Central Press (Newspaper) - January 23, 1874, London, Middlesex THE CENTRAL No. 3,383. A Newspaper tor newspaper JANUARY 23, 1874. PAGE 1 Registered at the General Office as a THE TRIAL OF THE ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY-FOURTH The of the claimant to the Tichborne baronetcy and estates was resumed to-day at eleven Mr. Hawkins continued his address by saying that there were a few more of the general witnesses whose evidence it would be necessary to after doing which he would dispose of the Carabineers as rapidly as he The first general witness was Mr. the grocer of failing to prove what he was called to endeavoured to prove something in which he also signally pretended that identify the although he had only see Roger on one occasion more than twenty years He would not trouble them by referring to the Poole because there was not a shadow of testimony to show that Roger had ever been asked to stand for the The next Angelina was just as for it was absurd to imagine that she could have had a good recollection of a man she only saw once when she was hanging out her He could not understand for one moment why Mrs. Byles had been because she did not see Roger after 1849, and had never spoken to him in her He would trouble them with a few words about Mary Ann the barmaid and chambermaid at near He did not hesitate to say that she was one of the witnesses who was not to be believed on her oath but her untrustworthy as it enabled them to see how the case had been ot 1, and detected the defendant in his attempts to She alleged that Roger on one occasion met with an accident in a and came to the inn she was serving at to wash his and when he was doing this she saw his naked but no tattoo as well as the defective Curiously she corroborated the gallant Captain Brown in asserting that the defective thumb was on the right the defendant's defective such as it was on the left What did they think of this woman when she affirmed that she was at Melksham at a period when she certainly was not if they were to believe the much more respectable rebutting evidence for the The defendant had allowed her to adopt a false story and to perjure herself in the If he had done what could they think of him The case of Mrs. Neal was parallel with that of Luie and Captain Next came a witness who was just as bad as Neal referred to the apprentice at who swore to having been introduced by Miss Doughty to Roger as her from to having participated with Roger in low scenes of debauchery on Tichborne Down which no human being had ever before and to having one when they were on the on Roger's arm a wound which he dressed under the broad canopy of and the shadow of Chick's public house the wound being exactly on the spot where the prosecution asserted the defendant had burnt out the initials He was sure that every one of the jury the story to be a wicked Did they believe that if it were true Roger would ever have forgotten it This Roger Tichborne to the had forgotten it. If he were Arthur Orton it could be understood how he had forgotten everything about the initials for he had doubtless followed the maxim of said the soonest Great stress had been laid 6n the evidence of Mr. the retired army tailor of the who had been succeeded in business by his Having some of Roger's old clothes in his and obtained from Greenwood Roger's the defendant made an appointment for an interview with the In 1852 Carter was in Roger's and in 1867 in that of the and was therefore to have remembered what clothes his old master had liad In this way what struck Greenwood as to the wonderful knowledge of the defendant was probably accounted What proof was there that the defendant had not seen the old business ledger which Greenwood admitted was now possession of his son at Canterbury It was significant that the son had not been the Among other things the defendant recognised a which Greenwood of the This made a great impression on the but what would he have 6aid had he known that some months previously the defendant had been totally unable to recognise a precisely similar picture What was the identification of the defendant oy Captain Sankey worth when it was remembered that he had been unable to say whether the Chilian daguerreotype was a faithful likeness of Roger or not? The defendant had expected to meet both Captain Sankey and Captain and on seeing Sankey mistook him for Being told that the captain was not the defendant Then you are % reply indicating imposture no actual of the There were several general witnesses who were examined at the last but had not been called at Where was Colonel who became a staunch supporter of the defendant although he had never seen Roger in his life He could have told them how the defendant occupied his time when visiting him at What had become of Dr. the old family Was the defendant afraid that he would repeat his evidence respecting the presence of tattoo on Roger's It waB well known that the defendant had made the most discreditable use of his access to Dr. What had become of Mr. Guildford who had known Roger as well as several of the witnesses for the Were or was afraid that he would be asked about the way in which he had into Dr. books to see what prescriptions had been furnished to the Tichborne If he had come he would have asked him that and have challenged him on his oath to say whether he did not give information upon which that infamous question which was put to Lady Radcliffe was Nor was Baigent Did not the defence think he would have been an important witness Dr. Kenealy he was and that was probably for it was known that Francis Joseph had prepared false and had made honest man say what they had not meant to in order to give affidavits a of Neither had Sir Talbot Constable been An excuse had been made for this for which there was not the smallest The real explanation was probably the last trial he was called before the defendant had fat en placed in the Ho could not help thinking that this was designedly Numerous individuals who formed honest opinions on the case were scandalously treated by the defendant and his and it was not that some who formerly believed him to be an impostor had slightly their mind by the influence and pressure which had brought to bear upon He now came to the Carabineer and inasmuch as a great did not say the military witnesses had based their recognition of the defendant upon his apparent recollection of incidents in Roger's the jury would forgive him il he called attention to the absolute ignorance he displayed on this subject when he first came in contact with Mr. the at Before Carter entered his the defendant's ignorance as to Roger's life in the army was neither more nor lesB than It be remembered that when the defendant was in Australia he stated that Roger had unlisted as a private in the 66th and had been quartered at the of which was directly contrary to the his arrival in England he immediately took steps to obtain official information respecting the Carabineers during the time Roger had been connected with But up to the very last he simply knew circumstances which were tolerably well known to almost every man in the being entirely ignorant of all matters which were known to officers Wonderful to he had a clear recollection of things that never than which the jury could have no proof of Could any one doubt the object of Carter's being taken into the defendant's when they found him at What his jury knew what he but seeing He brought some of them bask to office in after a they were shewn in to the asked the defendant if he remembered such and such a He I and store that thing up to retail it as a piece of his own genuine recollection to the next Carabineers he met. Cairns was introduced to the defendant by who doubtless prepared Mb for the What was the first thing the defendant asked it was how's your That had reference to an accident which everybody in the regiment heard of. Mrs. asked the defendant if he remembered her child being nearly he had the most distinct recollection of it in the as a matter of Roger knew nothing of the because it occurred after he had left the He would scarcely have thought it necessary to comment upon the evidence of Major Norbury if he had not desired to shew what means were adopted to induce the major to identify the Major testimony came to that he could not recognise the defendant at first from his personal but was convinced by his apparent knowledge of things that had happened in the He was not then aware that the defendant had been talking in Australia of having enlisted as a private and been quartered at the Curragh of The in the Court of Common Pleas unquestionably unsettled his mind and made him doubt the accuracy of his former The Lord Chief Justice very much doubted the expediency of allowing a witness 4to give an opinion as to the identity of an individual formed upon what might happen in an That was a matter for the The jury should be told what and form their own opinion and judgment upon it. Mr. Hawkins quite agreed with hid lordship's Major Norbury evidently thought that what ths defendant Baid was a genuine effort of was nothing of the The only other examined in the defendant's favour was Captain They had heard the description given of the defendant bythe defendant - neither correal of the Carabineers all their recollection of Roger that some twenty years ago they had an officer who had certain and upon whom jokes used to be They were told before they saw the defendant that same man who was supposed to have been had but very much They would now see a large but the same In that way they were made to overlook the really great dissimilarity between the defendant and being also struck with the apparent knowledge the defendant but which was unquestionably the result of A Juror A man like Mather would be above Mr. Hawkins did not for a moment mean to say that the Carabineers favourable to the defendant were as a and for iU by JuAn at 112,
