sentatives of the family, the reversion of the estates, or that of 1818, which gave them to Mrs. Arnold and her children by Arnold, should take effect.

For the will of 1815 it was shown that the testator was at that time of full testamentary capacity; that the dispositions of that will were in perfect accordance with what the testator had uniformly declared to be his determination; that at the time of executing the will of 1818 the testator was totally insensible and incapable of knowing what he was doing; that, although the Bainbrigges had attempted to see the dying man, they were refused access; no clergyman was sent for; that, whereas no one but Mr. Blair knew of any former wills, it was most important for Blair and his associates to draw up the formal will without allusion to previous wills; and that Blair had drawn the will with blanks, which were not filled up till after the testator's death that so soon as the testator was dead the Arnolds took possession of the house, which they ransacked in the most improper manner. When the will was read by Mr. Blair he carefully prevented the Bainbrigges from seeing it, but not so but that General Bainbrigge caught sight of it, and saw that it was full of blanks, spaces, and chasms, and pencil interlineations. That on General Bainbrigge inspecting the will at Doctors' Commons, after many years' absence, the document there was so perfect and complete that he perceived at once that it was not the will which Mr. Blair had read, but a substitution. As Mr. Blair was the usual legal adviser of the deceased, and had enjoyed the very highest reputation, his evidence was im

pugned by showing that he had since become a bankrupt, owing 100,000l.; that he had paid no dividend whatever on the unsecured debts, and that some part of the debt was trust money: but the most serious charge was in direct connection with this will. There was a family mansion at Derby which Mr. J. Bainbrigge, the heirat-law, wished to secure in the family. Mr. Blair knew this. There was a debt of 1500l. or 16007. due from the testator to his brother Joseph, which the latter did not like to enforce, lest he might offend him, and it became consequently barred by lapse of time. Blair saw that this was a good opportunity of getting the heir-at-law to confirm the will, and entered into a correspondence with him for this purpose, getting him to confirm the will on the terms of the trustees selling him the mansion for the amount of the debt, and setting off the debt against the price. Blair, in that correspondence, artfully warned him that this purchase would afterwards prevent him from disputing the will, but told him, at the same time, that it would be useless to attempt to upset the last will on the ground of insanity, unless he could prove that the testator was insane and incapable of making a will for the preceding thirty years of his life, as he (Mr. Blair) had got wills in his possession, prepared by himself and others, leaving the property away from the family. Mr. Joseph Bainbrigge fell into the trap, and executed a deed of confirmation of the will, the trustees agreeing to convey the house to him. This conveyance they had not yet made.

At the death of Mr. Bainbrigge the trustees of the will of 1818 entered into possession of the

estates; but on Blair's bankruptcy new trustees were substituted, and finally the Court of Chancery directed this action to be brought to try the validity of this will.

Mr. A. Fox, a medical attendant of the testator during his illness in 1818, deposed to his being in such a state as to be incapable of doing anything. He was a dying man, in a state of collapse.

Adam Roe, a labourer, was at the testator's bedside during his fatal illness. Saw Mr. Blair writing in a room leading to the Squire's. The Squire was then insensible. Mr. Blair brought a paper and read it over to him, and asked him if it was right? The answer was only a groan. Mr. Blair asked him several questions, but the answer was only a groan. Mr. Blair dipped the pen in an inkstand, put it in the Squire's hand, and he put his hand under the Squire's arm, and the Squire wrote something. Allen signed the paper. Witness put his mark to it. Always considered him a madman-a dangerous madman. He was insensible from Monday; incapable of making his will, or doing any business. Saw Mr. Blair dip the pen in the ink, put the pen into Mr. Bainbrigge's hand, and guide it; held his hand below the wrist. He was at that time insensible and speechless.

The deposition of Mary Roe, which had been taken on her deathbed, under the statute, was read. She stated that on the testator being taken ill she was sent for to attend him, and that he lay in a dying and apparently unconscious state from the Monday to the Saturday. During all that time she never heard him speak coherently, and he was incapable

of holding conversation, and when spoken to answered only by groaning.

Major-General Bainbrigge deposed to the existence of blank spaces, pencil marks, and interlineations in the will which Mr. Blair had read to the family. There were several long lines of interlineations in the body of the will, and gaps and openings, as he conceived, to be filled up at some future period. Went afterwards to Doctors' Commons to see the will. It was not then in the same state as when he saw it in Mr. Blair's hands.

