieffe had said. She could tell 
 them exactly what was her daughter's state and circumstances on the 3rd of March 
 and succeeding days. Was Lady Mordaunt then a maniac 1 If so, was it credible 
 that a mother could have left her child under such circumstances ? Mania was a 
 state easily discernible by any ordinary person, as they had heard from the 
 doctors. Could there have been any mistake in the mother's mind as to the real 
 state of her child at that time ? Was her daughter a maniac on the 6th of March, 
 when she left the house 1 Did they think that if such had been the case the 
 mother would have left her child, vrith her husband, no doubt, but otherwise in 
 the hands of comparative strangers ? Did Lady Louisa believe her a maniac T 
 Were there any signs of insanity ? If so, she could have told them. She could 
 have stated whether Lady Mordaunt was feverish, whether her pulse was rapid,, 
 or her tongue dry. Lady Louisa was the mother of many children, and therefore 
 could have no delicacy in taking of matters of that description. The ordinary 
 sense of an ordinary individual would enable them to say whether a person 
 was suffering from mania or not, and he sincerely hoped that there 
 might be those upon the jury who would bring to bear in the considera- 
 tion of the subject now before them their own knowledge upon ordinary 
 matters. Puerperal mania meant violent madness, and was not a disease only 
 discoverable by occult science, but any one who attended upon ber could easily 
 discover it. There could be no mistake about it. Was it true or not ? If it were 
 true, how easy to prove it. If true, why not have called Lady Louisa, and asked 
 her the question ? Why was she not there to prove it ? Instead of that, they 
 were left to the rambling evidence of a monthly nurse, who would, no doubt be 
 accused by the other side of perjury, while they kept back the very witness who 
 
21 
 
 could have given the most full and satisfactory evidence, if the nurse was not- 
 speaking the whole and exact truth. When an opportunity occurred of calling 
 two witnesses who could depose to the same circumstances, and thus enable the 
 jury to judge between them as to the facts, if the other side refused to call Lady 
 Louisa the jury must look upon it with the gravest suspicion. Before he went 
 further, he might observe that the name of his Koyal Highness the Prince of 
 Wales was mentioned in the first confession, but not in the second, ind he should 
 by-and-by point out the difference between his Eoyal Highness's position and 
 that of the other persons whose names had been implicated. A large number of 
 guests had been stopping at Walton Hall and enjoying the hospitality of Sir 
 Charles — friends of his wife, in whom he trusted and who were beloved by him — 
 and he naturally wished to know who were guilty and who were innocent. He- 
 said to his wife, "Tell me, are there any others?" Now, with regard to two 
 names she declined to give any answer — one was Captain Farquhar, the 
 other Lord Newport. About the latter no evidence had been offered. The 
 jury would remember the reply she made to the observation of Mrs. Herbert 
 Murray. That lady said to her, "But, my dear, you could not have oared 
 for all these men." The reply was, " No, only for one " — the inference pro- 
 bably being that that one might not be one that she chose to mention. They 
 would compare that theory with their own knowledge of human nature. If, 
 then, she had mentioned; others, there was nothing inconsistent in the two 
 confessions. She had not mentioned that name ; but still she had never 
 directly excused him. What could Sir Charles Mordaunt do under these 
 circumstances ? Could he any longer doubt, after the result of those inquiries ? 
 There is another part of the case, continued the learned counsel, to which I must 
 now refer. His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales appeared in court yesterday, 
 and denied in the only way that any subject of this realm, however exalted his- 
 position may be, can deny a fact. His Eoyal Highness appeared in court, and 
 denied that he had ever committed adultery with Lady Mordaunt. Gentlemen, I 
 had no reason whatever to cross-examine his Eoyal Highness. I never assumed 
 that he had done any such thing. I opened an entirely different state of facts. I 
 compared his position with others who had been named, and I pointed out that 
 while, in this particular instance, Lady Mordaunt's disobedience to her husband's 
 commands or wishes was consistent with propriety it was also consistent with the 
 case which I was endeavouring to establish. Gentlemen, I think it is desirable not 
 to discuss further the question in relation to his Eoyal Highness. I do not think 
 that in any way whatever, assuming the position that originally, upon deliberation, and 
 with the sanction of my learned friends, I took up — that Lady Mordaunt was more- 
 intimate with his Eoyal Highness than her husband wished — I do not think that I 
 conveyed any other idea. That idea I suggested, and it was that which Lady 
 Mordaunt intended herself to convey, and, after hearing his Eoyal Highness on 
 the subject, I leave it. Mind you, however, it must have no operation on your 
 minds unfavourable to my client. If I thought it necessary to point out that 
 which would be criminal in the highest in the land, I hope I have firmness and 
 honour enough to do it. I hope at the same time that in the conduct of my pro- 
 fession I have sufficient feeling for those whom I am obliged to speak of; to cause 
 no needless or unnecessary pain. If you are forced to the conclusion that this 
 lady meant something that I have not put upon her words, that must be your 
 construction ; but I invite you to consider that my construction of them is also 
 consistent with a case which I present to you on the part of Sir Charles Mordaunt, 
 The learned Serjeant continued : Other parties were named besides his Eoyal High- 
 ness and Sir Frederick Johnstone. Lord Cole, against whom there was strong evi- 
 dence, was also named. Captain Farquhar — agaipst whom, if uncontradicted, the 
 evidence was conclusive, was also named. Why were not they called ? My learned 
 friend, continued Serjeant Ballantine, elects to call one against whom no accusation 
 of adultery is made. Another is called to deny it. It was perfectly clear that Sir 
 Frederick Johnstone was more concerned in denying that which was deemed un- 
 gentlemanly than in denying the adultery. Whatever Sir Charles Mordaunt has 
 said from the beginning to the end Sir Charles Mordaunt was believed. He never 
 said anything to his -wife which he intended to be conveyed to the public, but that 
 which he did say to her he had heard from the public. They had heard the in- 
 dignation expressed by this young man, who does an act which destroys the 
 character of Lady Mordaunt, aoad casts a reflectien upon the honour of her husband. 
 It is all very well to talk about it ; but Sir Frederick Johnstone, a guest of Sir 
 Charles', received at his table, received with hospitality and consideration, either 
 ill November or December, meets with this unhappy girl, and dines with her in a 
 
