Hide Article Text (OCR)
THE EVENING JOURNAL, MONDAY, JUNE 30, 1873.but their {afore Disraeli -dared division.On May 5th the remaining great measure of the session on local rating was introduced by Mr. Btaosfeld. The Government proposals are embodied in three Bills—one to amend the law regulating the .liability and valuation of rateable property, another to provide for uniformity valuation, and a third to provide 4or a consolidated rate. Mines, woods, plantations, schools, and Government property will ceate to enjoy exemptions. The measure is avowedly tentative, and furnishes few points of attack to the Opposition. The eeoooa reading is fixed for the 19th. Meantime a Select Committee is appointed to determine parish boundaries.The Judicature Bill has passed the Lords. With the exception of an augmentation of the number and salaries of the Judges the measure is little altered.The debate has effectually disposed of the Permissive Bill, so far as this Parliament is concerned. The Bill has, in fact, made new enemies and lost old fnenda. In 1869 the Bill had 87 votes in the lobby, and only 193 its ; ■ 1870 its friends numbered 90, opponents only mustered 121 ; in 1871 the supporters of the Bill were 124, but the opponents were 266. Last year a division was avoided by a prolongation of the debate, but on Wednesday Sir Wilfred Lawson only told 81 votes, the lowest number the Bill has recorded, whilst the .Noe* rose to 321During a discussion on the Treaty of Washington, initiated by Lord George Hamilton, who censured the Government for allowing San Juan to be arbitrated away from us, Mr. GlaJstone said the British Commissioners had used every effort to get an unlimited reference; but the Washington Government had persistently declined. He thought the chance of arbitration was better than the chance of war.Mr. Jacob Bright's Women’s Disabilities Bill provoked an animated debate, and though rejected was supported by a dozen more votes than last year.Government refuses to buy the Irish railways. Lord Cland Hamilton proposed a resolution in favour of purchase by the State, which was seconded by The O’Connor Don ; but Mr. Gladstone met the proposal with a distinct negative. The Irish railways, however, are invited to amalgamate and burrow money on Government security.Sir Charles Dilke’s resolution in favour of .redressing inequalities in electoral representation, though lost, received 77 votes.Mr. Fawcett’s Dublin University Tests Bill has j .sted through Committee.The Lord Chancellor’s measure for simplifying the transfer of land, propounded in two Bills ha* l*een well received by the Lords. The system of registration adopted in the Australian colonies was explained and commended, and the aim of the measure ii to establish something similar m the Jnitod Kingdom. The new Act is to be the sole law c ’ tiun :be register ed.Tbero has been an important discussion in the Commons on the Cent-al Asian question. Mr. EastwkJc, ;u moving for copies of correspondence respecting the missions to Rhiva and Persia, traced in a long historical narrative the relations of Russia to Central Asia during the past century, and expressed his belief that she would never pause in her aggressive career. He recommended us to strengtheu ourtelves at Peahawur, to oocupy Quetlah, and cultivate intimate alliances with Kashgar and Persia. Mr. Grant-Buff made light of the advances of Russia, ridiculed the alarmists, and dared an attack in India. Mr. Gladstone declared that no engagement had been entered into to main-Mr. PlimsolTa Bill was talked out on its second reading.Despatches just received at the Colon1 \1 Office state that the King of Ashantee, ci the head of 40,000 men, was marching towards the territory of Elm'ra, ceded to us by the Dutch, with the avowed intention of lt;*nnexing it. Energetic measures are b'ling taken to repel the invasion.THE CLAIMANT ON TRIAL.[By our Special Correspondent JThe last occasion on which the Claimant’s name came before the public was in a correspondence with the St. Pancraa Veetry about the paving of a street which he bononn with his domiciliary patronage. He and ether dissatisfied ratepayers remonstrated with the Vestry on account of the injury which St Pancraa-road metal was doing to Heir broughams. 1 am sorry to say that they obtained no redress, and that the mighty name of the Claimant did not even secure for them a civil answer. Before the present trial began the great man had cub-sided considerably. His demonstrations in the provinces had not done much to till the treasury of the Defence Fund. The contempts of Court which had been commuted in connection with them had sealed the months of cc.ne of his most indiscreet champions, though the indomitable Sk'p-worth continued issuing appeals and protestations from Holloway Gaol about the liberty of the British subject. The financial prospects of the great trial were not of the rosiest kind. The solicitors among whom the case had been bandied about had each taken the biggest slice that the taxing-master would allow them, and then passed on the case. Several barristers in succession had received retaiierr, and then lost the confidence of the Committee. Mr. Montague Williams, Sir John Karslake, and half a dozen others, Fad temporarily enjoyed the notoriety of Cb:mrots counsel. At last the_ big brief come ’uto the hands of Dr. Kenealy, a rhrp man in certain kinds of criminal practice. In his younger days the doctor experienced a misfortune which kept him under a cloud for several years. He nad bad a liason with a lady who, after presenting him with several children, was pensioned or. Subsequently she began to think she had been ill-usccf, and the doctor received Bevcral unpleasant visits from her in his chambers. On one occasion a boy accompanied her, and for something that he did on the premises the doctor thought it necec*ary to chastise him. He was whipped