death. His favourite daughter Augusta, who died in 1845, was buried at Frankfort. On his return to England he had her body exhumed and brought to Dulford House, and there the coffin lay until the day preceding his own death, when it was placed in the vault prepared for himself. He was also remarkable for his fondness for dogs. He believed in their immortality, and he had the body of a pet dog, "Bob," brought from Nice and buried in his lawn, where he also erected a small monument to the memory of his dumb favourites. He was intensely proud of his ancestry, tracing his pedigree from Edward I., and until his rupture with his son-whom he disinherited by the testamentary papers the subject of the present suit-evinced a fatherly anxiety that Henry Walrond should prove himself worthy of his name and inheritance. In 1859 he entered his son, who had been previously under the charge of the Rev. Mr. Cresswell, of Teignmouth, as a gentleman commoner at Christ Church, Oxford. Up to this date there had been no interruption in the affectionate relationship which subsisted between the father and son. At Oxford, however, Mr. Henry Walrond did not realise the expectations of his father, and in September 1861 the testator had his name removed from the books of Christ Church. About this time, also, he discovered that his son had become engaged to a Miss Maude Clarke, who lived with her mother, a widow lady, and sisters at Teignmouth, and whose acquaintance Henry Walrond made while a pupil of Mr. Cresswell. The testator no sooner heard of the engagement than he expressed the strongest disapproval of it, and on learning that his son had procured a licence for his marriage with Miss Clarke at Teignmouth took immediate steps to prevent the solemnisation of the ceremony, in which he was for the moment successful. Mr. Henry Walrond, however, persisted in his resolution, and he and Miss Maude Clarke were married in London, in November 1861. The testator invariably spoke of the marriage as a disgraceful one," and of Miss Clarke and her mother as "vile and vulgar," but as a matter of fact his daughterin-law was of a good Cornish family, and was also an accomplished and attractive lady. A complete rupture between father and son ensued on Mr. Henry Walrond's marriage with Miss Clarke, and it was still further widened by litigation, which almost immediately afterwards arose between him and his father. Early in 1862, Mr. Henry Walrond filed a bill in Chancery to restrain his father from committing waste by cutting down the timber on the estate, and the litigation which was thus commenced between them was terminated in 1868 by compromise, the testator agreeing to purchase for a stipulated sum his son's reversion in the property. He never saw his wife or daughter, who still reside abroad, after 1850. It did not clearly appear how or when their estrangement arose; but about the date of the testator's return to England it seemed to have deepened into absolute hate on his part, there being scarcely a letter-and they were numerous-which was written by him between that period and his death, and in which he had occasion to refer to family matters, which did not contain some opprobrious mention of them. He had also litigation with his wife and daughter; but, beyond this circumstance, there had been nothing apparently in their conduct to justify the hate he entertained towards them. A like feeling of hate towards his son seemed to possess him after 1861, and it was in these circumstances that he made the testamentary papers now in dispute. The will which was executed on August 29, 1868, commenced :—

"I hereby revoke all wills and testamentary writings by me at any time

made, and particularly a will dated on or about the 16th of May, 1856 (made in favour of his son), &c. My wife Lady Janet Walrond, my daughter Harriet Walrond, and my son, the said Henry Walrond, having all deserted me and persecuted me with lawsuits, rendering my life miserable, the said Henry Walrond, my only son, to whom I devoted myself during 11 years of my life, and for whose sake during that time I denied myself the usual comforts of my station, having made, when just 20 years of age, a disgraceful marriage in defiance of my wishes, I wish to leave all my property of whatever nature of which I have the power of disposing by will—having now purchased from the said Henry Walrond all his reversions and other expectancies whatsoever which he derived under the settlement made on my marriage with the said Lady Janet Walrond-to those friends who have consoled me with their sympathy or assistance, not forgetting to provide also after I am gone for my dumb friends, who have been the faithful companions and comfort of my solitude."

