"I must object to my learned friend describing the accused's departure from the inn as 'running away,'" said Mr. Middleheath, with a bland smile of protest. "It is highly improper, as nobody knows better than the Crown Prosecutor, and calculated to convey an altogether erroneous impression on the minds of the jury. There is not the slightest evidence to support such a statement. The evidence is that he saw the servant and paid his bill before departure. That is not running away." "Very well, I will say hastened away," replied Sir Herbert impatiently. "Why should the accused hasten away from the inn if he retained no recollection of the events of the night?" "He may have had a hazy recollection," replied Sir Henry. "Not of the act itself, but of strange events happening to him in the night--something like a bad dream, but more vivid. He may have found something unusual--such as wet clothes or muddy boots--for which he could not account. Then he would begin to wonder, and then perhaps there would come a hazy recollection of some trivial detail. Then, as he came to himself, he would begin to grow alarmed, and his impulse, as his normal mind returned to him, would be to leave the place where he was as soon as he could. This restlessness is a characteristic of epilepsy. In my opinion, it was this vague alarm, on finding himself in a position for which he could not account, which was the cause of the accused leaving the Durrington hotel. His last recollection, as he told me at the time, was entering the breakfast-room; he came to his senses in his bedroom, with strangers in the room." "Does not recollection return completely in attacks of petit mal?" "Sometimes it does; sometimes not. I remember a case in my student days where an epileptic violently assaulted a man in the street--almost murdered him in fact--then assaulted a man who tried to detain him, ran away, and remembered nothing about it afterwards." "Is it consistent with petit mal, combined with _furor epilepticus_, for a man to commit murder, conceal the body of his victim, and remember nothing about it afterwards?" "Quite consistent, though the probability is, as I said before, for him to have some hazy recollection when he came to his senses, which would lead to his leaving that place as quickly as he could." "Would it be consistent with petit mal for a man to take a weapon away beforehand, and then, during a sudden fit of petit mal, use it upon the unfortunate victim?" "If he took the weapon for another purpose, it is quite possible that he might use it afterwards." "I should like to have that a little clearer," said the judge, interposing. "Do you mean to get the weapon for another, possibly quite innocent purpose, and then use it for an act of violence?" "Yes, my lord," replied Sir Henry. "That is quite consistent with an attack of petit mal."