and turned ontside, where a pobceman found him, and took him to the station. Lr. Kenealy win indicted for nssault, and tried at the Central Criminal Court, where the present Lord Chief Justice, who is now presiding at the Claimant's trial, sentenced him to a month’s 'mprisonment. Within the past year or two Dr. Kenealy has acquired a reputation among people who gefcmto wrouble. Baaides the Claimant be ras several heavy ca.es on hand at the present time; rmongat them thoae of Noyes, the American nill-forger, and Roberts, the defailtfng stockbroker. You may judge that he has a hard time of it at Westminster beside an antagonist like Mr. Hawkins.TUB INDICTMENT FOR PERJURY.It was on the 6th Mar-b, 1872, Hat the Claimant was arrested by order of Lo.l Chief Justice BoriU. Two indictments were presented against him ai the Central Criminal urt—one for perjury, pud tho other forBench for two reason*--to have them tried at Bar, and by a Special Jury. There had been no trial” at Bar for 40 years, tho last having been an important political action •gainst the Mayor of Bristol for allegednegligence in suppressing a riot. Three of the four Judges were told off for it, the sAme number who have taken in hand the Claimant’s case. The prosecution did notof the Court informed them that it could not be granted on the graver charge of forgery, it being a felony. They then elected to prooeed firstindictment tried fint. It made a considerable difference to the Claimant as regards the Jury. With a Special Jury there are 40 persona summoned by the offioer of the Coort. The accused has then a right to strike off 12, and the prosecution may do the same. The Master of the Court has then power to select a Jury from the remaining 24. Had a Common Jury been summoned the accused would have possessed unlimited right of challenge. Both Dr. Kenealy's applications failed — the prosecution being allowed to use their discretion as to which indictment should be heard first, and as to how it should be tried. The Court manifestly allowed them this latitude in consideration of the difficult point they had undertaken to prove against the Claimant. In the original suit, Castro v. Lushinglon, the dcfeodant had only to maintain that the Claimant vm not Roger Tichborne, the heir to the Tichborue estates. At that time also the burden of proof rested upon the Claimant, and it was open to the Jury to grant an open verdict of insufficient evidenoe, which they virtually did. But in this trial for perjuiy the whole onns lies upon the prosecution—it has to prove who the Claimant really is, as well as that be is not whAt he represents himself to lie. The present Jury must also give a decisive verdict. There is no middle course open to Hem, for the issue which Mr. Hawkins has raked is that he must either be a true man or an impostor; if not Ortou he is Tichborne, and if not Tichbome he i* Orton. The indictment has been drawnfear for the prosecution is that it is attempt-ing to prove too much.MR. DAWKINS’S OPENING SPEECH.Though Mr. Hawkins took rather less than five days to his exposition of the charge be has made out a very much more telling cao against the Claimant than the Attorney-General did last year. The additional Bcopo that he had as to the Claimant's identityKve him an important advantage, but apai cim that the forensic and logical ability of the recent speech far exoeed thoae of its predecessor. Mr. Hawkins is a far less pretentious man than Sir John Coleridge, a much better business man, and with a more easily controlled temper. His points were made without the alightost display of warmthor partisanship, and as a consequence they were far more lucid than the Attorney-Gereral’a. He sketched the life of Roger Tichborne, and then its counterfeit presentment, that of Arthur Orion. This was a brilliant psychological feat, working up a powe’ful contrast not only between the external conditions and habits of tbe two men, but between their mental characteristics as indicated by their confidential correspondence and their intercourse with their most intimate friends. In support of it a mass of letters, both Tichborne’s and Orton’s, will be submitted to the Jury—many of them having been specially photographed for that purpose. The Tichborne series commences as early as Roger’s sixth year, when he w.ote to his “ mamma from Jersey. Stress was laid on the change of life which rocurred in his sixteenth year on biB removal to Stony-hnrst. Mr. Hawkins did not disdain to make a small point out of his having then dropped tbe “mamma” style of address and written to his “ mother. ” To the claimant Lady Tichborne had always been “Dear mamma.” It was contended that at this period Roger Tichborne was essentially French, and knew nothing of England except through occasional visits. “Hismother had expressed great aversion to Roger being sent away from borne at all to be educated; and in one letter to his mother he alluded to that fact. At that tune be was to all intents and purposes a French boy bora in Paris, hismother being a Frenchwoman, and living there till his 16th year, acquiring French manners and French tastes. He entered Stony hurst in the year 1845 as a philosopher —a class of students not intendod for holy orders, those who were being called 'divines.' ”LOOK ON TI1I3 PICTURE AND ON THAT.Peculiarities of writing are to he one strong argument with the prosecution. Another is to be the reproduction of remarkable incidents in Roger’s life, which Ro^er himself could not have forgetten, but which the Claimant has never even alluded to. Speaking of a visit to Lady Howth, Mr. Hawkins observed—“ A curious matter hap-£ened in connection with this viaiu. Rogeran Englishman, and he was often exposed to practical jokes. Oue of these was played when he was going to visit Howth Castle. He was advised to go by boat, imtead of going by land, and tbe boatman was bribed to put