Sir Gregory Osborne Page-Turner 4th Bt 1785-1843
The Pages of Battlesden became Page-Turner when Sir Gregory Page-Turner succeeded his great uncle in 1775 (Thomas Page) A Charming Poem to his little son Gregory Osborne on the latter’s 12th birthday begins :
“Dear Gregory, thou graceful boy,
Thy
fathers pride, thy mothers joy”
He entered Brasenose College, Oxford, in 1805, aged 20.M.A. in 1809, Sheriff of Bedfordshire 1810 to 1811 D.C.L. (Oxon) In 1810 he served the office of sheriff for the county of Bedford. In 1818. He Married on 28 April 1818 at St George the Martyr, Middx, to Helena Eliza Wolsey, only daughter of Captain John Wolsey Bayfield, Norfolk. Served in the 1st Surrey Militia .This was an unhappy marriage through the mental aberration which developed in him. Already an Enquiry had been ordered into his mental condition. In 1818 he started proceedings for criminal libel against his own mother who, he said, had called him a lunatic. This action was dismissed because no malice was proved and it was shown that he had been "Forcibly detained several times already." his wife, who had probably been persuaded to marry him because he was heir to a baronetcy and a fortune, later brought an action against him for separation and alimony on the grounds of his "cruelty and disgusting habits". In 1827 he was said to have spent £100,000 more than his income. In 1824 he was in prison for debt and then declared to be a lunatic.
Gregory
Osborne Page-Turner 1785-1843 would become a major patron of the fine arts. One
of his most prominent artists was George Sidney Shepherd 1784-1862. His great
wealth allowed him to become a major patron of the arts in the early part of
the 19th century. On his father’s death in 1805, Page Turner
received an inheritance described as ‘funded property’ (stocks and shares)
valued at £310,000, from which was derived an annual income of more than
£24,000.55 It is unsurprising that he also inherited the previous two baronets’
love of books, paintings and other objects of virtue. The young man went to
live at the family seat Battlesden Manor in Bedfordshire, which had been bought
by the second baronet in 1714 for his brother Thomas Page but little used since
his death. But despite his great wealth, Sir Gregory’s life was not a happy
one. The only known portrait of him, still quite young, is somewhat disquieting,
the face of an older man on a boy’s shoulders (see above). Throughout his life, he suffered from mental illness, possibly either vascular dementia, with
periodic impaired blood flow to the brain (which in the early nineteenth century
was simply called insanity) or what we now know as bipolarism, which presented
in attacks that varied between little more than mild eccentricity and Violent
outbursts that were a danger to others and to himself.
One of Sir Gregory Osbornes's tutors at Oxford was John Dean, later he became the principal of St. Mary‘s Hall in Oxford, who subsequently had this to say of his pupil‘s scholarly demeanour: ‘He seemed well disposed to pursue any course or study which [was] pointed out, and he was capable of doing so with advantage and effect.” He added that ‘He entered a gentleman commoner. His habits were singular, he retired from society, and was slovenly in his dress)“
These last
three observations were expanded upon by Joseph Maberly, a solicitor who worked
for both Gregory Osborne Page-Turner and his father.
“At all times Sir Gregory was an eccentric man. His father was also an eccentric
man. Sir G.P. Turner was negligent in his person, and always regardless of personal
appearance. He was shy and sullen towards strangers and used to talk eagerly,
and in very loud tone of voice. He was a man likely to produce an unfavorable
impression upon strangers . . . at one time of his life had a fear of
infection, and if he saw a funeral, he would turn away to avoid. That
peculiarity existed for a very long time. He would never shake hands with a
person with his naked hand for fear of infection. He also used to stuff his
trousers pockets full or papers. Sir Gregory was a man of great conversational
talents, of considerable reading, and great information. He had a very good
memory.’-"
What can only be described as Page-Turner ‘s mania for collecting seems to have
begun around 1808 or 1809; in what is sometimes thought to be characteristic of
spending sprees by bipolar people (Symptomatic of drastic shifts in mood and
Energy), Sir Gregory Osborne Page-Turner appears to have taken little or no
interest in what he acquired. At about this time he began to think about
renovating and restyling the house and park, and it seems he may have
considered employing Humphry Repton (1752-1818) to do so. In his memoirs Repton
provided a remarkable description of a visit to Battlesden in 1806, and a
glimpse into the nature of its owner: approaching the house with his son, along
a lane newly planted with trees too close to allow easy passage, they found the
front door locked and had to enter through the kitchen, much to their chagrin.
The visitors were introduced to Page-Turner’s widowed mother, (Frances
Page-Turner ) who was sitting in the window seat of a large, lofty cedar
parlour.
“The room was decorated with fluted Corinthian pilasters, and had five windows, of which three were blocked up. The furniture appeared to have been formally crimson velvet. but every chair was Covered with old newspapers. books, rolls of parchments or some other litter or lumber. She cleared for us two chairs to sit down on by overturning their contents upon the uncarpeted floor, making a great dust, and astonishing sundry spiders and flies who must have long considered the chairs as their own property. After the usual first ceremony betwixt strangers, I requested to see the house, for which I was expected to plan some alterations."
We must turn to Humphry Repton’s manuscript memoir for our next clue, and this will eventually lead to a connection between the Pavilion Notebook design and a nameable client and location, though Humphry’s ambiguous ‘Sir xxx’ has been supplemented by a later hand to read ‘G.P.T-R’ .30 This must have been Sir Gregory Osborne Page-Turner (1785- 1843), 4th baronet, DCL, of Battlesden Park, Bedfordshire. We can deduce that this improvident young baronet’s occupation of Battlesden was from 1805 until 1823, after which date he was obliged to reside elsewhere. As Humphry Repton tells us in PAGES FROM AN ARCHITECT'S NOTEBOOK 67 Fig 12. John Repton: design for a conservatory, watermarked 1810. (Photograph: British Architectural Library, RIBA, London) (© RIBA Collections) his Memoir that when he visited Page-Turner with Edward Repton (another son, at that time intended to join his father's practice) the client had not yet quite achieved his majority, we can place their extraordinary excursion to have been made in either 1805 or by mid-1806. Humphry had an experience not to be forgotten; but despite this, and the fact that landscaping events at Battlesden between c1800 and 1860 have passed without known written record, we must set aside the temptation to relate them here and consider only two of numerous paintings made before 1823.
A pair of watercolours by George Shepherd (c1782-1830) show the large mansion , church and cottage alongside, and the slope below them, as seen from the south. The earlier painting (fig 13) is signed, and dated 1816. Parkland between the distant buildings and the foreground is virtually all grazing or lawns.