22 
 
 private room at a fashionable hotel. It is all very well to come here and Bay 
 there i£ no criminality. What business had he to meet her— dining there alone 
 from eight o'clock to twelve at night— a young man dining with a beautiful young 
 woman at a fashionable hotel 1 Let us bring it home to ourselves. Bring it home 
 to yourselves. But, forsooth, the waiter could come in. I dare say he did some- 
 -times. If this had occurred in a bed-room it would have been conclusive. What 
 business had he there? Was it known to Sir Charles Mordaunt, her husband? 
 Little did he know what was going' on. There was a young man with her in an 
 hotel three or four hours, and I say there is nothing in the nature of the case 
 to lead you to believe that when she mentioned the name of Sir Frederick the 
 lady was not speaking the truth. After noticing the manner in which the lady's 
 maid referred to the letter which she found, the learned counsel proceeded. 
 AH that Sir Charles wanted was a divorce, and there was quite 
 suflacient for that with Lord Cole ; but they had heard also that 
 Captain Farquhai was at the same hotel, and seen on the same landing with her, 
 and yet Captain Farquhar was not called. Lord Cole was not called. Where is 
 Lord Cole, andjwhat is he doing now? Here is a child expected to bear Sir 
 Charles Mordaunt's name and inherit his property. Lord Cole is the father of 
 that child, and Lady MoncreifiEe is seeking to prevent the divorce which Sir 
 Charles Mordaunt is asking. When we get to the plain English of it, how foul it 
 is I Lady Mordaunt makes a memorandum in her pocket-book, and the very day 
 -on which the child is born accords with the night that Lord Cole slept with her. 
 Neither Lord Cole nor Captain Farquhar is called to contradict the adultery, and 
 yet my learned friend is here to ask you to shut out Sir Charles from a court of 
 justice, and oblige him, by the law of the land, to maintain the infant of Lord 
 Cole, to give it his name, and to allow it to inherit his property. They are never 
 caDed, and with that I have concluded nearly aU that it is necessary to say on this 
 painful case. Was she insane at the time of her interview with Mr. Herbert 
 Murray ? If, however, you are of opinion that t'ae insanity is not proved down to 
 the middle or end, that is all I shall require you to find. If they were satisfied or 
 believed she was insane even in October, why had they not called her uncle ? She 
 went for the purpose of consulting him — why is he not called ? Gentlemen, said 
 the learned counsel in concluding, in this case there is no need for a peroration, I 
 have seen my client, and have described his position. I can understand that the 
 representative of an old house, in a county where he is loved and looked up to, has 
 gone through a bitter trial and has endured bitter agony. He has been libelled, 
 he has been slandered, and it has been sought to fix upon him the illegitimate 
 child of another by a mother who has betrayed him ; and this inquiry is to deter- 
 mine what shall happen upon these subjects. I can only say that I trust in deal- 
 ing with them you will be guided to a right conclusion by your honest hearts and 
 minds, and by a sound and impartial judgment. (Subdued applause.) 
 
 Dr. Deane : Gentlemen of the jury — In this case SeijeantBaUantinehas so mixed 
 up the issue you have to try with another issue which may or may not be tried 
 here, and so descanted upon the attractions of Lady Mordaunt and the afEection 
 -which existed between her and her husband, of the handsome settlements which 
 she received at his hands, that many persons who heard my learned friend dwell on 
 these topics might believe the question here is or is not whether Lady Mordaunt 
 committed adultery, and what damages you have to assess. That is not the ques- 
 tion. The question is simply that of the sanity of Lady Mordaunt at a given time. 
 How long of the three hours during which my learned friend has been addressing 
 you has he been pointing out to you the absence of certain witnesses, who, he says, 
 it would have been satisfactory to him to cross-examine. There is a very simple 
 answer to that, and the answer is this. In the view which my learned friends who 
 are with me and myself took of this case, we thought we ought to confine ourselves 
 to that which is the issue raised before you, to that which takes place from the 
 30th April down to the present time, and when, I alluded to the fact of Mrs. 
 Forbes not being here, I did so because she was with Lady Mordaunt when the 
 citation was served, and no other. In the view we took of the case, it wovild have 
 been utterly outside to call any one who was present at the first illness — the puer- 
 peral illness. The view which we take of the case is still the same ; but the 
 materials upon which I have to address you are, thanks to the course which has 
 been taken by my learned friend, very difEeren:. There has been given me links of 
 such perfect workmanship, so well welded, so perfectly joined together, that I will 
 lay before you a chain of evidence without flaw, without break, extending from the 
 JJSth of February down to the very hour in which I have the honour to address you. 
 In this case I feel very deeply for the position in which Sir Charles Mor- 
 
23 
 
 daunt is placed. I feel deeply for the family to -which Lady Mordaunt 
 belongs. I feel deeply for all those -whose names have been mentioned in 
 this case. But thsre are, perhaps, three or four episodes in these lamentable 
 transactions in which one will have some difficulty in restraining language -which 
 ought to be applied. I shall endeavour to speak as calmly as I can of what I believe 
 to be the hideous origin of all the trouble which this unfortunate family is now 
 brought to. Some time in Kovember there is that strange conversation between 
 Sir Charles and Lady Mordaunt in respect to Sir Frederick Johnstone, and Sir 
 Charles tails Lady Mordaunt that Sir Frederick was suffering under a complaint 
 which might bring disease upon any child he had. We know from Mrs. Cadogan 
 that previous to her confinement. Lady ^Mordaunt was extremely anxious and 
 nervous about that confinement. She was delivered prematurely on the 28th of 
 February. Now, Sir Charles Morda:mt told you, perhaps inadvertently, that there 
 were two or three days after that conversation before his wife went to London. 
 My learned friend told you she came the very next day. What is the evidence? 
 You have it from Clarke and the hotel bills that she came up on the 30th and left 
 on the Ist. She came up with the Duke and Duchess of Athole and stayed at that 
 hotel. The impression of that conversation remained on her mind. When she was 
 confined, she asked within five hours if the child was diseased. The conversation 
 with Hancocks was not limited to the eyes of the child, but the words used were, 
 " Has the child got the complaint ?" In the mind of Lady Mordaunt was dwelling 
 at the time of her confinement that conversation with Sir Charles, which he would 
 recollect to his dying day. I asked Sir Charles whether, on his return from 
 Norway, he slept with hig wife up to the time of her confinement ? He said, " Yes." 
 If Lady Mordaunt had been afEected with all this disease, how came it Sir Charles 
 never got the complaint? You will see that in the first confession she spoke of 
 herself as the cause of the child's blindness. You have heard that impressions 
 may be produced on the mind of a woman during her pregnancy so strong 
 as to affect her at her confinement. On the Saturday following her con- 
 finement she was found exhibiting one of the very symptoms of puerperal 
 mania which had been spoken of. When her mother wished to see her, 
 the very person whom Serjeant Ballantine said ought to have been with 
 her was, through her puerperal mania, forbidden to be with her. That was accord- 
 ing to the doctors, one of the signs of puerperal mania — a dislike of intimate re- 
 lations. What were the symptoms, according to Doctor Tyler Smith, who was 
 called to rebut — " Silence, taeitumity, and dislike of intimate relations." Mrs. 
 Cadogan came to see her, and, according to Hancox, there seemed little to be 
 learnt from Mrs. Cadogan. Lady Mordaunt said " She had had a strange dream." 
 ■\yhen the nurse immediately said, "Lady Mordaunt, Mrs. Cadogan knows every- 
 thing " — stopping one train of thought, and suggesting the other, which had been 
 uppermost. At the same time she was putting the laudanum away, at the same time 
 Lady Mordaunt was urging that the child should be put away. Were not these 
 evidences that at all events the mind was somewhat ofi its poise. _ But was the 
 nurse's evidence got elsewhere at this time. Was it consistent -with that o'. Sir 
 Charles and Dr. Orford ? It was not. His lordship had read yesterday symptoms 
 which it -svas said had been stated by the doctors. Dr. Orford took from the first a 
 favourable view. He saw neither hysteria nor catalepsy. But where did Sir Charles 
 get those terms. He must have heard them from the doctors. The argument pre- 
 sented to them was that Lady Mordaunt made admissions which -were true, and 
 that, therefore, she knew what she said when she made those admissions. What 
 should ttey say as to the accusation against the Prince of Wales? The words she 
 used were precisely the same as to other persons. He agreed his lesimed friend 
 would proceed against the highest as well as the lowest, if it became his duty. In 
 the evidence of Sir Charles Mordaunt, it was stated that the Prince of Wales 
 was frequently there. Now, I don't know whether you are aware, but it is perfectly 
 well kno-wn to a great many people that when the Royal family are visiting 
 at a house, no other visitors are admitted. That is a rule of society; 
 otherwise persons more or less vulgar might take that opportunity to intrude 
 on the Eoyal family. It is a rule perfectly well known. But we go 
 beyond that, and Sir Charles says that he had cautioned his -wife against 
 receiving the -visits of the ; Prince of Wales, and when she said she did -wrong, the- 
 learned counsel had remarked that she meant she kept up the acquaintance after 
 her husband had forbidden it. Then there was the shooting match in June. Lady 
 Mordaunt was do-wn marking. They were in constant communication with her, 
 each of them, and afterwards subsequently to that Sir Charles Mordaunt accepted 
 an invitation to a ball at the house of the Prince of Wales. Sir Charles Mordaunt 
 