him down short of the place, and uo land him in the mud, in getting through which he went up nearly to his knees, and in this plight bad to present himself st Howth Castle. He returned to Dublin, where he called to pretent himself to his colonel. Colonel Bicker3taffo was with Colonel Jack-sod, and they hearing a tap at the door, followed by a French voice, thought the person who presented himself was a French cook, and he was told to go round to tue kitchen before the mistake was discovered. There appear to have been two great family events in Roger’s life—the re-settlement of the estates when he came of age, and his falling in love with Miss Doughty. Both gave rise to prolonged correspondence, all of which is being put in evidence for the prosecution. Tbe object of the business lettere is to prove that Roger had thoroughly mastered all the legal intricacies of bis position as heir-entail to the Tichbome and Doughty properties; that concequently he could not have been the ignorant simpleton which the C’oimant's counsel wished to have him arp-Esed. His correspondenca with bis aunt dy Doughty and nis cousin represent him to have been os honourable in bis character as he was affectionate in his nature. “ Ithe conclusion of a long epistle, “ that you will forgive me tho reading of the letters occupies some considerable time ; but it is of importance, to my mind, for the due consideration of this esse, that your atteution shou'd be called to the style, language, feelings, and sentiments of the young man wboce life I im now discussing, because hereafter I shall have to call your attention to a correspondence of the defendant’s. And bearing in mind that the first 'great issue you will have to determine will be aye or nay—does the defendant who now sits before you represent — is he the young man whose pen penned those letters which I have just read ? I shall read you the defendant's own letters, expressing his own thoughts. You shall have them before yoa side by side, in order that you may contrast them and form you. own judgment upon them.”“the sealkd packet.”From the moment when the Claimant under Sir John Coleridge’s cross-examination mode his desperate revelations about Roger’s cooitship it could le seen that ho was^onperilous ground. It turn* out to have been far more dangerous for him than his worst loan could have painted it. Mr. Hawkins has literally sprung a mine under him with regard to the sealed packet and the alleged seduction of Miss Dcnghty. Having learned from Goaford that tho original sealed packet was destroyed the Claimant did not scruple to write a description of it from memory. He little thought that tbe woman whom he had slandered in open Court possessed the means of exposing liis falsehood. The sealed packet is not extinct, for Lady Radcliffe has a copy of it, and will produce it when she is placed in the witness-box. The same evidenoe will, it is hoped, give a double lie to the Claimant by disproving both his account of the sealed packet and of the seduction. This, according to Mr. Hawkins, is what really occurred at Roger Tichbome's final interview with his cousin in June, 1862. “ On the 18th they reoeived a letterinforming them that Sir Edward was again taken suddenly ill, and they returned to the country, Roger going with them for tbe .emSinder of his leave. When they arrived. Sir Edward, and Roger, and his cousin walked and rode out daily, but always accompanied by some of their relatives. Onclose to the house that any one might fish out of the drawing-room window; and before he departed to join his regiment he gave her a document in his own handwriting, and told her it was a copy of a sealed packet he had handed to the care of Mr. Gosford. On that document is the date June 22, 1852, wb'ch bhe put upon it on the day she received it; and she will appear before you and pledge her oath that it is that copy of tho ‘sealed packet’ which was given to her on that day irom Roger Tichborne. I have not the original document before me, bat it runs as follows:— ‘I make on this day the promise that if I marry my cousin Kate Dcugbty this year, or before three years are over, and 1 live, to build a church or chapel at Tichborne to tbe Holy Virgin, in thanksgiving for the protection which she has given us, in praying God that our wish may be fulfilled.f Those words contain ell that was included in the packet. I may as well explain why this was called the * sealed packet.’ Roger Tichborne had made Gosford his confidant, and in Gos-ford’s office at Uheriton, in tbe neighbourhood of Tichborne, Roger penned that document, handed it to Gosford, signed it, and sealed it up, keeping, however, a copy, wh:ch he afterwards gave to Miss Doughty. Gosford retained the packet in his possession tDl a’l hope of Ro^er Tichborne being savedand toon, thinking it should meet no eye but his own, he destroyed the document. Gosford did not know that Tichborne had given Miss Doughty a copy of the document. That document would behours afterwards, and from that hour until r ow she had never seen b'm again. That I will prove to you upon overwhelming testimony when I come to deal with that part of the case.” In his review of Roger'sBuraeyiug to and fro in South America, Mr. awkins showed that a'mort up to the day on which he had sai’cd in the Bella Roger had been in constant and regular com uuni-cation with his re’atives.LIFE OF ARTHUR ORTON.lught to have unabridged the opening of the W anping history, just to show you how thoroughly the prosecut’chapter owhat a feeble Clainant has of disowning himself. Mr. Hawkins began in proper biographical style thus :—“ Arthur Ortou was the youngest son of a shipping butcher who lived at No. 69, High-street, Wapping. He had a numerous family — several sons, and two or three daughters- and Arthur was baptised on the 1st of June, 1834, at the church of St. John's, Wapping, and in early