The other landscape is signed, and dated 1818 (fig 14). It depicts the same hillside transformed . Within a splendid Reptonian garden are a Gothick ruin , a capital trellised aviary and a greenhouse. Even to the opening roof sashes this is just like the Albury Park design shown in Pavilion Notebook 26--9. 32 The general accuracy of Shepherd's earlier view is not challenged by the surveyor's (two-inch) manuscript drawing of 1815 prepared for the one-inch OS map. 33 No new buildings are marked . So we are left doubly confused, for heading July in Peacock's polite repository for 1808 is H Repton's depiction of Battlesden made from about the same viewing point, showing, incredibly, a five-bay greenhouse. 34 This is set, not in a decorative garden, but on the hillside , adjacent to three terraces - all below house and church. Presuming that Shepherd's paintings were not, respectively, a record of the scene as it was prior to 1808 (therefore retrospective) and a later visualization of what by 1818 had been planned but not created and that they actually depict what evolved between 1816 and 1818, Fig 13. George Shepherd, watercolour dated 1816: Battlesden Park, Bedfordshire. (Private collection) Fig 14. George Shepherd, watercolour dated 1818: Battlesden Park, Bedfordshire. (Private collection) there appears to be only one reasonable explanation - that the Repository view was, despite its siting and general similarity, of a different greenhouse which had been removed by 1816; that the new garden had been formed two years later; and that during the many years ensuing when the owner was absent the whole place went to rack and ruin. Subsequently, on Sir Gregory’s death, Paxton was engaged to demolish the great house, clear the grounds, and start afresh - which he did in the 1860s. Since then, his chateau-style house has also disappeared at the behest of the Duke of Bedford, in 1886. But there remain ambiguities about Shepherd’s paintings. While evidence yet to be found might prove events to have been different, this tentative explanation must suffice: the apparent creation and demise of a Repton garden, and much more besides, has passed virtually without trace. A piquant sequel is added by the knowledge that the Paxtons lived on the Battlesden estate, where they were gardeners. This is where Sir Joseph was reared, and the place to which he returned to rebuild in his maturity.
Another, once magnificent drawing now in the Woburn Abbey collection (Fig. 129). is dated 1818. In common with many of Shepherd's watercolours for Page-Turner, it is on a much grander scale than his normal work: measuring 450mm by 900mm, it depicts the parkland with a capital-trellised aviary, a greenhouse and a Gothic ruin, the artist‘s label on the reverse stating it to beer a sketch made in 1812.
The figures
in this picture have tentatively been identified as Sir Gregory Osborne, facing
the viewer with arm outstretched indicating his additions to the park; on the
left of the group his wife Helen, in a wedding dress; his mother Frances, Lady
Page-Turner next to him holding the hand of an unidentified child; and Sophia,
the fiancée of his younger brother Edward George Thomas Page-Turner. Who had
his back to the viewer. The
architectural historian John Harris also speculates that the figure raking the
ground to the right of the group might be Joseph Paxton 1803-1865 whose first
employment was as garden boy to Sir Gregory Osborne Page-Turner, and that the
watercolour was possibly drawn to celebrate Page-Turner‘s wedding and the
engagement of his younger brother.“
To demonstrate his plans to clients (or potential clients) Repton prepared ‘red
books' containing watercolour: of the existing landscape with ‘overlays‘ of his
proposed improvements; however, there is no red book for Battlesden and more is
that this picture is George Shepherd's impression. drawn under the direction of
Gregory Page-Turner, of what he wished Repton to do. There are no records of any
work by Repton in the Page-Tumer archives and it must he assumed that no design
by him was ever implemented. On Page Turner's death in 1843 the house was
demolished the grounds cleared, and in the 1860. a new mansion in the style of
the renaissance Chateaux of the Loire was built on the site, under the
direction of its former gardener joseph Paxton.
By the year 1811 Page-Turner's eccentricities were beginning to resemble
paranoia, and he became prone to occasional episodes of derangement: this was the
first year in which. on the advice of two doctors, Symmons and Monro, for his
own safety he was temporarily put into a strait jacket . According to his solicitor Maberly, such
attacks occurred almost annually between 1815 and 1823, usually preceded by
bouts of heavy drinking which led. in his words, directly to lunacy. The attacks
continued ‘a few weeks at a time However, when the seizures had passed, he returned
to ‘a lucid state of mind .. he was allowed to do as he pleased afterwards. In
the year 1823 two keepers were appointed to live with Sir Gregory. A commission
of lunacy had been issued against him in November, 1823. After some time Sir
Gregory Osborne went to reside in the Alphia-road, Regent's park. Sir G. P.
Turner's state of mind improved from about the year 1840. On the 7th of May,
1840, his former wife (now Mrs. Helen Eliza Chumley) returned to live with him,
and lived with him until he died, which was in 1843. His mind continued to
improve, and he talked very rationally. In consequence of the improvement of
Sir G. P. Turner's mind both his keepers were removed from him. On the 6th of February
1841, all restraint was removed from him.
Although he ‘had very few associates of his own station in life; his father had very little society of that sort. He soon became the associate of persons who sought his society to get possession of his property. He was led by them into habits of intoxication.
A combination of his unsavoury acquaintances and obsessive collecting had serious consequences: by 1814 Sir Gregory Osborne Page-Turner was in debt, and his condition was such that he was once again put into a straitjacket on the advice of the two doctors. A commission for lunacy was issued against him on 17th February 1814 and it was alleged in court that he had been incapable since the previous September. Francis Whitmarsh, chief commissioner of the inquiry into Sir Gregory Osbornes Page-Turner’s state of mind, Visited Battlesden House with members of the jury and found the house to be:
'. . . in the greatest confusion, resembling a broker’s warehouse more
than anything else. The principal rooms were filled with packages piled away
almost up to the ceiling. In the drawing—room and dining—parlour were pictures
and packages in the greatest confusion; and in one of the large rooms there was
barely space for one person to pass to the window at the other end of it. Some
of the pictures were the verist daubs imaginable, without a good one amongst
them, In other parts of the house were bricks, tiles, Hints, and curious, but
not valuable, specimens of stones. There was an immense number of newspapers,
and upwards of a hundred of them unopened.’
Sir Gregory’s footman, Thomas Paxton said that his employer took about forty newspapers each week. Found to be a lunatic, and with his debts unpaid he was put into King’s Bench Prison, the court ordering that personal property be sold to satisfy his debtors. His brother, Captain Edward Page-Turner, took over the management of his affairs and between April and June 1815 there were five auction sales at Phillips Son & Neale in London of goods and chattels belonging to Sir Gregory Osborne.
