|
whose lot it was to preside at the trial, had enjoyed great eminence at the Bar both as a sound lawyer and as a successful advocate, and had been for a short time Solicitor- General in Lord Derby's final administration, succeeding to the Bench on the resignation of Sir William Erle. As a judge he hardly rose to the eminence which might have been predicted; he was too keen an advocate to listen always with patience to counsel, and too prone to inter- ruptions and anticipations which often had the effect of prolonging the case which he desired to shorten, but his sterling integrity and kindliness of disposition were uni- versally acknowledged. Messrs. Baxter, Rose, and Norton had retained a power- ful array of counsel. The leading brief was intrusted to Serjeant Ballantine, who had been connected with the case since the dim and distant days of the cross-examina- tion at the Law Institution. More than fifteen years have elapsed since his death, and his published 'remini- scences' are a very imperfect monument of the fame he once enjoyed as the most successful criminal advocate of his day. His powers were now, perhaps, somewhat past their zenith, but the case on which he was about to embark exhibited him, as of old, unsurpassed in tact and temper, and unrivalled in that `conduct' which -- far more than eloquence, to which he made no pretensions -- go to the root of advocacy in an English court of justice. Associated with him was Mr. Hardinge Giffard, Q.C., now Earl of Halsbury, and thrice Lord Chancellor of Great Britain, together with Mr. Pollard, Mr. (now Sir Francis) Jenne, and a young Mr. Rose, who died during the course of the trial. The defendants were even more powerfully represented. At their head was the Solicitor-General, Sir John Duke Coleridge, supreme in stately and pathetic eloquence, en- forced by a voice unmatched for music and expression, and by a dignity of bearing, to observe which was in itself a liberal education. His immediate junior was Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., now lost under the title of Baron Bramp- ton, but the most searching, skilful, and, may I add ruthless, cross-examiner then practising in Westminster Hall. When originally retained in conjunction with Mr. Coleridge he was destined as his senior at the Bar to hold the leading brief; but the whirligig of time had set him below Mr. Gladstone's first Solicitor-General, and the latter has often been heard to speak in the warmest tones of the loyal assistance afforded him by the colleague into whose shoes he had stepped. Sir George Honeyman, Q.C., afterwards a Justice of the Common Pleas; was a third `silk'; and two stuff-gownsmen completed the team -- Mr. Chapman Barber of the Equity Bar, whom we have already met with, and whose familiarity with the law of real property was required for the solution of knotty points connected with the Tichborne settlements, and the all-accomplished Charles Bowen, on whom devolved the critical and laborious task of keeping the Solicitor-General properly primed and stoked. `Watching' briefs for the trustees were held by Mr. Henry Matthews, Q.C., now Viscount Llandaff, and Mr. H. F. Purcell, but they took no part in the case. Nor does this long list by any means exhaust the names of eminent members of the Bar who had been briefed on one side or another in Chancery and the Probate Court. Lord Jus- tice Gifford, Sir Roundell Palmer, Sir John Rolt, Sir Charles Selwyn, Sir John Karslake, Sir Richard Bag- gallay, Mr. Druce, Dr. Tristram, Mr. Edward Karslake, Mr. Locock Webb, are only a few of the names that might be mentioned. The conversation in the bencher's parlours and at the bar tables, in equity chambers, and in common law pupil rooms, knew few other topics, and professional opinion was very evenly divided. Outside the profession the general interest was just as keenly excited, and household was divided against household in much the same way as Paris under the spell of 1'affaire Dreyfus. Little was known even in Hampshire beyond gossip and newspaper reports, but on the whole public opinion inclined strongly in the claimant's favour. It was conceded that he was of enormous bulk, and singu- larly unlike the former Carabineer in most externals; but then in spite of this `his mother' had recognised him at the first glance, and remained loyal to him with her latest breath. It was common property that with this most important exception the whole of the relatives were banded against him; but to people entirely ignorant of Roger Tichborne's family life this meant little or nothing, and only intensified the sporting interest, especially as the claimant in his affidavits swore that some of them had distinctly recognised him. English Roman Catholic society was smaller and more exclusive in those days, and the public felt that they were about to be introduced to an unfamiliar set of dramatis personae. The 10th of May was ominously significant; only three special jurors answered to their names; the whole day was wasted; and it was not until noon on the next that eleven jury were collected in the box, after both sides had consented to go to trial with that number. And in the midst of a crowd which taxed the resources of the mean little building beyond its utmost endurance, Serjeant Ballantine began his story. This opening speech, brief and jejune, and suggestive of serious doubts as to whether the learned counsel had mastered his brief, was in itself admirably fitted for its purpose. There was no attempt at high-flown language, no appeal to sentiment, merely the matter-of-fact narra- tive of a man who had gone away from home for a dozen years, and had been immensely surprised and pained to find on his return that his identity was disputed, and that difficulties were thrown in the way of his resuming his old position. A very slight sketch was given of his client's family history and early years prior to the voyage in the Pauline. Stress was laid on his intimate acquaint- ance with Hopkins, whose death was deplored, but whose evidence taken in the Chancery suits was still available, and with Gosford, who, `if an honest witness, is a witness of vast importance, and a man whose evidence will be of a vital character.' With regard to Miss Kate Doughty, he said that there were sentiments existing which might have ripened into warmer feelings, but there was reason to believe that the intercourse between them was objected to by her father, and that in consequence `Sir Roger' had left the house; and he proposed to call attention to certain