youth he was afflicted with the distressing malady know as St. Vitus's dance. His education was but a poor ore. He attended one to two little Bchcol* in tho neighbourhood—learnt a little of reading, writing, and arithmetic, so as to be able to assist hiB father in his business. In 1S48 it was suggested that a sea voyage might cure his malady. There were two ceafaring men—Mr. Angel, and Mr. Jarvis, who lives at Bridport, lodging at his father's bouse, and with them he took two short coasting voyages. In April, 1848, he was apprenticed to a Captain Brooks, the owner of a vessel called the Ocean, about to proceed to V alparaiso. Tho vessel left Gravoaend in ballast for Antwerp, and Captain and Mrs. Brooks went in her to that port. They lived on board for about a month, till her cargo was taken in, and thon they lefu A Captain Preston went ont in the Ocean as a passenger. Captain Brooks died, and his widow married a Mr. Howell, and she will 1 e called and give you her opinion that tho defendant is the same person as the yonth apprenticed to her first husband. The Ocean arrived at Valparaiso in November, 1848. It afterwards made two short coasting trips, and was again at Valparaiso in January, 1S49, and in that morth Arthur Orton deserted fiom the ship. A sailor deserting from a ship would not be likely to remain in the port, and accordingly Arthur Orton betook himself to Melapilla, a place in the interior, and some distance from the coast. At this place he made the acquaintance of a gentleman named Don Thomas Castro, who kept a grocer's [-tore. Tbe Don was very kind to him, and as he told a story of great hardships and ill-treatment on board ship, the ladies of the family took a good deal of notice of him, then a boy of about 15. One of the ladies took a lock of his hair, which will be produced to you. Ho remained about Melapilla for rather more than two years, and he loft Chili in February, 1851, not in the name of Arthur Orton, but of Joseph Orton. There can be no doubt as to identity, as we shall have the testimony of those who taw him when he came back. He then hired himself on bG*nl ft vessel called th? Jessie Miller, bound for London, as an ordinary seaman. Ho arrived in London on the 12th June, 1851, and then went to take up his abode with his father at Wapping. He renewed his acquaintarceship with many of his old Lchoolfellow* and companions, and his sea vo\ age and his residence in Chili bad done him so much good that he was remarkable even then for h's stoutness, and ca1 led by his own friends ‘Fatty’ or ‘Bul-locky Ortou.' At that time he went into the shop of a man named Lever, who weighed him, and ho then, although only 18 years of age, weighed 18 stone—a pretty good weight for that age. He was then in great measure but not altogether recovered from St V;tua’a dance, but there remained about his face a good deal of vwitching. ”HIS ADVENTURES IN HO BAB T TOWN.Arthur remained about eighteen months at home, and bad a love passage which will rite up against him when h's old friend Miss Loder comes to be examined. All we need say about it now is that Mias Loder, of whom yon have already read a good deal, was the daughter of a respectable lighterman living at Russell’s-Buildings. Unfortunately for Arthur she has committed the old-maidisli weakness of treasuring np her love-analogies to the Claimant’s account of his experience on board the Osprey after the wreck of the Bella. From London, in December, 1852, be sailed for Hobart Town in a vessel called the Middleton, in which vessel he was engaged as a butcher, and took charge on the outward voyage to Hobart Town of two Shetland potiies, which his brother consigned to a gentleman named Cad man at Hobart Town. On board the Middleton, during that voyage, there were three persona whose names must never be forgotten by you—John Lewis, the captain ; James Peebles, the boatswain ; and an ordinary seaman named Owen David Lewis.While the ship was windbound in the Channel Arthur wrote a letter to his ladylove, to the signature of which Mr. Hawkins directed the pat tacular notice of the Jury. To the left hand of the name there is the following quaint device, which reappears partially in the earliest Wagga Wagga letters : — “ Middleton, Captain Storie, Hobart Town. . ) : ( . M.”Arthur formed another unfortunate female acquaintance in Hobart Town who will swell the last of witnesses against him. “ He took out a letter of introduction to Mrs. Jewry from the brother of her husband. Mrs. Mina Jewry is already with'n the juriuiic-tion of this Court, and I am glad to Lav 1iholl be able to place her in the box, whoa she will tell you that, being resident in Hobart Town in April, 1S53, she saw Arthur Ortou immediately upon hlt;s arrival. When be produced his letter of introduction she received him and treated him kindly, aad he remained in Hobart Town till 1855, occupying himself as a butcher at one of tbe firet stalls in the new meat market, which was established shortly after his arrival. Mrs. Mina Jewry will be called before you, and sbo will tell you that the defendant that man. This is not the only evidence I have with reference to his arrival at Hobart Town, because there was a person named Hawkes, who was a private in the 99th Regiment. He will tell you that he accidentally saw the Middleton upon her arrival; that he saw the two ponies landed from the vessel; that be saw Arthur Orton, and remembers perfectly well the fact that be did occupy a stall in the meat market, and that he bad constantly bought meat of him. He will further tell you that that person is the iudividual who now sits before yoa. He will confirm the statement of Mrs. Mina Jewry; and if you believe them, before you is the Arthur Orton who brought out the ponies. . . . Arthur Orton, when ho got to Hobart Town, was not very well off, and borrowed £14 of Mrs. Jewry, for which he gave a note of