In August his mother Frances offered to settle the remaining debts in order that he might be released from prison, which implies that at that time he was once again behaving normally. By December he was considered to have fully recovered from his lunatic state and was duly released, having spent more than a year in prison.
In 1816 he commissioned George Shepherd to draw two watercolours at Battlesden, a general View showing the church and house and a View of the front of the house with a coach and horses, and in 1817 he first commissioned Shepherd to make drawings and watercolours of Winchester. Things seemed to be looking up for Sir Gregory Osborne Page-Turner, or at least his world had stabilized a little, and on 28th April 1818 he married Helen Eliza Bayfield, the only daughter of John Wolsey Bayfield, a captain in the 1st Surrey Militia. They spent most of that summer in London at their house on Portman Square, but before long paranoia seems to have consumed him once more: on 8th December he attempted to take legal action against his mother, his two brothers and an uncle on the grounds that they had conspired together to take out the commission of lunacy against him, but nothing came of it.
In 1818 and 1819 Shepherd was asked to draw several large watercolours of Battlesden, panoramic Views of the park and the surrounding area, a further clue perhaps to Page-Turner’s plans for landscaping. Among the finest is a view of the exterior of Battlesden Church, painted in 1819, which shows the congregation leaving building and children playing in the churchyard; one of Shepherd’s most bucolic pictures of Battlesden, there is a palpable sense of the pleasure he took in its painting (Fig. 130). Possibly it reflects his patron’s mood during this period, for Page-Turner was again showing his occasional penchant for grand munificent gestures: in 1818 he was exceedingly generous towards his tenants when ‘Upwards of 700 persons on the estates. . . were made to enjoy their Christmas Day, by a good dinner. through the benevolence of Sir Gregory Osborne Page-Turner and his amiable Lady.
This show of benevolence (albeit less enlightened) continued the following year when the couple ‘gave their last dinner for the season . . to a select party of their friends, at their residence in Gloucester place. Page-Turner then returned to Bedfordshire to look at newly purchased land before joining his wife in Brighton. In this same year he became an honorary Doctor of Civil Law at Oxford, an honour most unlikely to have been bestowed upon a lunatic (although perhaps upon a rich man); yet in November he was in Court again taking further action against his brother over property unaccounted for from the 1815 sales at Phillips. It seems also that he was no longer living with the now pregnant Helen, who stayed in London before the birth on 6th February 1820 of their daughter, Helen Elizabeth: he began to withhold money from his wife, leaving her with unpaid bills.
According to Thomas Paxton, Page Turner had to be put under restraint two or three times in 1820 and in June he was back in the King’s Bench Prison, where Paxton stayed with him. He was visited there by Sir George Tuthill, a doctor who described him as unquestionably being in an unsound state of mind. Oddly, he published that year a slim volume entitled Topographical Memorandum: of the County of Oxford, and according to his obituary, was a frequent contributor to The Gentleman’s Magazine, In due course he was released from prison and in January 1821 he and Helen were living together in Baker Street, whereupon he is said to have assaulted both his wife and her mother, the distress causing Helen to miscarry. In June he returned to Battlesden, once again leaving his wife without funds. Nevertheless, 23rd January 1822 saw the birth of a son, followed within months by the final breakup of their unhappy marriage, In September he was again visited by Tuthill and in November Helen, by now very ill, moved out of Baker Street, leaving a trail of debt. In spite of this, one of Shepherd’s drawings of Battlesden, a View of the park with a distant View of the Chilterns and the intended piece of water was exhibited at the Royal Academy this same year, suggesting that Page-Turner still regarded the landscaping to be an ongoing project more surprisingly, a further panoramic view of the park was shown in 1826.
1823 was a pivotal year in Page-Turner’s troubled life. Despite escalating financial and health problems and the death of his infant son, he found time to revise and reprint his 1820 monograph, the text of which was reset and the title page Changed to Memorandums for the County Oxford. He also undertook and funded the private printing of John Dunkin‘s “History and Antiquities of the Hundreds of Bullington and Ploughley.” Only 100 copies of the book were printed of which seventy-five were for sale, Page-Turner keeping the remainder for his own uses. Clearly, matters were getting out of hand: he had his ‘white-sheep’, people who supplied ‘curiosities‘, whom he went to great lengths to pay, and the ‘black sheep’ trades people, who did not fare so well. His voracious appetite for collecting and patronage came to an end that year, with the astonishing expenditure of more than £100,000 With thirty-five writs issued against him, he was arrested in November 1823 and again confined in the King’s Bench Prison; the following month he was once more declared a lunatic having been, it was said, of unsound mind since July. Thomas Rowlandson, presumably a ‘white-sheep’, had also benefited considerably from Page-Turner’s patronage, but by then was evidently less than impressed by him, as he made abundantly and publicly clear with an insulting caricature (Fig, 131)‘
The King’s Bench Prison in Southwark was a debtor‘s goal institution unlike normal prisons: poor debtors lived in squalor and suffered from malnutrition, but for the upper classes conditions were not uncomfortable. Writing in 1776, William Smith said that ‘Many prisoners, whose actions are superseded able . . . occupy rooms, keep shops, enjoy places of profit, or live on the rent of their rooms a life of idleness; and being indulged with the use of the key, go out when they please, and thereby convert a prison . . . into an almshouse for their support.’
At the time of Page-Turner’s incarceration, the prison occupied a site of about four acres. Within the walls of the main building were 224 rooms, which although only nine feet in length could hardly be described as cells. The State House was described in 1823 by an anonymous writer as being ‘A good and substantial brick building, containing eight spacious and excellent apartments, let at one shilling per week, to the oldest prisoners, or those who, by their good conduct and gentlemanly behavior, have entitled themselves to this indulgence?” There was also a system of liberties known as the ‘Rules’ which allowed the inmates, on payment of a fee to the Marshal, to live in or pay daily visits within three square—miles of the prison, an area that included part of Borough and St. George’s Fields. Friends, wives, and even children were permitted to visit, the yard had two public houses, a coffee house, butcher’s and Chandler’s, a surgery, and a regular open-air market; there were fives and racquet courts, a public kitchen, reading rooms, a bakehouse, and a chapel. In 1828 the prison was described as ‘the most desirable place of incarceration for debtors in England.’