24 
 
 was, therefore, evidently mistaken. There was not a tittle of evidence in this case 
 to show that, after Lady Mordaunt vras told not to renew her acquaintance with 
 the Prihce of Wales she ever set eyes on him. She said in her confession, ' I have 
 heen very wicked with the Prince of Wales, Lord Cole, Sir Frederick Johnstone, 
 and others, and in open elay." Sever the accusation («.ntmued ^e^ learned 
 counsel), if you can, made by Lady Mordaunt against the Prince of Wales from 
 that made against the others, and if there is a delusion in one case, I defy anybody 
 to sav it is not a delusion in the other cases. We heard yester- 
 day about these letters of the Prince of Wales. There were some letters 
 found in her desk— six or seven. They were, perhaps, .the most mnocent 
 letters that ever a gentleman wrote to a lady. Coming to Sir Frederick Johnstone, 
 Mr. Serjeant Ballantiue professed himself ready to believe his evidence m respect 
 ■of his health : but if he believed Sir Frederick Johnstone's evidence in that par- 
 ticular, what right had he to disbelieve his evidence as to the charge of adultery .' 
 It was urged that he dined alone with Lady Mordaunt at the Alexandra Hotel. 
 No doubt he did. But had it come to this that a gentleman could not accept an 
 invitation to dine with a lady whom he had known from childhood, and with 
 whose family he was intimate, without subjecting himself to the imputation of 
 abusing the opportunity ? He believed, no matter what his learned friend might 
 say, that there were people— men and woman, young and handsome— who could 
 meet under such circumstances and spend the evening together, and yet be 
 ■virtuous. The fact of his being with Lady Mordaunt was the only particle of 
 ■evidence against Sir Frederick Johnstone ; but no one in his senses would draw 
 irom it the conclusion of guilt. It was then said, but why not call Lord Cole ? He 
 explained yesterday why it was that he had determined to call his Eoyal Highness 
 the Prince of Wales and Sir Frederick Johnstone. In one case the exalted position 
 of his Eoyal Highness called for it ; in the other, a charge than which none could 
 be more odious was made against Sir Frederick Johnstone. It was due to them that 
 they should be called, but there existed no such necessity in the case of Lord Cole. 
 Lord Cole remained with Lady Mordaunt somewhat late. On the 10th July, Lord 
 Cole went to Walton, where he remained until the 14th. That was the only 
 •evidence against Lord Cole, and there appeared to have been no secrecy about his 
 visits. The learned counsel then referred to the diary in which the entry " 280 
 days from the 27th June" was made against the date of the 3rd April, and argued 
 that it was quite inconsistent with the evidence of the nurse that Lady Mordaunt 
 had said that the child was begotten on the 27th of June, because the period from 
 which women calculated for their confinement was well known, and it must, there- 
 iore, be patent to everybody what the " 280 days from the 27th June" meant. That 
 was all the evidence aginst Lord Cole, and they could place no more reliance 
 upon the admission with regard to him than they did with regard to the Prince of 
 Wales and Sir Frederick Johnstone. He now came to Captain Farquhar's case, ■ 
 and he confessed it was to him a matter of some difficulty, not in explaining it, 
 but from the manner in which it had been dealt with on the other side. Jessie ' 
 Clarke told them that in November, 1847, her mistress came to London and went to 
 the Palace Hotel, and was there with Captain Farquhar, and that ten days after 
 that she found, under a pincushion in Lady Mordaunt's room, a letter from Captain 
 Farquhar. She said that she mentioned the fact to Mrs Caborn and to Bird, the 
 butler, and put it back : after which she saw her mistress destroy it. She said 
 that she did not mention the letter to anybody else because she was afraid of 
 compromising her mistress ; yet, although she mentioned the other circumstances 
 before the petition was served. Captain Farquhar's name did not find a place in 
 the petition, and that was obviously because those to whom she told the story did 
 not choose to believe it. ',What evidence was there against Lord Cole and Sir 
 Frederick Johnstone ? Was it not weak as compared with that against Captain 
 Farquhar ? Then, again, vfith regard to the notice of arrivals at the Palace Hotel, 
 he argued that the alteration in the name in the hotel books from Farmer to Farquhar 
 could not have been made on the night of the 7th, as stated by the hotel porter, be- 
 cause the Morning Post of the 9th gave the name as Farmer, together with the entries 
 of the arrivals on the following day, the 8th. For what purpose could those news- 
 papers havebeensetasideby Bird? for he did so four days before he sawthe letter. 
 That was a matter which he thought might have been explained by the other side. 
 He now came to Mr. Orford's evidence. From the first to the last that gentleman 
 ' said she wat. not the least unwell, and difEered from Dr. Jones as to her being 
 excitable or hysterical. He also refused to see Dr. Tuke and Dr. Alderson, or to 
 give them any information. This country doctor thought that three or four of 
 the most eminent physicians in this country had entered into a conspiracy to 
 