hand. Mrs. Jewry, in lending the £14, gave a £5 note instead of a £1 note. Ortou, in a letter to her, alluded to that fact. Now, gentlemen, you will see that this promissory* note was dated May 22, 1855, and was payable three months after date; but iu August, when Mre. Jewry was hoping to receive the money, they found the individual gone. Where ho passed a few weeks of his time 1 do not undertake to tell you. It is impossible to do so, because wo cannot follow bis movements as we can those of Roger Charles Tichborne.”THE CLAIMANT COMMENCING HIS EDUCATION.Mr. Hawkins practically skips the thirteen years from Arthur's arrival in Melbourne to nis appearance at Wagga Wagga in the service' of Mr. Higgins, the batcher. Then he undertakes to prove bow the daring scheme of personating Roger Tichborne was first suggested by the advertisement in the Home .Vcuji and gradually developed. At this stage you will appreciate the keenness with which tho prosecution have ransacked all tho Claimant r, Wagga Wagga papers, and the zeal with which they pounced on his little mistake. Mr. Hawkins mado a racy passage out of the Castro pocketbook. “But then there is th-pocketbook kept by Thomas CAsbro, an i wb'ch contains the following:—'Some men has plenty money and no brains, and somlt; men has plenty brains and no money. [That's true. (Laughter)]. Surely them that plenty money and no brains were made for them that plenty brains and no money. (Laughter.) Yea, these aro the sentiment of R. C. Tichborne, Bart.’ (Laughter.) Well, sometimes when one takes to scribbling it is bard to say what a mess one may get •uto. Some sf tho iioms in this pocketbook, although brief, speak volumes. It has on the cover the name written, ‘Rodger Charles Tichborne, Tichborne Hall.’ Now, it never was called T'chborne Hall—it was always Tich bo. ne House or Tichborne Park—but the next word was 'Surrey.' The Hamp-ihire man d«d not know his own county. (A laugh.) There is a good deal of humour in seme of the items. Here is one:—‘Sept. 13. Lost in Wagga Wagga, two cases in the Small Debts Court—one for £6, the other for £3 13s. Any one findingthem is welcome to them.’ Here is another, * Rodger Tichborne, Baronet, 1 hope, some day.’ Of course a man cannot perfect his education at once, and the Claimant d d Dot at thia time spell h*a name correctly. I do not blame him for not knowing bow to spell bia name coirectly all at once. (A laugh.) It appears here B-o-d — ('oud laughter)—g-e-r, but in all the lotters 1 have read to you there ia not a single instance in which Roger is Bpeit improperly. In another he writes, ' I, Thomas Castro, do hereby certify that my name ia not Thomas Castro—(a laugh)—and they who say it is know nothink about it.' This word ' nothink’ reminds as the word lo spelt in his letters to Mias Loder. Then on mother page ia written, ‘ Miss Mary Loder, Russell-Buildings, High-street, Wap-P'Dg-’ How on earth did Roger Charles Tichbome know anything of her ? Why, he never was at wapping in all his life. The journey to Sydney followed, and the. o the claimant met Boyle. From him he fiist learned about the Tichbornes being a Catholic family; whereupon he posts back to Goulbura, where he bad left his wife, rnd gets re married by a priest. As Robert military life, all he knew in Sydrey was shown in his answers to Mr. Cubit!: — “ I was in tbe 66th Regiment. Uni'orir dark-blue, private. Only 13 days in regiment. Mother went to Franco soon offer J was ton, to Cherbourg, c., C.HIS childhood’s home.That fatal mistake which the mi disant. Sir Roger mrde in rushing off to Wapping has been so thoroughly improved upon by tlu-Eroeecrtion that there will be no evading it.Ir. Hawkins has the whole incident at bis frnger e*ids, and can produce all the actors in it. His sketch of the scene in the public-house must have banished all hope from the mind of the Claimant:—among his numerous relatives and acquaintances. One would have thought Roger Tichborne would have gone to them to welcome him. Aithur Orton knew none of these. The only spot he know was High-street, Wapping, and thither he wended his way after taking a hatty meal with his wife at Ford's Hotel. He knocked at the door of No. 69.“Mr. Justice Lush—Whose residence wai that *“ Mr. Hawkins—The residence of the late George Ortoi, my Lord. He did not find ary one at home, Mrs. Tredgett and Mrs. Jewry being away. Where was he to go ? Richardson had given him no reply. So he walled to the Globe public-house, at that time kept by a lady named Jackson, andthere he a There « mo Hie;Mrs. Jackson and Mrs. Fairhcod. came in a burly stranger with a and having on a cap with a He asked for a glass of sherry and a cigar, and leaned with bis burly form against the side of the bar. He began to sip his sherry and to look round the place. There was a narrow passage, at the end of which ia a little glass window. The stranger walked straight to the door, and looked anxiously through as with a look of recognition, and then turned to come back. On the way back he bad to pass a little side door, through tbe glass of which he looked, and gazed upon a house on which was inscribed in large letters • No. 60.’ He then said, * Does Fred. Orrain live over there yet?’ 4 No,’ said Mrs. Fair-head, ‘he got into trouble and broke up a long time ago. ’ ‘ Very sorry, ’ was the reply, followed by an interrogation, ‘ Aro the Shottons going on still?’ ‘ They are brokebrought the response, ‘ Poor John War* wicks,’ followed by a further question, * Is young Wright, the shipchondlcr, dead ; did he ever come back from sea?1 ‘No, he never came back.’ Then comes the question, ‘ Do you know anything about the Orton family here? The lady did not deny that she had known them.Mrs. Fair head said she is no longer MaryAnn Orton; she married Mr. Tredgett. He said, I should like to get her address. After a little while he said, ‘ How long have you had thia house?’ She said, * I think I had it in 1S54,’ and he aa:d, ‘ Let me see, you tookit of a M*i. Mac .’ She said, ‘Mrs.McFarlare,' and he said, ’ Mre. McFarlane, that’s right.’ Then they went back to Mr. Orton’s and after saying lie should like to get the address of Mrs. Tredgett she said, ‘ You look very like an Orton yourself.’ He said, ‘ No, no, I am a friend of theirs.’ She sa;d, ‘ You seem to know the plaoe well,’ and he said, * It is 15 years since I left.’ She then went to try and get the address. The 8ame character of conversation went o.i with Mrs. Jackson, and when bo got the address of Mrs. Tredgett he left the house. Here ends, as far as 1 know it, his adventures on that night. On tue following morning he was down at Wapping again.This time he left at the Globe public-house a letter for Mrs. Tredgett signed Arthur Orton, and dated Irom Wagga Wagga in Jure, ?S6S. It finishes with the device of,the letters Vo M'cs Loder—):(—M. Accompanying it was a letter to Mre. Fanlen written in a fe’gned hand, which Arthur Orton’s sister recognised as his, and signed W. H. Stephens. Tbe real W. li. Stephens, who had sailed with tbe Claimant from A spin wall to New York, will bo produced, and Mr. Hawkins promises important evidence from him. It is a question if Charles Orton, the brother, who was subsidised for a considerable time and afterwords went over to tho enemy, may not also appear in tbe witness-box. Mr. Hawkins went at great length into the prtxreedings of the Claimant and bis various solicitors, tracking him through all his evasions and his acknowledged falsehoods. A great deal of the information which he acquired about tbo family has since the last trial been traced to its source, and tbo prosecution have had their suspicions con-fiimed about tbe use that was mode of Robert Tichbome’s letters and papers in the possession of Lady Tichborne. On this point Mr. Hawkins has said that whether upon the death of I-ady Tichborne he 'ound any diAry or journal kept by Roger Charles Tichborne there is no direct evidence, but amongst tbo things taken possession of by tho defendant was a little book of Roger tichlorae’s, of which no mention ia made i the defendant's affidavit. That little pocket-book wss retained by tbe defendant until it was prodnoed at the lats trial, when you will find good use was made of it on more occasions than one dnring his cross-examination. I know, however, that a diary was kept by Roger Charles Tich! -ree at Stony-hurtl, and 1 cannot help thinking tbat yoj will be of my opinion that that diary got into the possesrion of tho defendant. He was not likely to produce that, and, indeed, it was only by an accident tbat the pocket-book was produced. There was a memorandum in -tbe possession of Mrs. Radcliffe which cbows c'early that at that time Rojar Tichborne kept a journal, and the defendant in bis cross-examination said that which placed it beyond doubt that he had somo such document to refer to. When on ono occasion he was asked the name of one of his annis, he said, “The teat thing I can do will be to devote myself of an evening to looking up these things.”mr. Hawkins’s peroration.The learned counsel reserved a clear day for hia perorat'on, which be brought wiwh him written out in copious notes, and read closely from the manuscript. It compressed into very brief compass all the fundamental points on which he proposed to rest his ca:.e. Alluding to the mass of documents, printed, photographed, and otherwise, which tne Juty had before them, he said he bad given them numbers of Roger Tichbome's letters, and they should compare them at their leisure, and tbo more particularly those which Roger Tichborne wrote during the last few months of his existence, with the letters beyond all doubt that were written by the defendant before and immediately after his arrival in England in 866, and before he had had much opportunity of studying the style and character of Roger Tichbome's writing. Between this writing they would txoce, he was satisfied, no each resemblance as would •o- one single moment lead to the Bupposit'on they were written by one and the same person. The learned counsel referred to the peculiarity of tbe writing and the mark used by the defendant in all bis signatures, and contended tbat since 1807 the defendant had had opportunities for studying and making himself acquainted and practising, as he thought he should be able toKive, tbe handwriting of Roger Charlesnghty Ticbboiue. In conclusion he aaivl : —I have colled your attention to the life, habits, education, correspondence, sentiment*, and feelings of a young gentleman whom the defendant is charged with fraudulently attempting to personate. I have celled you. attention to the life, habits, education, comfeuondence, eertiinent, and feebngs of Arthur Orton, whom I charge .he dwends-nt to be. No two persons could in all respects be more unlike each other. 1 have called your attention to the various accounts which the defendant has given of himself—how ho would have you believe tbat a high-born Engbsh glt; otleman, Roger Charles Doughty Tichborne, has voluntari'y, with fortune at hia command, descended to menial service, and submitted to penury and hardship; that he has forgotten every tie of duty and srered affection towards those to whom he owed both. How, with wealth and education which would have entitled him to mix and move in society befitting bis station, and which he loved, he has preferred the occupation of slaughterman, and chosen for his associates highwaymen and thieve*. Dow, from a man of honour and truth, bo wor’d have you believe Roger Char'rs Dough cy Tichborne condescended to become a trickster and a krave. How, wirh audac’ty unparalleled, ho has, fur his own ends and to cover his iguoranoe of the ore secret of the man whose name he assumed, not hesitated to impute him baseness, ingratitude, and cruelty, and to