After Sir Gregory Osborne Page-Turner’s imprisonment (ironically by order of one of his successors as Sherriff of Bedfordshire), the contents of Battlesden House were auctioned by James Christie in fifteen sales, between June 1824- and December 1828, We know that Christie himself catalogued the collection as the original quarto manuscript text is still in the family’s possession (Fig 132); his signature is on the final leaf beneath his valuation figure of ‘fifteen thousand six hundred and four pounds, ten shillings‘, considerably less than was ultimately realized for Sir Gregory’s possessions.
The
first three sales were held at Battlesden, the reminder in Christie‘s rooms in
King Street, London: over 2600 lots were sold during fifty days. The first sale, on
19'“ October 1824-, included books, drawings, and watercolours; of the 2,726
lots listed l,l64 were sold initially and the remainder in January of the
following year A second sale, of 750 further lots of books was held over four
days from 5‘“ March 1827; curiously, according to the auctioneer‘s book Page
Turner withdrew twelve lots from the sale‘ Lots 521-528 contained 243
watercolours by ‘Shepherd & co’: most were catalogued as being views in
Bedfordshire, thirty of Battlesden and the neighborhood. The ‘& c’ could
suggest that some were by Thomas Fisher. The other two lots (529 and 530) were
a collection of impressions from monumental brasses in Bedfordshire, and
thirty-two drawings of London monuments by Fisher. Lot 657 was a small
collection of topographical books and the final lot, 750, was a collection of
books and manuscripts collected by Dr. Foote Gower for his unpublished history
of Cheshire, Seven of the lots were bound in Russia, the most expensive style
of leather binding available at the time,
Lots 89, 90, and 93 were withdrawn from the book sale of 19th March 1828: two
copies of Dunkin’s History of Bullington and Ploughley and an interleaved copy of Kennett’s Parochial
Antiquities in four volumes; two other copies of the first work (lots 91 and
92) sold for £2. 55. each. Further, lots including Shepherd’s work (65-68) were
withdrawn from the book sale of 18th December 1828: fifty-three
topographical drawings by Shepherd, among them five large and a smaller view of
Battlesden, and two volumes in boards containing watercolour views in
Bedfordshire. The number of withdrawals (even while Page Turner was
incarcerated) hints that he still harboured ideas of rebuilding his collection
but may at least have been considered sufficiently compos mentis for his
instructions to be acted upon.
The consequences of Page Turner’s madness were far-reaching, and George Shepherd must have feared the loss of his second great patronage after Sutherland. Unfortunately, there is no record of how much he received from either patron, but there is one clue as to the sort of prices he commanded: the verso of a large watercolour of Ampthill Park in Bedfordshire, the seat of Lord Holland, which Shepherd drew in 1825 records a price of five guineas. However, an extraordinary exchange in court puts a different slant on this: at the attempted reversal of Page Turner’s lunacy order at Bedford Assizes in July 1826 Shepherd appeared as a witness.
‘George Shepherd, an artist, stated that he had been employed by Sir Gregory to take designs for him, and had spent a week at Battlesden house, during which time Sir Gregory was decidedly mad. He, on one occasion, assaulted him violently with a key; at another time he forced open witness‘s bedroom door, and, pulling back the curtains, stood before him like a statue, without saying a word. He insisted on witness mounting to the roof of the house by a ladder, to take a View of the surrounding country, on a day that was so foggy as to render it impossible almost to see the nearest object. He used to keep dinner waiting for hours after it was ready at the usual time. On cross examination, the witness stated that he had sold drawings to Sir Gregory to the amount of £1000, or £2900.; and that he [Page-Turner] was now indebted to him [Shepherd] for upwards of1,0001.’”
To put this into perspective, at about that time the annual wages of a
housemaid ranged from £2 or so to as much as £8, rising to £12 for a
housekeeper: A footman earned about £8 a year, while coachmen were paid
anywhere between £12 and £26; somewhere in the region of £40 per annum was
necessary to keep an ordinary family and the middle classes could not expect to
get by on much less than £100 As one of Page-Turner’s ‘white-sheep’ Shepherd
occupied a privileged position, but the sums he mentions would imply the
commission (at his typical rate of a few guinea: per picture) of hundreds of
works, which simply do not exist. Among the plausible interpretations of this
are that Shepherd lied, or that Page Turner was as profligate (or generous) as
has been supposed.
His patron’s imprisonment must have posed a dilemma for Shepherd, so it‘s open
to question why he chose to testify in Bedford. What had he to gain? It does
seem possible that Page Turner had indeed promised extravagant sums to favoured
artists, and that in one of his rasher moments had done so with Shepherd. A
cynic might say that by going into such detail about Page-Turner’s obvious
insanity and incidentally mentioning a huge debt, Shepherd ensured his own
place on the list of creditors. On the other hand, it is clear that even in
1825-1826 the two men had something resembling a working relationship, so it
would have been in Shepherd’s interest to see Page Turner released in order
that he might receive further commissions and, possibly, yet be paid what had
been promised. There is no evidence of Shepherd being anything other than an
honest man (in a world of many rogues) and the simplest interpretation is that
he gave truthful testimony in the case of a man who had been good to him:
whether that was to the tune of thousands will never be known, but Page-Turner’s
generosity to Shepherd is undoubted.
He died on 6 March 1843, aged 57, and we: were buried at Bicester. His remains were interred on the 15th of March in the family vault at St Edburg's Church Bicester, attended by his brother and successor, Sir Edward George Thomas Page-Turner, as chief mourner. His widow married on 15 August 1844 Joseph John Geary Cholmeley and died on 21 Nov 1858 at Norwich, aged 64, and was buried at Cromer, Norfolk.
Grave of Sir Gregory Osborne Page-Turner Bicester Church Cemetary
The two children of Sir Gregory Osborne Page—Turner (4th baronet) were
GREGORY who died as an infant in 1823
HELEN ELIZABETH, born 1820 married the Rev Charles Fryer, MA, in
1838. She died in 1884 and her trustees Helen Elizabeth and those of Sir Edward
Henry Page-Turner Bt sold Battlesden to the Duke of Bedford. They also
purchased the Manor of Great Bramlingham near Luton in 1890.
Transcript
of the hearing at Bedford Assizes on the 7th July 1826 from the
London St James’s Chronicle and General Evening Post 8th July 1826 ,
P3
THE
KING V. SIR GREGORY PAGE TURNER, BART.
This was the traverse of an inquisition of lunacy, by which Sir Gregory Osborne
Page Turner, the defendant, was found to be a lunatic in the year 1823, and it
now came on for trial under an order the Lord Chancellor, on an application of
the defendant L0 be allowed to disprove his having been of unsound mind at the
period of the finding of the inquisition aforesaid.
