appeared to be defective was his memory, which occasionally flagged. Dr. Winslow said that, perceiving his irritation against Mr. and Mrs. Evans, he urged him to forget the past and make an equitable distribution of his property; to which he replied that he had not been well treated by them but would not forget their claim. In conclusion Dr. Winslow submitted that, if evidence similar to this were generally considered sufficient to warrant the protection of the Court of Chancery, no aged man in the kingdom with a memory somewhat impaired by age and bodily infirmity would be free from the suspicion of insanity and mental incapacity, and he reported that he was clearly of opinion that Mr. Taylor was a person of sound mind and capable of managing himself and his affairs. In consequence of this report their lordships, in April, 1857, dismissed the petition. In June, 1858, an application was made on the part of the Evanses for a habeas corpus, on the ground that the Williamses were detaining Mr. Taylor in their custody against his will, but that application also was refused, and with costs. The deceased died in July last of brain fever, having been confined to his bed for the previous 15 months. In support of the plaintiff's case Dr. Forbes Winslow and the four medical men who had tested the testator's capacity in the course of the proceedings in Chancery in 1857 were examined, and adhered decidedly to the opinion they had then expressed. Mr. Edward Davies, a medical man at Merthyr Tydvil, had also examined him to test his capacity in December, 1856, and found him perfectly rational. This gentleman attended him subsequently, and said that in August, 1857, he had a slight attack of paralysis. In addition to this medical evidence a great number of witnesses were called to speak to various acts of business done by the testator subsequent to the date of the will. Mr. Frank James and his partner, Mr. C. H. James, had had several consultations with him on the subject of the proceedings in Chancery and of the actions against the Evanses, and had taken his instructions, and had also transacted business for him connected with his mineral property at Hendrewin. On two occasions, in May and in September, 1857, Mr. C. H. James inquired whether he wished to make any alteration in the disposition of his property in favour of any of his other relations. He replied decidedly and positively that he wished matters to remain as they were. Mr. Joseph had seen him several times at the end of 1856 and the beginning of 1857 about taking a lease of the minerals at Hendrewin. He conducted the negociations himself and granted the leases. At the general election in 1857, he was canvassed for Mr. Vaughan, but said he had promised to vote for Messrs. Talbot and Vivian, and did vote for them. A number of other witnesses were called to speak to various other smaller matters of business, such as the receipt and payment of money, in which he had acted for himself in 1856 and 1857, without showing any symptom of a decayed mind. In the course of the case his lordship asked one of the witnesses what was the number of the inhabitants of Hirwaine, and how many of them knew the deceased. The witness said Hirwaine had about 6,000 inhabitants, and most of them knew Mr. Taylor. His lordship observed that he could now form some idea as to the probable duration of the cause. The plaintiff's case was concluded, and Mr. Serjeant Pigott briefly opened the defendant's case. The court then adjourned. May 21. This trial was resumed by the examination of Mr. William Davis, a surgeon, who had attended the deceased, and who said that he had an attack of paralysis in May, 1855, and that in June, 1856, he had become quite childish. At the conclusion of this witness's examination, a conference took place between the learned counsel. Mr. E. James then said that he and his learned friends found that it would be hopeless to attempt to establish the plea of undue influence on which the defendant relied, and he was therefore authorized to consent to a verdict for the plaintiff. Mr. Lush said that the plaintiff was willing to hold out the olive branch by consenting that the costs should be paid out of the estate, in order that Mrs. Evans might enjoy the annuity of 707. left her by the will. His lordship observed that he hoped this arrangement would tend to the reconciliation of the parties. It was his opinion that the defendant had not the slightest chance of success, and he should have felt bound, however reluctantly, to have condemned her in costs, if the plaintiff had applied for them. The jury expressed their concurrence in his lordship's opinion. The verdict was accordingly entered for the plaintiff, and probate of the will of December, 1856, was granted; the costs, by consent, to be paid out of the estate. Psychological Quarterly Retrospect. THE columns of the DAILY PRESS form, as it were, a current clinical record for the psychological physician. It is well that it should be so, for the facts recorded there are common property, and the lessons to* be learned from them will, it is to be presumed, be the more readily acquired, the more patent the circumstances upon which they are founded. Thus, for example, of NEGLECTED OR UNRECOGNISED BRAIN DISEASE AND NASCENT LUNACY-subjects to which, notwithstanding their grave importance, but few have as yet given attention; subjects, the social aspects of which are of more immediate moment than the medical -it is from the proceedings of our courts of justice, as reported in our newspapers, that the most striking illustrations are derived. In proof of this, when such proof is needed, and in confirmation of the increasing magnitude of the subjects, we cite the following cases selected from the journals of the last three months. MURDER-WINCHESTER CROWN COURT.-(Before Mr. Justice Keating.)— William Henry Whitworth was indicted for the wilful murder of Martha, his wife, and his six children, at the Isle of Wight. Mr. W. M. Cooke was instructed for the prosecution; and Mr. H. T. Cole for the prisoner. It having been stated that the prisoner was insane, and not in a fit state to plead, the jury were sworn to determine whether the prisoner was in a fit state to plead. Dr. Lyford, the surgeon of the gaol, was called, and he stated that he had seen the prisoner upon his first coming into the gaol, and had been in daily attendance upon him ever since, and he was decidedly not in a fit state to plead. His mind was full of delusions; his mental faculties were extinguished, as he supposed, from a softening of the brain, which must have been going on for a considerable time. He thought it would be permanent. The JUDGE asked the jury to give their opinion. The jury said they were of opinion that the prisoner was not in a fit state of mind to plead. The prisoner was directed to be detained during Her Majesty's pleasure.— (Times, July 18). In this case, the prisoner, a sergeant of artillery, had resided with his wife and family in one of the small forts in the Isle of Wight. With the destruction of his family all evidence disappeared by which the precise mental condition of the unrecognised maniac, immediately prior to the perpetration of the murders, could be ascertained; but from the evidence given on the preliminary examination before the magistrates, it seemed tolerably certain that he had shown marked symptoms of brain-disease for some time prior to the horrid tragedy. He himself was the first to announce the commission of the murders, |