He then devised all his real estates to trustees, with directions to sell the same, to apply the interest of 1,000l. to the maintenance of his dogs, and after payment of certain legacies of inconsiderable amount to hold the residue of his real and personal estate in trust for the family of the Rev. John Forster Alleyne, the rector of the neighbouring parish, with whom he had been for many years acquainted. Some time after the execution of the will he had a long illness, in which he conceived he was neglected by the Alleynes, and on August 2, 1875, he added a codicil to the will, by which he substituted for the Alleyne family Mr. Forster M'Geachey Alleyne, a nephew of the Rev. John Alleyne, as the object of his testamentary bounty, and he also appointed Mr. Alleyne, who is a barrister of Lincoln's Inn, one of his executors. By this codicil, also, he cut down the bequest of 1,000l. in favour of his dogs to 300l., all his dogs but one being then dead; and by the second codicil he increased his gift to a Miss Marish, one of the legatees named in the will. He made no secret of the fact that he had disinherited his son, and by the second codicil he named his solicitor, Mr. F. Barrow, of Collumpton, in Devon, one of his executors, for the express purpose of preventing his son ever again entering Dulford House. He also frequently expressed his belief that his will would be disputed on the ground of his alleged insanity, and with it he left behind him a paper, in which he set out at length the reasons which had led to his final testamentary dispositions, chief among these reasons being the false statement as to his father's consent to his marriage made by Henry Walrond in his application for the licence, his son's marriage with Miss Clarke, the suit instituted against him by his son, and his son's impeachment of his sanity in the affidavits filed in the course of the suit. A report of the remarkable case of "Boughton v. Knight,” which was tried in this Court a few years since, and which in its general features bore a resemblance to the present suit, led him to take further precaution for the upholding of his will, and in his last illness he obtained from several of his acquaintances the assurance that they were prepared to testify to his sanity.

The above is an outline of the case which was laid before the Court on behalf of the plaintiffs. In support of it a large body of evidence was adduced, the witnesses including numerous friends and acquaintances of the deceased, persons who had business transactions with him, several medical men who had professionally attended him from time to time, and Sir John

Walrond, the head of the Walrond family. Sir John described the deceased as a man of " strong prejudices and strong feelings, not amenable to argument," and endorsed the depositions of the other witnesses, who, while allowing that the testator was in some respects eccentric, declared he was a man of great natural intelligence, of great business capacity, well read and accomplished. They were aware, they further said, that the testator made complaint of unfilial conduct on the part of Mr. Henry Walrond, as well as of disobedience to his wishes in respect of the marriage with Miss Clarke, but they were unable to say whether these complaints were well-founded

or not.

On the close of the plaintiff's case, the Attorney-General proceeded to state the case on behalf of the defendant, declaring at the outset that, though he did not impeach the truthfulness of the witnesses called on the other side, he should yet show that they knew nothing whatever of the testator's inner life, and that in addition to his unreasonable and unreasoning hate for his wife and daughter and son, he was also the victim of insane delusions, chief among them being the belief that the soul of his favourite daughter had passed into the body of his pet dog "Bob."

The Attorney-General concluded his address on June 8; and on June 9 Mr. Henry Walrond was examined at length. Finally, on June 13, this case, after occupying the Court for eight days, was concluded upon terms of arrangement. On the sitting of the Court,

Mr. Serjeant Parry said,-My Lord, in this case I am happy to inform your Lordship that since the adjournment on Saturday an arrangement has been come to between me and the Attorney-General which is perfectly satisfactory to all parties, and there is no doubt whatever that that arrangement has relieved us, and relieved the Court, from a very lengthened and painful inquiry in many respects. Of course, it is not necessary to state what that arrangement is; but it is an arrangement which is perfectly understood between us and which will be carried out in a manner perfectly satisfactory to everyone. I do not know whether I ought to state anything more; but I am anxious to say a word in reference to Mrs. Henry Walrond. It has been the most painful part of my duty in this case to have to call attention to imputations upon that lady's fair fame and character before her marriage. Personally, I am thoroughly satisfied that there had never been the slightest ground for any imputation of any sort against her or her family. My clients, the plaintiffs in the suit, have also always been strongly of opinion that there was no foundation for an imputation of any kind against her. Their instructions were to that effect; but it was impossible, until the case had developed itself, that I could make the statement which I now make. I make it most sincerely, and I earnestly hope that any unpleasantness or discomfort which Mrs. Henry Walrond may have suffered will be entirely removed by it.

The Attorney-General,-The only observation, my Lord, I have to make is this I desire to express my client's deep gratitude to my learned friend for the observations he has just made about his wife and his wife's family.

The President, I am very glad, upon many grounds, that this case has been brought to a termination. You must remember (addressing the jury) that there are only three persons--the widow and son and daughter of the testator who would have any claim to his property in the event of this will

M

being set aside, and it is perfectly competent for them to enter into a money arrangement with the other side, the effect of which will be to save daily increasing expenses. I am glad to hear that the arrangement is one that is perfectly satisfactory to all parties, and particularly that Mr. Serjeant Parry has done that which I expected from him, in stating in the most decided manner that neither he nor his clients think there was any ground for the imputations cast by the deceased upon the character of Mrs. Henry Walrond. I am bound to say that though it was perfectly natural that the testator, whatever his eccentricities might be, or however free from eccentricity he might be, should object to his son's early marriage; yet there was no ground whatever for his using the language he did use when speaking of his son's wife. I think it also right to point out that in the beginning he did not use any expression reflecting on her moral character, and that it was not until after he had brooded over the matter that what began in mere terms of abuse ended at last in charges against the lady for which there does not appear to have been the least foundation.