The case for the defendant was that, though Mr. Bainbrigge had always acted under control when mixing in the society of his equals, when at home he threw off all restraint, and indulged in those low and dirty habits which were not uncommon in the state of society in his youth; but that no man had, up to the last, been more shrewd in matters of business. He was a most active and intelligent magistrate, and had shown himself to be such within a fortnight of his death. His brother magistrates deposed that, although he was dirty and eccentric, they had always considered him perfectly sane. At dinners and evening parties he dressed like other gentlemen, and was altogether of a superior habit of intellect. Up to the 12th of June, a few days before his death, he kept a regular diary of all his proceedings. As to the granddaughter's practices, she had learned them from depraved servants, and was careful to keep them from the knowledge of her grandfather. What motive had Mr. Blair and the other witnesses for entering into this conspiracy? Mr. Blair was, at the time of this

two co-trustees.

alleged crime, one of the most eminent and respectable solicitors in the county. The only motive that could be imputed to him was a desire to obtain the exclusive right of sporting over the manors, instead of dividing it with The testator had been to some degree reconciled to Arnold before his death. Except ing this relating to Mr. Blair there was not another blank in the will. It was on thirteen closely-written pages, and, with the exception of this one passage, all was in one hand; there was not the slightest reason for supposing there was any blank in it when it was read after the funeral. It was seen by Mr. Rushton, a solicitor, then an articled clerk to Mr. Blair, and he would prove that it was in the same state it was then, and that he, before the funeral, had made two copies of it, one of which would be produced to the jury. It was, therefore, contended that General Bainbrigge must be mistaken in what he fancied he saw at the funeral; and on the very day of the funeral one copy of the will was given by Mr. Blair to Joseph, the elder brother, and heir-at-law to the testator.

As to the alleged reconciliation with Arnold, the evidence was very contradictory. Arnold himself was examined, and swore to an amicable interview; but he could not tell when his wife (the testator's daughter) died, and denied that he was at the testator's house during his illness except on the last day. His wife did not see him during his illness. "If the estate goes, I will have no means of support." Allen, one of the witnesses to the will, and who had 'been with Mr. Bainbrigge above a week before his death, swore that

he considered him of sound mind, memory, and understanding. That he sat up in bed to sign the will, and spoke several times to witness respecting it, and ordered refreshments to be given to him. Other witnesses also swore to the competency of the testator at the time of executing the will, but their evidence was impeached on various grounds.

Mr. Blair, the solicitor, who prepared the codicil and will, said he prepared the will of 1815 and the codicil to it. During Mr. Bainbrigge's last illness was called up in the night of the Wednesday, the 17th of June, and rode over to him. He said he was very ill, and wanted to make an alteration in his will. Received his instructions and prepared the codicil immediately in an adjoining room. Read it over to him. He required several alterations to be made. They were accordingly made, and they now appear in it. In one of these he (Mr. Blair) had limited the remainder to Mrs. Arnold's heirs male, and he ordered "male" to be struck out. After it had been altered he signed it. The codicil was only a temporary precaution. Went home to prepare a formal will, and did it by altering the will of 1815 in pencil, and adding clauses by way of rider. It was then engrossed. A blank was left at the bottom of the second page for the purpose of asking directions as to the right of sporting over the estates. I know of no other blank in the will. Having received the instructions, I filled up the blank at the bottom of the second page. I explained the heads of the will to him, and read over that clause, and he executed it. Dr. Fox, Mrs. Rawlins, and John Allan were present. Mr. Bainbrigge understood it as well as

66

I did. In reading over the parcels to be sold he directed this addition" and my estate in the county of Derby." Those words were interlined, and he initialled them. He did not direct other alterations. It was executed at 10 A. M., or a little after. He sent for me again on the Friday, and gave me instructions to prepare a settlement of part of his personal estate, for the purpose of saving probate and legacy duty. I went home, got it prepared, and came back with it on the Saturday; but Mr. Bainbrigge was in a state of stupor, and could not execute it. He died at 3 o'clock on that day. After the funeral the two brothers and his or their nephews retired to Woodseat. I either read the will or went through it. The document before me is what I then read. At the funeral I delivered to Mr. Joseph Bainbrigge a copy of the will." Cross-examined. Testator said Blair, I want to make some alterations in my will. I wish, if Marianne dies, that Mrs. Arnold's children should have the estate, and that Mrs. Arnold should have 1007. a year at once, and 300l. a year after her husband's death.' To every alteration in the will there are his initials, but not to those in the codicil, because it was only a temporary precaution. The will was engrossed by a clerk of mine, named Stringer, who has been since prosecuted by me for embezzlement, and sentenced to transportation. The testator did not read over the will himself, but I told him its provisions from it. Testator was weaker on Friday, but he was quite collected, and gave his instructions for a settlement quite clearly. I read the will most probably altogether. I

