aid of another of the
hotel guests, I carried him to his room. It was there I noticed foam on
his lips. When he returned to consciousness he had no recollection of
what had occurred, which is consistent with an epileptic seizure. I saw
that his condition was dangerous, and urged him to send for his friends,
but he refused to do so."

"It would have been better if he had followed your advice. You say it is
consistent with epilepsy for him to have no recollection of what
occurred during this seizure in the hotel breakfast room. What would a
man's condition of mind be if, during an attack of petit mal, he
committed an act of violence, say murder, for example?"

"The mind is generally a complete blank. Sometimes there is a confused
sense of something, but the patient has no recollection of what has
occurred, in my experience."

"In this case the prisoner is charged with murder. Could he have
committed this offence during another attack of _furor epilepticus_ and
recollect nothing about it afterwards? Is that consistent?"

"Yes, quite consistent," replied the witness.

"Is epilepsy an hereditary disease?"

"Yes."

"And if both parents, or one of them, suffered from epilepsy, would
there be a great risk of the children suffering from it?"

"Every risk in the case of both persons being affected; some probability
in the case of one."

"What do you think would be the effect of shell-shock on a person born
of one epileptic parent?"

"It would probably aggravate a tendency to epilepsy, by lowering the
general health."

"Thank you, Sir Henry."

Mr. Middleheath resumed his seat, and Sir Herbert Templewood got up to
cross-examine.

CHAPTER XVI

Sir Herbert Templewood did not believe the evidence of the specialist,
and he did not think the witness believed it himself. Sir Herbert did
not think any the worse of the witness on that account. It was one of
the recognised rules of the game to allow witnesses to stretch a point
or two in favour of the defence where the social honour of highly
respectable families was involved.

Sir Herbert saw in the present defence the fact that the hand of his
venerable friend, Mr. Oakham, had not lost its cunning. Mr. Oakham was a
very respectable solicitor, acting for a very respectable client, and he
had called a very respectable Harley Street specialist--who, by a most
fortuitous circumstance, had been staying at the same hotel as the
accused shortly before the murder was c