25 
 
 make Lady Mordannt ont mad. There was such a thing as ignoranse, 
 and it wag not unfrequently attended with self-conceit, and this Mr. Orford 
 would not see the other doctors because he would not allow himself to he cor- 
 rupted. He had never seen a case of puerperal mania, and he ventured to tell 
 them that there was no mental derangement, and when Sir Charles Mordaunt's 
 letters were read to him he said that he did not believe the statement. The 
 suggestion with regard to the child was that it had a disease of a specific kind 
 given by the mother. Could they conceive that on four different occasions this 
 unfortunate lady should, in her own husband's house, have been subjected to 
 examination, once with the speculum, in order to prove that she was affected with 
 gonorrhoea. If Dr. Orford believed it was gonorrhoea, why these four examina- 
 tions 1 He said it was usual in such cases. Wlay, a prostitute under the 
 Contagious Diseases Act would scarcely be subjected to such treatment. If Dr. 
 Orford was satisfied on the first examination, why the three subsequent examina- 
 tions ? He said it was by Sir Charles' request, but that he (the learned counsel) 
 did not bslieve, for Sir Charles must have known that if his wife was infected he 
 must have become infected himself. It wag the duty of Mr. Orford before he 
 made any examination to ask Sir Charles whether he had slept with his wife 
 continually, and if so, whether he was diseased. Dr. Jones stated that Lady 
 Mordaunt's manners weie marked by great taciturnity, and they heard from him 
 that catalepsy and hysteria, when exaggerated, would end in dementia. Mrs. 
 Cadogan, in her evidence, said that she had found Lady Mordaunt in one of those 
 taciturn states, and she told them that a servant took her up and walked her 
 about the room, and showed her some pictures. Surely that could not be 
 shamming. It was exactly what would be done with an imbecile child. 
 The learned counsel contended that evidence of that nature was of great 
 value. The acts in question were done at the time, and the impression 
 made upon the minds of two persons was that " she geemed in a rapt 
 state." Referring to the confession made to Mrs Cadogan, the jury would 
 remember that it came shortly after the strange dream which her ladyship had 
 had. It was different to what she had previously stated to her husband, and. 
 consisted in her saying, " Everybody does it in London ; I only did it two or three 
 times." The impression caused by the dream might have led to another delusion. 
 Alluding to the evidence of Jessie Clarke, they would remember that she appeared 
 perfectly self-possessed under examination ; but if they came to look at her 
 evidence, he thought they would find that it contained many inconsistencies. 
 What did they think of an expression used by a lady's-maid to her mistress in a 
 sound state of mind — " It is no use you trying to deceive me, my lady." They 
 would remember that Clarke tried to get out of the difficulty which she had 
 incurred by previously, stating that "she had never appeared to be shamming." 
 They would also recollect the two different stories which the same witness told 
 about the letter under the pincushion, and likewise the mistake which she said 
 she had made in saying that her mistress had asked her permission to lie down on 
 the sofa. He thought they would be of opinion that such testimony was not 
 exactly true — ^that there was something wrong in it. When matters of that kind 
 cropped up here and there they were worth all the other testimony which the 
 witnesses came prepared to state. He now came to a very curious part of the 
 story — ^he referred to the letter which was alleged to have been found in the 
 pocket of one of Lady Mordaunt's dresses, and which contained a request that 
 Hancox should not say anything of the nonsense which she had talked to her 
 while she was at Walton. The case, as now laid before them, was that Hancox 
 never received that letter, but he found in her affidavit of the 18th June, that it 
 had been shown to her. 
 
 Lord Penzance ; It is marked " A." 
 
 Dr. Deane Yes, my lord; 
 
 Lord Penzance : Well, then, she simply says that it had been shown to her, and 
 that it is in Lady Mordaunt's handwriting. 
 
 Dr. Deane would put it to the jury whether any sane woman would have vnitten 
 such a letter as that, left it about, and never cared to inquire whether it reached 
 its destination — in fact, forgot all about it ? Keferring to the evidence by the 
 Dowager Lady Mordaunt, he pointed out that she had only seen Sir Charles' wife 
 three or four times before rfie left Walton, and that in her jresenoe the same 
 eccentricities took place on the part of her ladyship as had been also observed by 
 the nurse, by Mrs. Cabom, and by Miss Clarke. The Eev. Mr. Cadogan's evidence 
 went to show that in his conversation with Lady Mordaunt he made no impression 
 