did not intentionally turn shoulder, so as to prevent General Bainbrigge from seeing the will. I swear that the blank was filled up before it was executed. I frequently make pencil notes in the margin of original documents, but cannot say whether I had made them in this document, but there were no pencil interlineations. I agreed with Mr. Joseph Bainbrigge that the purchase money of the house in Derby should be allowed out of such claims on the estate as he could establish. He was to file a friendly bill, and I was to offer no opposition. I became bankrupt in 1836. My debts amounted to 100,000l. I have paid no dividend on unsecured debts. There was some trust money included."

Mr. Rushton proved that he took the will on the morning of the funeral from Uttoxeter to Woodseat, and read the whole of it, and made two copies of it, and that it was in the same state as

now.

Lord Campbell summed up the evidence at great length, and, among other things, observed that, in arriving at their verdict, the jury would have to say whether or not Major-General Bainbrigge was labouring under some hallucination as to what he saw after the funeral. It did not appear by the will, as it now stood, that there ever was more than one blank in it, and for that Mr. Blair accounted in a very probable manner, as he thought, for he virtually had all the same advantages by the will of 1815 as by that of 1818, except the exclusive right of sporting. The evidence of Mr. Rushton also, who saw the will before the General, and made two copies of it, went a great way to show that the gallant General had fallen into some

mistake. A strong improbability against the will of 1818 was, that in that of 1808 he left his sister, Mrs. James, an annuity of 100l. a year, and by that of 1815 one of 4001.; and a short time before his death he wrote affectionately to her, enclosing a cheque for 1201., and yet cut her off by this without a penny. This change of feeling, too, with regard to the Arnolds, was remarkable; but it was possible that at the last moment his heart relented, and his natural feelings returned.

The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, thus rejecting the will of 1818, and establishing that of 1815.

A rule for a new trial was obtained, and the litigation seemed about to be endlessly protracted. A compromise, however, took place, which put an end to this great will case.

CRIMINAL CAUSES. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT, July 11. THE ASSAULT UPON HER MAJESTY.

Robert Pate was indicted for an assault upon Her Majesty on the 27th May (see CHRONICLE, p. 73). The indictment, in the first count, charged the prisoner with having with a certain offensive weapon, that is to say, a stick, unlawfully and maliciously struck at the person of our Lady the Queen with intent to injure the person of our Lady the Queen.

In a second count the intent of the prisoner was laid to be to alarm our Lady the Queen.

In a third count the prisoner was charged with intending to break the public peace.

The prisoner pleaded "Not Guilty."

The Attorney-General, the Solicitor-General, Mr. Welsby, Mr. Bodkin, and Mr. Clerk appeared for the prosecution. The prisoner was defended by Mr. Cockburn, Q.C., and Mr. Huddleston.

The Attorney-General stated the case very briefly. He said it had been his misfortune, since he had had the honour of filling his present office, to appear in that court as the public prosecutor in many cases of importance. This was at all times a most painful duty, but he assured them, with all sincerity, that he never stood in his present position with feelings of greater regret than he did on this occasion. When he considered, on the one hand, that the object of the attack of the prisoner was a lady and a Sovereign who had endeared herself to her subjects by her great virtues, and that, on the other, the person charged with the commission of the offence filled the position of a gentleman and a man of education, and who had also at one time held Her Majesty's commission, he could not but feel that these were circumstances which very greatly aggravated the offence imputed to the prisoner; and this he considered warranted him in imploring them to dismiss from their minds all they had read or heard in reference to this matter, and that they would be guided in their decision solely by the evidence that would be laid before them, and that they would enter into the consideration of this case in the same manner as though it was one of the most ordinary character. It appeared to him that he should exceed his duty if he were to dilate npon the motives that might have actuated the prisoner to commit this offence. As the public pro