The following Gentlemen composed the Special Jury: 7
Sir R. It. Inglis, Bart.
c. Whiibmd, Esq, M.P.
J. Foster, Merchant.
J, Higgins, Esq.
L Macklley, Esq.
T. C. Higgins, Esq.
V. B. Higgins, Esq.
George Musgrave, Esq,
L. Simpson,
Henry Brandreth, Esq.
Furs. Pym, Esq.
Wm. Huinhle. Esq.
Mr. Starks then opened the case. He told the jury that the simple issue which
they had to try was, whether Sir Gregory Osborne Page-Turner Was of unsound
mind on the 19th December, 1823, the time of the finding of the
inquisition of lunacy, which pronounced the defendant to be incapable of
self-government and Incompetent to manage his property and affairs. He dwelt at
considerable length and argued with much force on the nature and character of
the malady which afflicted this unfortunate gentleman, who, inheriting, as he
did, a fortune of £17,000. A year had reduced himself from affluence and
splendour to comparative poverty: and instead of cultivating that society in
which his
station and fortune entitled him to mix, had degraded himself the lowest Connections,
and afforded, in his person and habits, A melancholy spectacle of wretchedness
and debasement. He then detailed the facts of the defendant’s lunacy which were
to be given in evidence.
Rebecca Marshall, the first witness, deposed that she had lived at Battlesden house
(Sir G.P-Turner’s residence), as housekeeper, since 1821. He generally resided
in that house for two years while the witness was there; his sheets, neckerchiefs,
shirts, and towels, were constantly cut into holes as if done with scissors;
always considered his orders inconsistent: he would order dinner for a particular
time, and when told it was ready, walk out; often did not dine till nine or ten
o’clock; Often kept his victuals that came from his table, before he would let
them go into the hall until they were mouldy when he did not consider joints
of meat high enough, he would order them to be hung in the fire
corner, to make them higher; would order fires often in the hottest weather.
Generally wore old clothes full of holes and was never willing to part with
them. Prior to 1823, the witness did not consider his mind sound. His bed was often
not made for three weeks together. After the witness had lived with him a
Considerable time, he turned her out one night at 11 o’clock, sent for her
back, and asked her to drink wine: there had been no quarrel. He once struck a
witness through a window and cut his hand. He asked her to tie up his hand, and
after she had done so, struck her again, He once ordered a ham to be boiled,
and when it was half dressed, caused it to be taken up and kept till mouldy when he sent it back to the butcher.
Mary Budge, a servant at Battlesden, said that she looked after Sir G, P,
Turner‘s body linen. It was constantly cut into small holes. Witness produced a
number of shirts and sheets that were so cut Sir Gregory must have cut the
holes himself. He would not allow his linen to be mended. He once hit witnessed a
violent blow, which confined her to her bed for three days. Sometime after he
followed her along a passage, and looked very much deranged.
Sarah Robins, a servant at Battlesden house, corroborated the former witness,
and stated, that she saw Sir Gregory‘s bedroom broken open by the sheriff’s
officers in 1823; it wanted cleaning very much. There were several pieces of
filthy paper about the room. She last made the bed about three weeks before Sir
Gregory went away. She sat up with him one night, at his desire, He walked
about the room and looked wild. He was wrong in the head. Lady Turner had been
there for three months together. She never saw Sir Gregory with her.
J. Spivey, the gardener at Battlesden, said that Sir Gregory would make him pull up the flowers and destroy the shrubs. He dressed very shabbily. His beard was very long, and he was dirty. He was quite insane. Mary Welch, the chambermaid at the Percy Coffeehouse, Rathbone Place, deposed, that Sir G. P. Turner, and two persons named Ryan and Tomkins, slept at the coffee-house in 1823, From the appearance of the sheets, she thought Sir Gregory slept in his boots. Sir Gregory’s beard was very long. He caught hold of the witness one night and tried to bite her nose. He did not bite it oil, but made it very tender.
Boarding and Lodging Bill for Sir Gregory Osborne Page-Turner
Thomas Paxton deposed, that he had been a servant to Sir Gregory for 15 years, and
went with him to the King's Bench‘s prison in July 1820, He was then
completely insane, He was only once shaved the whole time. and refused to have
clean linen. (Witness described indelicate conduct on the part of Sir Gregory
in the presence of a person named Weir and witness.) From the King’s Bench, they
went to Baker—street; Lady Turner was there. Sir Gregory slept on a sofa for a
fortnight and attempted to jump out at the window. Sir George Tuthill was sent
for, and they were obliged to put on a strait waistcoat and to cup him. They went
down afterward to his seat in the country. On their return, in a gig, he
jumped out and ran away with a portmanteau, Coming from Battlesden together sometime after, Sir Gregory would not suffer the horse to be baited,
but came the 40 miles through. On the road, at Hockley, he behaved indecently
before some females. When they came to Tottenhamcourt Road he wanted to go back
with the same horse: they went to Baker Street, where the witness desired to
leave the room, and shortly after heard a scream from Lady Turner. He went into
the room with the lady’s maid, and in their presence he persisted in
endeavoring by force to treat Lady Turner in a way too gross and disgusting to
be mentioned, Sir Gregory would not go to bed during the night, but took a
blanket off the bed, and walked about the room. He afterward escaped from the witness and was found in a small pot house on Tottenhamcourt Road. He gave two
men there a £10 note no pay for some porter, and then ran away. They thought it
was a forged one, and followed him. The note was a good one. In 1823, a witness
being at Battlesden, received a letter from Mr. Maberly, that Sir Gregory’s son
was dead, with directions to break it to him as gently as he could. Sir Gregory
said the doctors had killed the child, and he would have an inquest on it and send a witness for restorative medicines to put into the child‘s mouth. The
child's head had been opened by the surgeons, and although informed of that
circumstance, Sir Gregory was displeased with the witness for not having procured
the restorative medicines for it. He then directed, that when the child was
buried, a grating should be left open in the vault. in order that if the child
should come to life again, its voice might be heard when it cries out. In
October 1823, he insisted on the witness purchasing a common coin from a traveling tinker for, £10., because the tinker said it was "the tribute penny,”
although the witness told his master it was an imposition. He bought many other
useless things, such as stones, shields, and spears, from his tenants, and gave
them receipts for their rent for them. When he was leaving his house in Baker
Street, his room was very offensive. There were many valuable articles mixed
with others worth nothing. As the watches dropped out, he would say, “Here’s another 7 here's another, Tom." He had about 50 watches and 40 clocks. The
curious people he called his white sheep and went to great lengths to pay them. He called his tradespeople his black
sheep. He had about 411 newspapers a week; a great many were not opened, He had
many cases of goods from London which were never opened; one was filled with
small tiles from ruins: the roads had since been mended with them, There were
piles of flints in the house, brought from the roads by various persons, who
got paid for them.