26 
 
 upon her mind, and that upon his second visit her ladyship showed an utter forget- 
 fulness of what had occurred on the former occasion, except with reference to some 
 trifling circumstance which was passing through her mind at the moment. He 
 ■directed the attention of the jury to the circumstances in connexion with the 
 drawing of the cheque by Lady Mordaunt, and her asking Mrs. Gabom to cash it. 
 They would remember that Mrs. Gabom could not cash it, but ofiered to lend her 
 ladyship £20— five sovereigns and three £5 notes, and that she expressed an 
 aversion to take the notes. He asked them, could she have had any sane reason 
 ior refusing the notes ? The cheque was sent to Mr. Cobb, the steward, who had 
 the money, and could therefore have cashed it, but who returned it to Mrs. Gabom, 
 and she ultimately gave it to Sir Charles' brother Osbert. It was then lost sight 
 of. He would like to know whether that was the way in which a lady of sound 
 mind would generally be treated by those about her? Eeferring to the evidence 
 given by the different medical gentlemen, he asked the jury to apply their minds 
 to it, and say whether the statements made by those gentlemen were founded on 
 fact, and to compare them with that of Dr. Oxford. He referred to the demeanour 
 of Lady Mordaunt when the copy of the petition in the Divorce Court was deli- 
 vered to her. She sat with her hands before her, kept her eyes fixed on her lap, 
 made no response when the petition was handed to her, but subsequently 
 when Mrs. Forbes came into the room she suddenly appeared cheerful. 
 Was that, he asked, the conduct of a woman in her right senses ? His 
 learned friend the Serjeant had said that the witnesses from Worthing had not been 
 corroborated in their evidence regarding the demeanour of Lady Mordaunt while 
 there. That he had no right to say, as there were other persons who were 
 constantly about the person of Lady Mordaunt at that time whom Mr. Serjeant 
 Ballantine could have interrogated as to the truth of that evidence. He then 
 commented upon the many eccentric acts of Lady Mordaunt, and specially called 
 the attention of the jury to the fact that upon no occasion would the nurse 
 Hancox trust the child with her ladyship, simply, he contended, because she did 
 not consider her in her right mind. He had now brought them down to the 15th 
 May, when Lady Mordaunt came to London, and went to the residence of Lady 
 Kinnoul, in Belgrave-square, where she was twice seen by Dr. Gull. That gentle- 
 man had stated that he had questioned her very closely, keeping his eyes upon her, 
 and his hand upon her pulse during the time, yet he could make no impression 
 whatever upon her. "Was Dr. Gull a man likely to be deceived or imposed upon ? 
 He considered his evidence of great value in itself ; but it became more so when 
 compared with that which had been given by other witnesses. The argument 
 presented to them was this — Lady Mordaunt made certain admissions ; those 
 admissions were found to be true in point of fact ; therefore, when Lady Moxdaimt 
 made these statements she was perfectly sane, and that in order to get rid of them 
 he was now shamming ; but he urged that if such was the true theory, she 
 would be more interested in shammiag to her husband than to anybody else. If 
 that, however, were the case, how could they reconcile it with the facts, when 
 taking into consideration the letter which she wrote to him on the 16th May, which 
 he had previously alluded to? After cdmmenting upon the irregularities of 
 Lady Mordaunt's cheque-book, he passed on to the evidence of Dr. Wood, 
 who had deposed to her having drawn a cheque with great difficulty on blank 
 paper for £600, and then offered it to him for half a crown. This was 
 one of many similar acts, all of which, he contended, were unmibtakeable 
 proofs of her insanity. Suspicion, as a rule, characterised all the acts of 
 Lady Mordaunt, which, the jury might be aware, was peculiar to that species of 
 insanity. Dr. Wood's evidence was of great importance. He said he saw her on 
 five or six different occasions, and that she was extremely docile, and he could get 
 her to do any mechanical act. He drew a distinction so far as mechanical acts 
 -were concerned. She would do anything he asked her; but when she came to a 
 matter which required reflection there was some difficulty ; but she would succeed 
 sometimes. With respect to her mechanical acts he was corroborated by Dr. Gull. 
 He illustrated her want of power by showing her two florins and a shilling.' She 
 named the coins properly, but she could not teU what they amounted to together. 
 In all these things Dr. Wood was corroborated by Dr. Hughes, who attended her 
 some fifty or sixty times ; but against this they had the evidence of Mrs. Cabom, 
 but in that he could not see the slightest contradiction of the witnesses Kettle and 
 Barker. The learned counsel proceeded to caU attention to the evidence of the 
 four female attendants of Lady Mordaunt, alluding to it very minutely, and 
 drawing from it the inference of her "inconsistent consistency." He did not 
 think the evidence of General Arbuthnot had materially advanced the case of the 
 
Banity of the lady, because it was consistent with the evidence of Dr. Wood that 
 for a quarter of an hour or more she could control herself, but that when she did 
 BO she sufEered afterwards. He then came to the evidence of Mr. and Mrs. Herbert 
 Murray and their visit with Lady Mordauut to the Crystal Palace, alluding to the 
 circumstance of her ladyship seating herself in the centre of one of the broad 
 gravel walks in the gardens of the Palace. If that had been an isolated instance, 
 he should not have thought it worth much, but it accorded with similar acts 
 deposed to by other witnesses as to her habits at Bickley. Bef erring to the evi- 
 dence of Dr. Tyler Smith, the learned counsel urged that the symptoms 
 presented by her ladyship were perfectly consistent with those indications 
 of puerperal mania which he had said existed in rare cases, namely, sulky 
 taciturnity. Dr. Wood had also stated that at the very time he visited 
 her ladyship he had a female patient under his charge who presented exactly 
 the same symptoms. He complained of the system of espionage to which 
 her ladyship had been subjected at the hands of certain persons about her, and 
 referred to the letter which she wrote to Lady Louisa from Bickley, and which 
 had been brought forward by the other side as a proof of her sanity. That letter 
 was opened and copied by Miss Parsons, and then forwarded to its destination. 
 He wanted to know how it was this letter was written ; whether Miss Parsons did 
 not sit at the shoulder of Lady Mordaunt when it was written, as Mrs. Cabom had 
 done when the cheque was written. He was approaching to the end of this 
 melancholy case. He admitted that Lady Mordaunt had the strongest possible 
 motives for feigning, and he had told them that the argument of feigning was a 
 dangerous one ; but could it be argued that every person who had a motive for 
 insanity — who was beyond all doubt insane — was feigning for the motive. It was 
 admitted that Lady Mordaunt was of unsound mind at the present time, and it 
 was not a question whether the lady was in a position to say she was guilty or not 
 guilty merely, but she must be capable of making those other defences which were 
 available in law. It was a question whether she could instruct those who advised 
 her as to incidents and excuses, which she might make if the facts were proved. 
 His learned friend said they must consider the position in which Sir Charles 
 Mordaunt was placed. He admitted that ; but he asked them, in their anxiety 
 for Sir Charles Mordaunt, not to forget the honour of the family of Lady Mor- 
 daunt. All sorts of imputations and charges, extending over he knew not how 
 long, had been introduced by his learned friend, and in his speech he had endea- 
 voured to prejudice 'Lady Louisa and other members of the family. With regard 
 to ncrt calling Lady Louisa, he would take the blame upon himself. He had thought 
 the matter over very dispassionately. He could call no witnesses to contradict 
 the statements which had been made on the part of the petitioner until his case 
 was closed, and he was not aware until Tuesday last that Sir Frederick Johnstone 
 was about to give evidence, nor did he know until yesterday (Wednesday) what 
 the Prince of Wales was going to say. They came forward voluntarily, and were 
 not his witnesses. In concluding a speech of three hours' duration, he said that 
 they must not, in order to free the husband from those painful circumstances under 
 which he was Suffering, inflict an irreparable injury upon the wife. They must 
 not suppose that in coming forward to defend the honour and rights of his child. 
 Sir Thomas MoncreifEe had done more than his duty, and in doing that he had 
 thrown no unjust impediment in the way of Sir Charles claiming his rights. 
 
 Lord Penzance said he should sum up the case to-morrow, when he should ask 
 the jury to take into their consideration whether Lady Mordaunt was on the 3rd 
 of April in such a state of mind as to be able to instruct her attorney, and if so, on 
 what date did she cease to be so. 
 
 SEVENTH DAT. 
 
 The court was filled as on previous days, and long before the doors were opened, 
 a crowd surrounded the entrance from Westminster Hall. It being generally 
 supposed that the case would terminate this afternoon, the public interest mani- 
 festly increased as the judge's summing up proceeded. The gallery was occupied 
 by several interested in the issue, and also by an aristocratic company of ladies and 
 gentlemen. The issues stated by the Judge Ordinary yesterday to be decided by 
 the jury were — Firstly, whether Lady Mordaunt was on the 30th of April in such 
 a condition of mental disorder as to be unfit to answer the petition and duly 
 instruct her attorney for the defence ? Secondly, if she was in such a condition,, 
 did she at any or at what time afterwards cease to be so ? 
 