aully the honour of an English lady. I have calledyour attention to how the defendant wonld have you believe, with a memory so marvellous as to enable him to relate with accuracy the most puerile trifles, he has nevertheless forgotten his mother tongue, and has become oblivious of ovente which, once known, never could have been erased from the memory of a man who had taken part in them. 1 have called your attention to the mass of living testimony which I propose to offer for your consideration. I snail lay before you the evidenoe of the dead—that oi Lady Doughty, who. on her deathbed, and with the consciousness that in a few short hours she would pass into the presenoe of her God, stated that the defendant was not the man he falsely swore himself Cb be. With such testimony, aided by those inferences I invite yon to draw as reasoning men from the matters 1 have called attention to, I believe 1 shall abundantly satisfy yon that the defendant ia not Roger Charles Donghty Tichborne, as he baa falsely sworn himself to be, but that he is Arthur Orton, whom I charge him to be ; and that in tbo foul aspersion which he has made upon the character and reputation of the lady whose name has been so often dragged into the.© proceedings he has committed perjury the most daring and detestable.”EVIDENCE OF A BUI SALTS.Dr. Kenealey is a pleader to catch at every passing straw, which if it cannot help him zray at least prove that be is preternaturally alert and vigilant. When tho proof of the trial of ejectment (Tichborne v. Lush-ington) had been put in ho objected that the indictment assumed the issue which was about to be tried, namely, that Thomas Castro, otherwise O.ton, otherwise T’chborne, were all the some indiv’dua1. This failing he demurred to the jnricdiction of the Court, as one of tho offences alleged hod taken place in the City of Londor, and could not be tried by a M’d-dlescx Jury. He was again overruled, and then the Chancery affidavits were put in evidence. The course o* proceeding recommended by the Lord Chief Justice was to have specific portions of the original evidenco of the Claimant read in Court, and then witnesees examined upon it. As a prelude to Abbe Salts the Cl»;mani,’s history of his boyhocd wn recited. Abbe Salis flatly contradicted bis aeserrion that tbe Louvre had bren visible irom b'8 father’s house. It was bidder, he trid, riom the Rue St. Horor6 by two rows of houses. Roger had never confessed to him as the defendant alleged. In the beginning of 1867 Lady Tichbome had told him about the arrival of her son. and had asked him to come and see him. He replied, “ Madam, it is impossible it can be your con, because if he had oeen he would hove remembered the tenderaoes of his father sod mother, and the comforts of bia home, where he would have been received with open arm*. One does not make up hia m;nd to suffer willingly. She offered to recompense him if he would recognise him. The A bbe stood to this th~t there had been distinct insinuations of reward. As to the tattoo mark on Roger's arm, he was positive, though having seeu it only onoe he oonld not furnish any further information than that it was bine. When asked about the defendant he answered emphatically — “ He is not Roger Tichborne, and bears no resemblance to him.” In cross examination there was a passage . at • arms between the Abbe and Dr. Kenealy as to Lady Tichborne. The witness had been pressed as to how he would not credit her recognition of her son, and he answered with some hesitation. “Dr. Kenealy—Was Lady Tichborne a truthful and honourable lady 7 Abbe 8alis—She had a diseased brain. She was a person bad in her head, but she was not inaare. She had a fixed idea coming from a bad bead; in other respects she was a prison of education. I often had money from Lady Tichl orao. She was not bail in tbe bead in that respect; a person bad in the head pursues a phantom. 1 had money often and in large uuantit'es from Lady lichfcorre to be disbursed in charity. . . . Lady Tichborne had a fixed idea that sbc would find her son, and she evidently wished to get me to recognise the defendant as her ton. She offered to recompense mo for it. I can't remember the worda she used. Sbo repeated the words twice. iSbe made no indication or gave any explanation what the reward would be. After my refusal Lady Tichborne wrote once to me after rbe left Paris.’ One little advartage was gained for the defendant through the Abbe’s 'decision on the curious phrase eo often quoted 'rom one of his epistles to Lady Tichborne, “ May the blesicd Maria have meizy on your soul.” An anthem was quoted from the Jtoman Catholic Liturgy in which slightly similar phraseology occurs, and tbe Abb6 admitted tbat the expression would be understood by a Roman Catholic.ROGER’S CONFESSOR.PSre Lcfevre appeared in the box to depose that he and not Abbe Salis had been the spiritual guide, philosopher, and friend of young Roger. Up to tbe time of his leaving for Stonyhurst Roger had onfeased to him, and bad been in the habit of visiting him regubuly on certain festivals of the Church. In their after acquaintance Boger bod toldof hisher. Hemarryinghad even told him what ho would expend upon it — from 200,000 to 300,000 francs. Dr. Kencalv picked up this ccent eagerly, and in his croas-exs*nir\tion he endravoured to turn the confessional to tbe benefit of his client. “ In the last confession *n 1853 d*d P oger say he had seduced his cous:n? Wituesc—It ;s not reasonable. It wov’d be an infamy to ask it and for me to repeat it if it was toid in confession, but it was never said.” Like the Abbe the Father a^gned a somewhat French reason for net recognising the defendant. Had be b:en Roger they said he would have come at once and thrown himself into their anus— “ But this man has no resemblance to Roger Tichbome.”THE CHATILLONg.Yon will observe that these French writ-There was