Mary Springctt, servant at the King’s Bench coffeehouse in November 1823,
proved that Sir G, P. Turner was there for 32 days, during which he never went
into bed, changed his linen, nor washed himself.
George Shepherd, an artist, stated that he had been employed by Sir Gregory to take designs for him, and had spent a week at Battlesden. house, during which time Sir Gregory was decidedly mad. He, on one occasion, assaulted him violently with a key; at another time he forced open witness’s bedroom door. and, pulling back the curtains, stood before him like a statue, without saying a word. He insisted on witness mounting to the roof of the house by a ladder, to take a view of the surrounding country, on a day that was so foggy as to render it impossible almost to see the nearest object. He used to keep dinner waiting for hours after it was ready at the usual time. On cross-examination, the witness stated that he had sold drawings to Sit Gregory to the amount of £1,0001. or £2,0001; and that he was now indebted to him for upwards of £1,000.
Thos, Stephens deposed, that he had had the care of insane persons for 20
years, and Sir G. Turner was decidedly insane. Witness described his indecent
conduct. Shaving was always done by main force, and when it was over he would
fall on his knees.
At six o’clock the Court adjourned to nine o’clock on Saturday
Wm Jones, Marshal of the King’s Bench prison, stated, that from the
opportunities he had had of witnessing the demeanor of the defendant in the
prison, he considered him wholly unfit to be entrusted with the management of his
own affairs. That was witness’s impression from the first time he saw him in
November, 1823, down to the present moment. In his general appearance he was
quite deranged. Witness was present when the jury (the inquisition) examined
him; he said to one of them, whom he knew, “This is all a conspiracy; I have no chance here.” Mr. Maberly, he said,
was at the head of it, After a certain time, Sir Gregory was removed to rooms
above the lobby, in consequence
of a communication which witness had had with Sir G. Tuthill, and from that
time forward he had no opportunity of anything hut half a pint of wine a-day,
and two pints of porter.
Jeremiah Herbert, keeper of the King's Bench coffee house, frequently saw Sir
Gregory there; and, in witness’s mind, he was deranged.
Francis Whitmarsh, Esq. was the chief commissioner upon the inquisition, and
accompanied the jury to Battlesden house, which he found in the greatest
confusion, resembling a broker’s warehouse more than anything else. The
principal rooms were filled with packages piled away almost up to the ceiling,
In the drawing room and dining parlour were packages and pictures in the
greatest confusion; and in one of the large rooms there was barely space for
one person to pass to the window at the other end of it. The packages were
broken open; some contained children’s hooks and toys of trifling value. Mixed
up with the refuse were things of value. Some of the pictures were the verist
daubs imaginable, without a good one amongst them. In other parts of the house
were bricks, tiles, flints, and curious. but not valuable, specimens of stone.
There was an immense number of newspapers, and upwards of a hundred of them
unopened. His bedroom was in a most filthy state, with an accumulation of empty
lavender bottles in it, The Sheriff, who was in possession, produced the key of
a place where trinkets were. There were 20 to 30 watches, as many snuff boxes,
and a musical bird amongst them. An outbuilding, apparently a Coach House, was
fitted up as a music room, having a beautiful massive marble chimneypiece, but
the old coach house windows unaltered. In an adjoining room was a numerous
collection of musical instruments, piled away like rubbish. In a small
adjoining building were some specimens of sculpture, similar to the Elgin
marbles, These, although the most curious things in his collection, were placed
in a situation that exposed them to injury, and they had been injured. In his
sitting-room were scattered about letters, horseshoes, pieces of iron, & Co.
Nearly every room in the house was in the same state of confusion. Messrs.
Shadwell, Brougham, and Abraham, appeared as counsel for Sir Gregory on the
Inquisition; and Messrs. Denman and Phillimore on the other side. The evidence
lasted until about two o’clock, when Mr,
Shadwell said, that upon consultation with his learned friends, he felt he was
so overborne by the weight of the evidence, it would be useless to go any
further. Witness, however, told the jury, that they must find their verdict upon
the evidence, and not consider that Mr. Shadwell had ever appeared for Sir
Gregory P. Turner. Witness accompanied the jury to the King’s Bench prison to
see him, and endeavoured to draw him into the conversation. He was rude, abrupt, and coarse; and said they were
all in a conspiracy. The witness has attended a great many inquisitions. and in his
opinion, Sir Gregory is decidedly of unsound mind. He did not consider his
disorder lunacy, hut unsoundness of mind.
Thomas
Oldham had been clerk in the office of Mr, Maberlys father and himself for 40
years. Mr. Maberly had always been an agent to Sir Gregory and was an executor under
his father's will. Sir Gregory came of age in September 1806 and was then in
possession of a clear rental of £17,000. per annum. It would not now, alter incumbrances
were paid off, amounting to £1,000 a year. The witness corroborated the preceding
evidence respecting the black and white sheep and proved a letter from Sir
Gregory to Mr. Maberly, dated 4th November. 1822, authorizing him (Mr.
Maberly). in the event of his (Sir Gregory’s) becoming ill again, to call in
certain persons whom he mentioned to take care of him. and not allow his wife
or mother to have any control over his person or property. He also proved a
letter, dated the 27th of September, 1825, in which Sir Gregory directed Mr.
Maberly to pay no more money to “Dr Jerry and Old Tommy,” because, by the
result of the traverse. their attendance would turn out to have been unnecessary. By
“Dr Jerry and Old Tommy," Sir Gregory meant Sir George Tuthill and Mr.
Warburton, The detainers against Sir Gregory in the King’s Bench amount to
£10,0291., and his debts in the Master‘s Office amount to £35,500. There was an
inquisition against him in 1814.
In cross-examination witness said. that the inquisition in 1814 had been sued
out by Sir Gregory's mother, In May 1823, Mr. Maberly raised a loan of £45,000.
for Sir Gregory from Mr. Sturch. Lady Turner’s mother was the wife of Captain
Mayficld, or the Militia, The £45,000 . was borrowed at 5 percent. to pay off
annuities at 12. or 14. per cent.; and Mr Maberly did not receive a shilling as
commission, or otherwise, for raising the money.