28 
 
 The counsel on both sides having agreed as to the issue to be put to the jury — 
 " Was Lady Mordaunt fit and able to instruct her attorney on the 30th of April, 
 and has she since become unfit, and when?" 
 
 The Judge Ordinary, in summing up, said they were approaching the end of the 
 inquiry, and they were agreed as to the question for their decision. He asked for 
 a continuance of that patience they had exercised hitherto, and he doubted not 
 they would come to a just conclusion. No case for some years had occupied so 
 much public attention as that case had. Those who stood in high places were more 
 particularly objects of public attention. Inquiries such as that affected other 
 parties besides those who were parties to the suit, but whose names were introduced 
 into it. That almost savoured of injustice in its secondary effect, and it aimed a 
 serious blow at the character of others whose names were not mentioned in the 
 ■cause, and who were not parties to the suit. Those persons affected in a secondary 
 degree were not in a position to instruct counsel, and so far as the interest of either 
 party to the suit was concerned they had no place in the witness-box. He repeated 
 that almost savoured of injustice, but it should be remembered that it was a 
 necessary injustice, and there were corresponding advantages and benefits. The 
 petition for a divorce was filed in that court in June last, and the papers called the 
 case " The Warwickshire Scandal Case." The case was no longer a private matter 
 between families, and he asked whether it could be regarded as altogether an evil 
 that these matters should be investigated, to discover the length and 
 breadth of the vfrong it was alleged she had committed. They were not 
 called that day to give a verdict in respect to third persons ; but they 
 had to consider the questions at issue as agreed on by the parties. All 
 that was to be said and proved on the subject should be said and proved in 
 open court ; they had heard all that could be said about the matter without let or 
 Tiindrance, and without fear or favour. He complimented Serjeant Ballantine and 
 all the learned counsel on the manner ia which the case had been conducted, and 
 could not help thinking that nothing would be lost by the public investigation of 
 the case. In reference to the Prince of Wales, the learned counsel for the petitioner 
 had honestly and fairly said, " This is all I can put before you to justify Lady 
 Mordaunt's statement. I do not now impute to you that he was guilty of adultery." 
 The learned counsel stated that, and he said the same thing substantially in his 
 opening. The Prince of Wales, being outside the case, had been examined, and the 
 learned counsel for the petitioner made no imputetion on his Eoyal Highness. 
 The petition was filed on the 30th of April, and Lady Mordaunt was allowed three 
 weeks to answer it. The case stood over from time to time. On the 10th of July 
 four medical men went down to Worthing, in order that the question as to the 
 state of her mind might be brought to a point.' The case came before him again 
 in July, and he felt uncertain whether he ought again to defer the matter ; but Ster 
 consideration he came to a conclusion that it should be tried by a jury, to ascertain 
 the state of her mind. What effect, he asked, would the finding have 1 It had been 
 a strong topic of conversation as to what that effect would be. Suppose they came 
 to a conclusion that she was not sane, it had been said, most untruly, that that would 
 stop Sir Charles Mordaunt's cause in the divorce suit. But if Lady Mordaunt 
 was out of her mind now, and in the course of one, two, three, four, or five years 
 she ceased to be out of her mind, Sir Charles would have as good a right to a 
 divorce as if she never were out of her mind. There was a question which would 
 liave to be decided, and that was whether the case could go on if she is out of her 
 mind. They had been asked by the learned counsel if the illegitimate child of 
 Lady Mordaunt was to succeed to Sir Charles's property, and they had been appealed 
 to whether Sir Charles's life was to be blighted and blasted by the acts of a woman 
 who had abused his bed. These were ftrong topics, and they had been forcibly put 
 by the counsel. The adiiltery was introduced to prove the sanity of the person 
 who made the statement ; in fact, the usual order of things was reversed. 
 They were asked, "Are or are not those facts true?" If she did make 
 these statements was she ' sane at the time 1 In applying their minds to 
 the question they had to ascertain how far the sanity of her statements 
 was supported by facts, and they must look at the truth that supported 
 those facts. They had to ascertain how far they had evidence upon which 
 they could rely to establish the truth of the facts. If the fact was true 
 it went some way towards showing she was sane when she recovered. 
 They must consider the question how far Lady Mordaunt had committed 
 adultery independent of the statements made by her. First, with regard 
 to Lord Cole. The lady liad an almanack, and in that she marked 2S7 
 dajs from the 27th of June. No doubt Lady Mordaunt expected to be con- 
 
20 
 
 fined at the end of March or the beginning of April. What was the meaning of 
 the entry in the almanack, unless it meant, " I shall be confined on the 3rd of 
 April, because it is 287 days from the 27th of June when my child was conceived." 
 That was the meaning. She stated the child was Lord Cole's. His lordship dined 
 ■with her on the 27th of June, Sir Charles being in Norway, and was with Lady 
 Mordaunt a considerable time. He (Lord Cole) was the sole visitor at Walton 
 from the lt)th to the 14th. 
 
 Dr. Deane : It was stated that there were two other persons there. 
 