The jury were then discharged, with consent of all parties, and Mr. Serjeant Parry having intimated that he was willing that the will should be pronounced against,

The Court, in accordance with the terms of arrangement, pronounced against the will and codicil, and ordered that the cost of all parties be paid out of the estate.

F

III.

THE PENGE CASE.

SEPTEMBER 19 having been specially appointed for the trial of the persons charged with the murder of Mrs. Harriet Staunton, at Penge, the prisoners, Lewis Adolphus Edmund Staunton, described in the calendar as a farmer, aged 26, Patrick Llewellyn Staunton, artist, aged 24, Elizabeth Anne Staunton, aged 28, and Alice Rhodes, aged 20, were placed at the bar at ten o'clock. The indictment charged them with the wilful murder of Harriet Staunton.

The Counsel for the Crown were the Attorney-General, the SolicitorGeneral, and Mr. Poland. Mr. Montagu Williams defended Lewis Staunton, Mr. E. Clarke defended Patrick Staunton, Mr. Straight defended Mrs. Patrick Staunton, and Mr. Percy Gye appeared for Alice Rhodes.

The Attorney-General, in opening the case for the prosecution, gave a summary of the facts which he proposed to lay before the jury in support of the charge against the prisoners. He observed that the charge of wilful murder included the minor one of manslaughter, and that if the jury should be of opinion that the death of the deceased was occasioned by the criminal and wilful neglect of one or more of the prisoners, another question would then arise, whether any or all of the others were accessories, either before or after the fact, to the commission of that offence. He concluded by stating that the case for the Crown was that a deliberate determination had been come to by all the prisoners to get the deceased out of the way, and that if this was established, and the jury should be of opinion that her death was the result

of this determination, the prisoners would all in the eye of the law be guilty of the crime of wilful murder.

Mrs. Harriet Butterfield was then called and examined by the SolicitorGeneral. She said I am the wife of the Rev. Mr. Butterfield, of Great Bursted, Essex. I was previously married to Mr. Richardson, and the deceased was my daughter by that marriage. Her name before her marriage was Harriet Richardson. If she were now alive she would be 36 years of age. In April 1875 my daughter was staying with a Mr. and Mrs. Hincksman, in the Walworth Road. Mrs. Hincksman had been married before to a Mr. Rhodes, and she was the mother of the two female prisoners. The two male prisoners are brothers, and some time in the year 1875 I heard that Lewis was paying his addresses to my daughter Harriet. She was entitled to a fortune of between 3,000l. and 4,000l. altogether, but at the time of her marriage she was only entitled to about 1,600l. I was always under the impression that my daughter was unfit to be married, and I took some proceedings in Chancery to prevent the marriage from taking place. Those proceedings were unsuccessful, and my daughter was married to the prisoner Lewis on June 16, 1875. The witness then gave evidence as to a call she had made upon her daughter, about three weeks after her marriage, since when she had never, she said, seen her alive again. Soon after she received a letter from her daughter, enclosed with one from Lewis Staunton, saying that it would be best for her not to call again. The witness then proceeded to relate her hearing of Alice Rhodes, and that she met her and asked where her daughter was, but could get no satisfactory reply. Witness related her meeting with Patrick Staunton, and his threats to her when she announced her intention of going to Cudham to see her daughter, her subsequent visit to Little Grey's Farm, and the behaviour of Lewis Staunton and Mrs. Patrick Staunton on that occasion when she tried to see her daughter. Finally, in giving evidence as to her daughter's death, witness said: I received a letter from a Mrs. Orridge, in consequence of which I went to 34 Forbes Road, Penge, and there I saw my daughter lying dead. When I last saw her she was in very good health. She had previously during her life had very good general health. She was always well dressed; very fond of dress, and knew how to dress. She was a particularly clean girl in her person; she was very temperate, and was never given to take drink in excess. The photograph produced in court correctly represented her. When I saw her on the Sunday she was in her coffin, and I observed a great change in her appearance. She was then very dirty, and was so changed that I scarcely knew her. The letter produced was in my daughter's handwriting. She had had opportunities of being educated, but was not able to avail herself of them.

On cross-examination by Mr. Montagu Williams, witness said she had been always averse to her daughter's marrying, believing her to be of unsound mind, and incapable of taking care of herself.

George Cakehead and Henry Watson, porters at the Bromley Railway Station, gave evidence as to deceased being put into the train there by the prisoners on April 12, and as to her apparently feeble and helpless

state.

Some railway officials at the Penge Station also gave evidence as to the deceased's arrival there in an exhausted condition.

Emma Chalklin gave evidence as to letting apartments to prisoners, and