John Flint. clerk to an auctioneer. stated, that from 20 to 25 clocks, and 60 or 70 watches, had been sold by the Sherriff. Paxton, brother to the former witness of this name, had been a gardener at Battlesden house and remembered Sir Gregory having a fawn pie dressed for himself, which he kept for several weeks, It was then given to the servants, by whom it was thrown to the yard dog, which refused to eat it for nine days; at the end of which period sir Gregory ordered the witness to eat it. Sir Gregory has ordered the witness to get up £150. worth of trees from a nursery in frosty weather, when it was impossible they could be dug up, He also ordered witness, alter a heavy fall or snow, to wheel all the snow out of the pleasurer ground on Christmas morning, a task that all the men in the county could not perform. He gave witness various other inconsistent directions, but never a rational one. He once saw young Burgess flogging a cat which was tied by the tail to a table in the picture gallery, while Sir Gregory stood by laughing.
James M’Maher has been one of the keepers placed over Sir Gregory ever since
the 22nd of September. 1822. Sir Gregory never undresses to go to bed and
sleeps between the blankets. The first thing he does in the morning is to rub
his drawers and stockings & with white brown paper. He also rubs his face
and hands with it, and sometimes his watch, chain, and seals. He objects to
being shaved. When he gets new clothes, he asks for a week’s holiday before he
puts them on, and when that is expired he asks for another. He mends his own
clothes, and if there is a spot on them he rubs it with “white-brown” He never
has a good wash. He never goes to the proper place on certain occasions, Whenever he rises from a chair, he looks round on the ground as if he had lost
something. He makes an imitation of a bugle when calling for his “whity-brown”
When he opens the door he puts the skirt of his coat between his hand and the
lock. When the witness gives him what he calls a holiday. he gives him notes. (Witness
here produced several of them, which were read by the officer of the court. One
ran thus “Sir G. P. Turner promises to accommodate Mr. M‘Mahcr with £50 upon
his liberation, in consideration of his not shaving him to-day," In the
next he promised to accommodate the witness with £800, “for his services.” In
another, he promises him £100. not to mention his peculiarities.
Again he promises £100. not to mention that he has torn his coat. He promised
him similar sums in consideration of not asking him to take medicine. Sir
Gregory was not allowed to have wine or spirits If he saw a hearse or persons
who were ill, he would take hold of his nose and run away. He avoids dogs and cats.
He makes peculiar faces, Witness could not make such ugly faces (a laugh). He
easily believes absurd things. He has gone down on his knees to witness to beg
he would return him an old pair of gaiters which he had taken from him. When out,
he has exposed himself in a disgusting manner. He talks to himself. The witness has
been in the constant habit of attending insane persons For six or seven years and is satisfied that the state visit to Gregory’s mind is
unsound.
Cross-examined Sir Gregory has always complained of being in confinement. And expressed himself with indignation of those who put him there. He has always stated his determination to get rid of the finding of the jury. He complained that his case had not been heard. A Juror Sir Gregory was in a state of great irritation on leaving the Court last night. All the notes produced were given to witnesses in 1824. By the court - Insane persons are constantly complaining of those placed over them, as their bitterest enemies.
Michael Rourke, the other keeper, gave similar testimony to that of M’Maher‘s and produced a number of notes given to him by Sir Gregory for like considerations.
Thomas Gibbs, tipstaff of the King’s Bench, came down with Sir Gregory to
Bedford and prevented him from signing a paper tendered to him for signature
by Messrs. Corbett and Bryant. it was a petition to the Lord Chancellor
respecting the appointment of a solicitor.
Sir George Tuthill is a physician, residing in Cavendish Square. Was first
called in to attend Sir Gregory in July 1820, and continued as attend him for
six weeks. His appearance then was maniacal. At the end of the period he had
become quiet, and a witness recommended him to be placed at liberty. Witness
again attended him by the desire of Lady Turner, in September 1822, when he
was very nearly in the same state as on the former occasion. He found him
nursing a leather portmanteau, which he refused to be separated from. Witness attended him then until November in that year, and again in November, l823,
When he ceased to attend him in November. 1822, he did not consider his mind to be sound. When he visited him in the King's Bench he was not in the
same violent state, but his mind was still unsound and is unsound up to the
present moment.
In cross-examination, the witness said He thought Sir Gregory decidedly a lunatic,
with no lucid intervals. Liquor was a great exciting cause to a mind
predisposed to the excitement, and so was the distress of mind; and more than that, the witness thought Sir Gregory “as particularly excited by drinking. When he was
better he was more temperate, but when his malady was worse he was more
disposed to take liquor. Drink affected the brain, and excitement of mind from
mental distress had a similar effect. He never saw Sir Gregory’s mind, even in
his better state, free from the disease.
Dr. Powell saw Sir Gregory, by the desire of. Mr Collyer, and the result of his
observation was that Sir Gregory was insane.
Cross-examined. His case was not idiocy. Mr. Lock's definition of “reasoning
rightly from wrong principles,” would, in part, apply to Sir Gregory. He had a
good memory.
Mr. Warburton first saw Sir Gregory on September 24, 1822, in company with Sir
George Tuthill. He again saw him in November 1823, in the King’s Bench, and
continued to see him up to the present time. in Witnness's opinion, Sir Gregory
was perfectly incompetent to manage himself~ or his affairs from unsoundness of
mind. He was decidedly a lunatic. He had a correct memory and was far from
being an idiot.
Dr. Sutherland had visited Sir Gregory first in December 1825, by the desire of Mr. Collyer, with a view to support his sanity. The witness saw Sir Gregory three times and is of the opinion that he is of unsound mind.
Dr. Munro has been particularly conversant with this branch of medical science
for 15 years. He saw Sir Gregory ten times. He was uniformly of unsound mind.
Witness considered that his disease was chronic lunacy.
Here the case for the Crown closed.