 The Judge continued by referring to the case as it affected Captain Farquhar, 
 ■which, he said, would not be very strong ; and if it were not for one piece of 
 evidence he dared say they would think it would not justify any one in coming to 
 an adverse canolusiou ; he alluded to the letter found by Jessie Clarke under the 
 pincushion. Then, as regarded Sir Frederick Johnstone, if they looked at the 
 case concerning that gentleman, independent of the lady's admission, what did it 
 amount to ? What was the evidence of adultery ? He could not find any fact in 
 the evidence establishing adultery, independent of Lady Mordaunt's admission. 
 Sir Frederick went to the Alexandra Hotel and dined alone with Lady Mordaunt. 
 He hoped they had not arrived at such a pass that a jury would be asked to find, 
 because a lady and gentleman dined together, that they necessarily committed 
 adultery, Then as to His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales. It had been said 
 that letters had been bfought from Marlborough House to Lady Mordaunt from 
 His Eoyal Highness, and that the Prince was a frequent ■visitor, and that when he 
 came orders were given to admit no one else. He felt bound to tell them that 
 there was not the slightest evidence of adultery in those facts. It was said that 
 His Koyal Highness stayed an hour and sometimes more. As to no one else being 
 admitted, it was in conformity with established etiquette in this and all other 
 European countries that whenever a Eoyal personage made a call others ■were not 
 admitted. Setting the admission of Lady Mordaunt on one side, he should have 
 been bound to withdraw the name of His Royal Highness from the case. There 
 was no evidence of adultery as far as His Royal Highness was concerned. The 
 question was, whether they thought Lady Mordaunt was in such a condition of 
 mental disorder as to be unfit or unable to answer the petition or to instruct her 
 attorney for her defence. He much preferred using those words to apply the term 
 " insane," " mad," or " out of her mind." He asked them to consider the two 
 periods at which Lady Mordaunt made confessions of her guilt in determining her 
 state of mind. Two tests had been resorted to by the petitioner in order to esta- 
 blish her mental condition. One was, that the lady made certain confessions, and 
 were those confessions true ? If they were, there was an end to the question, and 
 that carried the petitioner a long way. The second test was, what reasonable 
 things did she say or do ? She did a number of ordinary acts, and by reason of 
 that it was said that she was as sane as other people. He did not know, however, 
 whether either of those tests were correct. Supposing Lady Mordaunt did commit 
 adultery, supposing it was true she dishonoured her husband, was it quite certain 
 that when she was confined she was in a sound state of mind at the time she did con- 
 fess 1 Did people never refer to things that did not really take place ? Was a woman 
 at the time of her confinement likely or aptto refer to anything that had never taken 
 place 7 Was it not possible that a woman in that condition of mind might not — in 
 her mental disorder — make untrue statements 1 Was it not ■within the range of 
 their experience that a person might state that which was true, and add to that 
 statement that which was false ? Might not a guilty woman's mind be worked 
 upon by a consciousness of that guilt to add other things that were not true, to 
 facts that were true ? She first said the child was Lord Cole's, and she asked the 
 nurse if it was diseased, or if anything was the matter ■with it. Was she, acting 
 as she did, in the full possession of her faculties, or were those faculties disordered ? 
 It was not so much what reasonable thing she might say or do, as what unreasonable 
 thing she might say or do. It had beeii said that she was " generally cheerful." 
 The jury would bear in mind that, for was it likely that if she had thoroughly 
 appreciated her position she would be cheerful. The nurse, too, had stated that 
 Lady Mordaunt at one time threatened to take the child's life, and would not in 
 consequence allow her to have it. That, too, was a fact to which the jury should 
 give their attention. On Saturday, the 6th, two days before she made the confession, 
 she expressed a wish to try and nurse the baby. She did try, but soon got tired. On the 
 Tuesday morning after that she appeared well, and then said, " I shall confess all to 
 Charley, for he is so good." On the Saturday following she seemed full of trouble, 
 and when asked by Mrs. Gadogan why she did not say to her husband that she 
 was " sorry," she replied, " But I am not sorry." This was a strange reply, 
 
30 
 
 especially after her previous depression. After viewing the evidenceof Dr. Orford 
 and the Dowager Lady Mordatiiit, his lordship passed on to the evidence of Sir 
 Charles Mordaunt. He had in all his letters expressed his belief that his wife was 
 not in her right mind, while, on the other hand, he had stated that he found 
 nothing peculiar in her demeanour. His letters also went to show Lady Mordaunt 
 slept well every night. He had written that " she slept eight hours " every night. 
 All he (the learned judge) could say was, that if she were sufiering from the 
 remorse of conscience, which had been deposed to, it was surprising that she could 
 sleep at all. He thenread the different letters, and called the attention of the jury to the 
 fact that they had all been written after the confession, and that it was not until after 
 he found the letter in her desk that Sir Charles began to believe in her confession. As 
 regards the remarks of Serjeant Ballantine about certain persons not being called, 
 his lordship was bound to say that it was a very extraordinary circumstance that 
 Lady Moncreiff and her daughter Lady Louisa were not placed in the witness- 
 box, for if the statement regarding the condition of Lady Mordaunt were tme, 
 . he could but think that there were no persons who could have spoken more 
 positively to her condition than her mother and sister. The question of sham- 
 ming was one that had been much discussed ; but if the young lady were really 
 shamming, what did she propose to herself ? If her object was to prevent the 
 divorce she would have to' pretend to be mad all the rest of her life, because the 
 moment she began to assume her natural demeanour that moment Sir Charles's 
 suit would go on, whereas, if she met these charges, and they were found true, 
 it would be better for her than if she was retJly mad. His Lordship said he 
 would go further into this matter after the adjournment, when he would speak of 
 the medical evidence that had been given in this case. 
 
 The Court then adjourned for ten minutes. 
 
 On re-assembling. 
 
 Lord Penzance remarked that, perhaps, it would be better that he should now 
 speak of the opposite direction to that which he had just previously referred, and 
 ask why Lady jlordaunt should assume madness, and what she would gain thereby. 
 The lady left her husband's house on the loth of May, and came up to London, 
 where she remained a short time, about a fortnight, and was then taken to 
 Worthing, under the guardianship of her father. Sir Thomas MoncreijBEe. In 
 August she was removed to Bickley, for the purpose of taking her away from 
 under the control of her father. At Worthing, witnesses stated that Lady Mor- 
 dannt's memory was gone, and that she would not speak for days together. At 
 one time she would eat little, and another ravenously ; she would laugh and spit, 
 was dirty in her habits, and refused to go into her bath. "When the subject of her 
 child was mentioned, she said she should like to kill it. Whilst at Worthing re- 
 peated applications were being made to this Court aa to what steps should be taken 
 to show the true state of Lady Mordaunt's mind, and Drs. Burrowsand Eennolls 
 were, by Sir Charles, own request allowed to examine her. Dr. Burrows said he came 
 to the conclusion that Lady Mordaunt was totally incompetentto give advice to a 
 legal adviser. This gentleman said he examined Lady Mordaunt for the purpose 
 of finding out whether she was sufEering from extreme disease, or, on the other 
 hand, extreme shamming. Dr. RennoUs gave evidence in a, somewhat similar 
 strain, and it was remarkable that those two independent medical gentlemen 
 should have sent such a report as they had done. 
 
 The Judge, in condnsion, left it to the jury whether Lady Mordaunt was on the 
 3rd of April in such a state of mind as to be able to instruct her attorney, and, if 
 so, on what date did she cease to be so. 
 
 THE VEEDICT. 
 
 The Jury, with reference to the first point, found that Lady Mordaunt was not 
 sane on the 3rd of April, and that she has been insane ever since. 
 The verdict is thus in favour of Lady Mordaunt on both points. 
 
 Lady Mordaunt's friends have thus gained the first point in this important 
 cause. Perhaps never before has the country taken so much interest in a matter 
 striitly social, probably owing to the various rumours that ever Royalty was 
 implicated. We are, however, pleased to observe that the demeanour and 
 assertions of His Eoyal Highness the Prince of Wales fuUy warrants us to believe 
 him entirely innocent of the foul charge. 
 