considerable interest shown in M. Chatillon’s evidence, as he had been Roger's tuior, and had been the first man to repudiate the claimant after he had been received by Lady Tichborne. It turned a good deal on personal marks. M. Chatil'on described the accident to Roger at Fonio, when he fell down from a low cliff and braised his temple. Though ho remained unconscious for about ten days after, the mark on the temple entirely disappeared in consequerce of his having been immediately bled. The scar at tbe back of the defendant's head, which he alleged had been caused by a fall at Ponic, could have nothing to do therefore with tho real accidert. M. Ghatillon gave a vivacious account of Roger's luuchiug|with him before bis departure for South America, of his showing a tutoo mark on his arm, and of their walking afterwards to a shop where Roger purchased a large silver chain as a present for him. These incidents he had used on bis first interview with the Claimant to test his memory, and in his own words this was the unsatisfactory result:—“ On getting to the hotel I asked her not to tell my name, but immediately on arriring where ber supposed son was she said, ‘Sir Roger— M. Chatillon.’ I approached and I gavemy hand, saying, ‘ My dear Roger, I am glad to sc« yon again after so long an absencebut afterwards I stepped back three paces, 1 looked at her supposed son, and said, ‘My lady, it ia notKur son.’ She said, ‘You don't embrace tger.’ I replied, ‘ No. my lady, it ia not he ; yon are deoeived in him.' Mr. Holmes, a lawyer, was there, and an interpreter,because it was aaid Roger did not speak French. I repeated it was not Roger. I waited for lunch. I sat down with the interpreter by my side. 1 asked the Claimant several qncctions, and the interpreter repeated them to the Claimant. The Claimant was unable to say with whom he had lunched and dined the lastParis. He said it was a gild chain that he the trips into Normandy and Brittany.gave me before leav-i had no recollec-Lady Tichborne said I any more questions, becaoae he had travelled so much and had seen so many things that he remembered nothing ; that I was to ask so more questions because he was so fatigued. The Claimant had all the while his face oovered with bis pocket-band her-chief, and was writing. Madame Chatil-Ion's evidence bora only on ona point, tbe lunch which Roger had at her houso before he started for Booth America. It was she who had noticed tbo marks on his arm, and husband to enquire aboutthem, whereupon Roger laughingly pulled up his sleeve, and showed the tattoo. Unfortunately the is at variance with herrepresented all the different parts of the device as connected, but ahe affirmed that they were separate from each other. Her authority may be accepted as tbe beet respoctinc Roger’s personal appearance. 8ho said—“He was not in-kneed. I never remarked if he had small feet. He had rather a thin long band. He was of medium height, and rather thin. He was well-pro-poi tioned and sufficiently thin in 1853. He nad chesnut-coloured hair, and blue eyes. Thera was nothing remarkable about his eyes. He had no twitching.” Senor Spaniard, long resident indeuce in every material respect. He affirmed that to the lost Roger was so backward with his English, and so reluctant to use it, that M. d'Aranza often remonstrated with him about not learning it better. But Roger had always regarded French as hia mother.tongue. M. d Aranza contributed to the personal description of Sir Roger by stating that when he was examined for his coroetcy in 1849 he was 5 feet 8§ inches high. There was nothing whatever either in the defendant's voice or appearanoe to remind him of Sir Roger.M. Gosscn, the maitre d’hotel of Sir Jaa. Tichborne, gave the fullest evidenco as to Roger’s physical peculiarities. When a chld he had no other marks than an issue upon his arm. Witness had bathed with him daily for months, and had never seen any brown mark on his side. “ Roger had light chemut hair; ho held his head erect very well; hs had thick eyebrows and hair; he walked very well. I never remarked any peculiarity about his leg. There was nothing remarkable about Rogers hands and foot.” REPETITION OF OLD EVIDENCE.At the end of the second week it was agreed that several days should be devoted to the reading of tbe Claimant’s dross-exami-r at ion a* preliminary to the second batch of witnesses. There were twenty-one days to get through, and though Master Cockburn is not by any means slow in his elocution, ho could not compress more than two days into one. An entire fortnight has consequently been lost in this weari lt;me operation which vciy considerably reduced tho crowd of visitors. It was a dreary business dragging on hour after hour without a break, except when Mr. Hawkins wished to put in a relevant document. Next Monday the hearing of evidenco will likely be resumed, and the foreign witnesses are mustering in force. The original Don Castro, of Melapilla, has been brought down from bis native mountains to say what he recollect* of young Orton, and what he sees of him in tbe Claimant. He and his son arrived at Liverpool by steamer two days ago, and are now in London. I have been told that the Tichborne fkirily are taking infinite trouble in hunting up witnesses, ana to secure a conviction, as it would be simple ruin for them could the Claimant instimte a fresh suit. All hope of a speedy issue to the present trial ha* disappeared. There is no question now that it must hang lt;direct from Dr. Kenealy that he duce eight hundred witnesses, if nelt; for tbe defence.prej
Newspaper Details
Adelaide Evening Journal
Adelaide, South Australia, AU
Mon, Jun 30, 1873
Page 3
Full Page
Clipped by
University O.
IA, USA 26 Jan 2025
Other Publications Near Adelaide, South Australia
Adelaide Saturday Journal
Adelaide Suedaustralische Zeitung
Adelaide Sport
Adelaide Quiz and the Lantern
Adelaide Quiz