Mr. Williams then addressed the jury at great length on behalf of the
defendant, contending, principally that Sir Gregory was a man of eccentric
habits, but not insane. He denied that the English law knew anything of the term
unsoundness of mind. Any deviation from right reason was unsoundness of mind,
to which every man was subject more or less, The question of degree was
everything; but where was the architect of the mind who could draw a line and
say, “Eccentricities to a certain point we allow, but beyond that they
disqualify a man from conducting his affairs.“ The Stoics held every deviation
from right to be equally wrong; and Cicero, therefore, laughing at Cato, said
that
the man who wantonly killed a cock, and he who strangled his mother were
equally guilty, The same principle was acted upon by his learned friends in
this case with respect to right reason, every deviation from which they would
convert into madness, The question for the jury was, had Sir Gregory Page
Turner sufficient understanding to know his own interests? because, if so, no
matter how much be neglected them, he was no more insane for wasting his
property in purchasing curiosities or anything else, than those persons were
who were equally destructive of their fortunes by gaming or picture dealing, or
being habitually drunk, or living beyond their income. By the law of England a
man might waste his fortune as he liked, and yet, provided he knew what he was
about, he was not held to be insane. If this were not so. The whole nation
would be held to be mad, for we had contracted a debt to the amount of
£80,000.000. sterling beyond what we were able to pay. He admitted that Sir
Gregory‘s taste and habits were peculiar, and not such as became his rank in
life; but unless the jury could say that he was unable, if he chose, to attend
to his affairs, they could not pronounce him insane. He would prove to them
that Sir Gregory was a man capable of very considerable study; that he went to
college; that he possessed very fair powers of composition, and could write
letters as well
as any of his learned friends on the other side. What would they say if they
had seen Lord Erskine, when in grave consultation upon some question of the
most vital importance to his client, make his spaniel sit up, and put his wig
and gown on him to make him look as learned as the lawyers? If they had not
known him to be a man of the first class of intellect. would they not say there
was a little ballast wanting in the skull? Again, what would they say of
Sergeant Hill, an exquisite black letter lawyer, if they heard that on the day
of his marriage he forgot that circumstance, and went to bed to the year books
instead Mrs. Hill.
Lord Chief Justice Best observed, that that was said of Mr. Curran,
Mr.Williams dared say they both did it. If they did not know that both of these
gentlemen were men of the first intellect, would they not say they were as mad
as March hares? The learned gentleman commented at length upon the evidence
adduced on the other side, admitting that the testimony of the keepers proved a
more lamentable state of mind than that of all the other witnesses put
together; but then the jury must recollect the state of excitement the presence
of the keepers was said to produce in Sir Gregory’s mind; and that the doctors
had stated that any distress of mind tended to produce this effect. He
contended, that had Sir Gregory been a free man, he never would have been found
on his knees to such a person as that, nor have given those papers which had
been produced. While, therefore, he was in that state of confinement and
restraint, they must not scrutinize his conduct so narrowly as if he were
independent and at large. After commenting on the other parts of the evidence,
the learned counsel proceeded to state that which he intended to produce. Let
them not form their judgement from other men‘s opinions, but from the facts
that would be laid before them. When Sophocles had similar proceedings
instituted against him by his children, because he had neglected his affairs,
he answered the case against him by simply reading the Oedipus, his last and best
play, and asked his judges if that were the work of a madman? To which they
answered, by instantly acquitting him of insanity. He concluded by reminding
the jury, that the fate of this irrevocably wretched man was in their hands;
and he was therefore sure that the case
would receive that deliberate consideration which would enable them to arrive
at that determination to which they could come with safety from their own
impressions.
The learned council then called the following witnesses;
Dr. John Deane stated, that he was President of St. Mary‘s Hall, Oxford, In
1805, and a part of the following year, Sir Gregory Page Turner was his pupil.
He seemed well disposed to pursue any course of study which witness pointed
out, and he was capable of doing so with advantage and effect, An attack of
rheumatic gout, which Sir Gregory experienced about two months after his
admission, made him somewhat irritable, and he then showed a greater degree of waywardness
and self-will than he had done before. Witness remembered him using a harsh
expression to his mother, who was then with him in college. “Witness told him
it must not be. repeated. He immediately replied. that he really suffered so
much pain, that when his mother came in and teased him with questions he always
felt as if he was afraid of being trodden upon. He seemed anxious to excuse himself
for what he had said. He entered a gentleman commoner. His habits were singular.
He retired from society and was slovenly in his dress; but witness never saw
anything bordering on insanity about him. in consequence of Sir Gregory’s
respect for himself (witness), he presented him to an honorary master’s degree.
Witness saw him in 1818, and again in l821, at Battlesden, when he spoke to him
on a subject which he discussed with a degree of delicacy and gentleman like
principle that reflected credit on Sir Gregory’s character. He again saw him in April, 1822, in Baker Street,
when he (witness; stood sponsor for his little boy. He conducted himself with
as much propriety as any gentleman whom he knew. He saw him last Tuesday in the
King‘s Bench, He had not then any thine like the irritation which he has shown
within these few days, He was never more Composed. Witness conversed with him
on a variety of topics for an hour and had not the least reason in the world to
doubt his sanity. He went through the whole or this case with a degree or accuracy
and precision that left not the slightest doubt on witness's mind that he was
perfectly master of his intellects. Whatever subject was mentioned he had
something to say that bore directly upon that topic, and he did not utter an
opinion that any man might not be proud of:
Thomas Robinson, the town clerk of Oxford, dined with Sir Gregory in Baker street, in 1820. His conduct upon that occasion was that of a gentleman and well-informed man, He corresponded with witness, and his letters were those of a rational man. Witness presented him to the Vice Chancellor, and he received an honorary doctor's degree,
Smith, keeper of the prints in the British Museum, knew Sir Gregory who often visited the print room. He seemed very deep in the knowledge of books which he was then illustrating: these were Dryden‘s Monasticon, Camden's Britannia, and some others.
A series of letters, addressed by Sir Gregory to Mr. Maberly, commencing the 10 th of June, 1823, and running down to the 23rd of November in the same year, were then put in and read. They related to business of various kinds, and were all written, not only with great propriety or language, fun they evinced an unusual degree of intelligence on the part of the person who composed them. The last of them declined the future services of. Mr Maberly Sir Gregory's solicitor.
The defendant’s ease haying closed here Mr. Storks shortly replied.
Lord Chief Justice Best, in summing up the case to the jury, observed, that it was contended by the learned counsel (Mr. Williams) that everyman who wasted his fortune was alike insane. That was not true. The distinction was this where persons knew they were doing wrong, but had not a disposition to control their passions; and where a party did wrong from want of intellect to guide them. That was the real question. His Lordship then commented upon the evidence, observing that tor the defendant hardly touched the case. It was for the jury to say, upon the whole of the ease, on which side lay the weight of evidence.
The jury retired at nearly eight o’clock, and in a few minutes returned with a verdict finding the defendant, Sir Gregory Page Turner, to have been of unsound mind, and so, unable to manage himself or his affairs at the date of the inquisition in 1823. Sir Gregory was in court each day, and sat behind the counsel, immediately opposite to the jury. He paid the greatest attention to the whole of the proceedings, and conducted himself with considerable propriety, although he occasionally manifested no small degree of irritation of mind whilst the ease in support of the inquisition was going forward.
Comments
Post a Comment
Please leave any interesting factual comments relating to the post(s)