 There are, of course, thousands who are but too ready to look upon the black 
 
31 
 
 side of the question, shutting their eyes and ears to any proofs of exculpation 
 
 which may he produced. To these we can say nothing, no amount of appeal 
 
 would turn their thoughts aside from their dismal groove ; hut to the mass of the 
 
 public we leave the task of giving a verdict according to the evidence in preference 
 
 to rumour or hearsay. 
 
 It Is an unhappy case. Misery will he in the homes of those who are more or less 
 
 connected with it — the insane wife, the unfortunate husband, and their respective 
 
 families. 
 
 Of Lord Cole and the other gentlemen over whom the charge of adultery is 
 
 hanging, we say nothing, as further proceedings may possibly be taken by Sir 
 
 Charles Mordaunt, and their guilt or innocence be made clear. 
 The learned counsel engaged betrayed the usual remarkable ability for which our 
 
 bar is so famous, and the Judge (Lord Penzance) summed up wioh a, conciseness 
 
 only to be met with in the courts of our country. 
 
 All the details of this remarkable trial have been carefully culled from the best 
 
 sources, and presented to our readers : not a point has been omitted — thus affording 
 
 to thousands upon thousands the opportunity of possessing a complete record,of the 
 
 whole sad story from beginning to end. 
 
 With regard to the appearance of the Prince of Wales in the case, the Glasgow 
 Herald's London correspondent writes : — " The public mind in the metropolis now 
 seems to be relieved as far as the Prince is concerned. I am informed Her Majesty 
 the Queen has interested Hferself very much in the case, and that it was a deference 
 to her expressed wish that His Eoyal Highness offered/ his evidence. It will be 
 recollected that Mr. Ballantine, the counsel for Sir Charles Mordaunt, distinctly 
 stated that His Eoyal Highness should not be served with a subpo3na to appear. I 
 am further informed that the Eoyal Council at Windsor on Tuesday had reference 
 to this great Warwickshire scandal. The Premier has been very anxious, too, as 
 to the issue of the examination of the Prince of Wales, the publication of the 
 Prince's letters on Saturday having led to much alarm in high places. I understand' 
 the man who gave publicity to the documents was present during a portion of the 
 hearing, but that, fearing the lash of the law, he wisely decamped, and instructed 
 a barrister, should necessity require, to act for him." 
 
 The following article on lunacy, from the Echo, is worthy the attention of our 
 readers : — 
 
 " Lunacy akd Lunacy. — An undergraduate, who was reading for his degree 
 at Cambridge, and who had long feared that he would be plucked in m.athematics, 
 fell asleep the night before his examination, but soon started wildly from his 
 haunted pOlow. He had dreamt that he was a quadratic equation, and could 
 not solve himself I In sleep, not only does the mind lose its balance, and we are 
 surprised into the fancied committal of actions the very memory of which 
 strikes terror through us as soon as we awake, but different subjects of thought 
 become hopelessly mixed together. If in sleep some one asked us — ' If two 
 pegtops cost three pints of monkeys, how many British Museums could you buy 
 for six Lord Mayors V we should probably begin the calculation quite seriously. 
 But even in our waking moments Shakspere has confessed that 
 
 " We are such stuff as dreams are made of," 
 
 and, indee J, lunacy seems little more than a sort of waking dream, in which certain 
 powers of comparison are dormant, whilst the energy which should be diBEused 
 throughout the whole mental mechanism, is concentrated in one or two parts, or 
 overflows its appointed channels, and mixes all the faculties together, sometimes 
 in the most capricious and arbitrary combinations. 
 
 " We have all read in Mr. Warren's ' Diary of a Late Physician ' the accotmt of 
 a man who fancied his head was turned round, and insisted upon tying his cravat 
 behind his back, and we believe that it is not very uncommon for persons affected 
 by a peculiar form of insanity to imagine themselves metamorphosed into anything 
 else, such as a tea-pot, a pump, or a steam engine. Such persons will often be sane 
 upon all other questions, and there will be no reason to doubt their word when 
 ffiven upon any subject, except, for instance, making tea, or working a pump. 
 The Courts of Law are often placed in the position of having to say what value 
 can be attached to the assertion of a person alleged to be in an unsound state 
 of mind, simply because it was thought difficult to say whether or not that person 
 was insane. Now most people have a dim notion that there is a kind of insanity 
 ■ which leaves very nearly free the moral responsibility of the subject, and is, at 
 all events, not sufficient to invalidate his testimony. We strongly doubt 
 whether many people, who are commonly called -insane, have a right 
 
32 
 
 to all the sheltering privileges of insanity. When a person is constitutionally 
 prone to drint, and gives way to his natural foible, his will at last loses all control 
 over his actions — he becomes insane, if you will, in his immoderate indulgence, and 
 probably dies of deliriwrn- treTnens. But in any stage short of this last he must be 
 held responsible for his actions, although the feebleness of his will is such that he 
 cannot control himself. The common sense and common experience of mankind 
 refuse to let him ofi under the plea of insanity, because in such cases a man's sanity 
 is considered to be in his own hands. Probably everyone is bom with a proneness 
 to some foible, which if immoderately and systematically indulged will destroy the 
 balance of the whole nature, but society demands that in such cases a person shall 
 either control himself or give himself up to be controlled by others. 
 
 " The insanity of very many persons seems to us to be of this description. They 
 permit a certain proneness to irregularity to grow into a kind of mania. Some 
 people have an inveterate habit of dissipation which is claimed as insanity. But 
 this seems to us to be distinct from that kind of lunacy which we are glad to 
 regard as releasing the individual from moral responsibility, nor do we believe that 
 the words of such a person, dropped' in unguarded moments, even when criminating 
 himself, can be lightly dismissed as untrustworthy, on the general grounds that 
 the extraordinary and licentious irregularity of his life and the capricious way- 
 wardness of his manners have previously proved him to be insane. We leave to 
 experts the physical causes of insanity ; but the public will not fail to form rough 
 judgments on the mental condition and moral responsibility of criminals in high 
 and low life', ^hich, after all, will probably be. not far from the truth. One thing 
 seems to us tolerably clear, that it some unhappy persons are insane against their 
 will, a good many more are quite wiUing to be insane, and these latter ought, not 
 to be allowed to make capital out of a kind of insanity which, if not wholly 
 assumed, is only another name for deplorable weakness or criminal self- 
 indulgence." 
 
 PRIKTKD BY THE NATIOSAL STEAM PRINTIMO COMPASY 
 11, CKANE COURT, FLEET STREET, E.G. 
 
*u^. 
 
 .^:;■:^>4. 
 
 w^ 
 
 '^M*^ 
 
 
 ^m^ 
 
 ^^4^ 
 
 it\JiW> 
 
 m^iS 
 
 ■.:n/' 
 
 *^^ 
 
 ^^^C^w^i/' 
 
 ^ ^5^ -