facts in connection with that young lady which showed that she left upon his mind a very considerable impression, which operated largely to influence him in leaving the country. As to his client's early life in Paris and at Stonyhurst he said nothing, except just to mention Chatillon, `with whom we are not in communication, though, I believe, the other side is,' and to remark that during his school- days he paid two visits -- one to Sir Clifford Constable, the other to Sir Edward Doughty. And he admitted that, though as a boy more accustomed to the use of the French than the English tongue, he was now by no means master of the former language, and had almost entirely forgotten it. His early life generally was painted in gloomy colours ; his career in the army had been an unhappy one, in which he had consorted with his social inferiors; and finally dis- satisfaction with his surroundings and the love of field sports and an outdoor life had driven him abroad. During his absence Sir Roger had undoubtedly increased con- siderably in size, but it would be shown to the jury that this was a characteristic of the Tichborne family, and the evidence would show that except in this increased bulk there was no such material or important change in the features of his client as to cast doubts upon his identity. On this point, moreover, irrefutable evidence would be adduced in the shape of the traces of a blow on the head received when a boy in Brittany, and in the scars inflicted by lancing a vein in the ankle while in the barracks at Canterbury. Then he returned to the subject of Gosford, whom he described as an unfaithful steward, apprehensive of having to disgorge a legacy of £500 derived under Sir Roger's will, and as having learned that the latter intended to compel him to make restitution of moneys improperly expended. ` From that time forward Gosford became the bitterest and most malignant of all his persecutors; he has hunted him in a very bitter manner; and it is the impression of Sir Roger that there is not in the community at the pre- sent moment any man more thoroughly convinced that he is the genuine baronet than Gosford is.' Before Sir Roger left the country he put into the hands of Mr. Gos- ford a sealed packet, ` for reasons which before the end of the case may be apparent,' telling him it contained certain directions in the event of his death. Since Sir Roger's return, in the presence of witnesses beyond all impeach- ment, Gosford had admitted that he possessed this packet, the contents of which were known to no human being except Sir Roger; no human being could have known them; and yet his client, without pledging himself to words, was able to tell the contents of that document. ` He challenges its production; he is ready to give evidence with respect to it; and he challenges contradiction by any of the opposite party. Gentlemen, that packet, in my opinion, will never be produced.' Then the narrative shifted to South America, and Roger Tichborne's adventures were given in some detail, including, of course, his three weeks' stay at Melipilla, ` a village a short distance off the coast,' the truth of which incident his opponents absolutely denied. Next came the loss of the Belle, and, -- rather out of turn,-- the evidence of an old servant called Moore, who had been sent from England with Roger, and whom he disliked and left behind at Santiago. Moore had come back to England, and was in service at the time of Sir Roger's return, on which sub- ject he was utterly incredulous; he was sent to the Law Institution, and was there converted by his old master's mention of an incident connected with gn albatross. Tracing the wreck of the Bella, the rescue 'by an American vessel,' and his client's early Australian career, as set out in the Chancery affidavit, he brought him, after `having very stupidly changed his name and called himself Thomas Castro, in remembrance of a friend who kept a store at Melipilla,' to Dargo, where he made the acquaintance of Arthur Orton. This was the man whom the defendants alleged the claimant really to be, the son of a Wapping butcher, brought up among the carcases of sheep and oxen, and the learned counsel launched out upon the gross improbabilities of the idea. It would be a main issue for the jury to decide, but he hoped clearly to show that they were different persons, and that Orton and Sir Roger, or rather Castro, would be proved to have been at different places at the same time, though there could be no doubt that they had associated a great deal together. Then, after a passing tribute to the virtues of the Dowager Lady Tichborne, he detailed the story of her faith in her son's survival, her advertisements for him, and his discovery by Gibbes. The ignorance shown in the Wagga Wagga will and the entire want of education betrayed in Sir Roger's letters were serious, but by no means insuperable difficulties; and then there was the disputed recognition by Guilfoyle, and the undoubted one by Bogle, who had come over to England with Sir Roger, and for so doing had been deprived of his annuity and been rendered penniless. Once back in England, the claimant was shown going first to his father's old hotel, then to Alresford to see the wreck that had been wrought with the Tichborne property, and finally over to Paris. The identification there was most rightly made the sheet-anchor of the case, and the  serjeant, brushing away the so-called 'voice of nature ' as a vague term and an indefinite idea, contended that it was unexampled in the history of mankind that a mother who had constantly associated with her child up to the age of fourteen, and seen him from time to time up to the age of three-and-twenty, should be capable of being deceived by a stranger. He added that if any issue should be raised as to her perfect competency to form a judgment upon that or any point, he had evidence sufficient to show that up to the time of her death she was in full possession of her faculties and understanding, and he commented bitterly on the way in which the rest of the Tichborne family had met the claim after the mother's recognition. Lastly, he turned to the Chilian and Australian Com- mission, accounting for Sir Roger's refusal to face the former by a sudden attack of severe illness, and asserting that the defendants had resorted to the most unscrupulous tactics to affect the witnesses there. From Australia he claimed that evidence had been received conclusive of his contention that Castro and Orton were separate people, and he enumerated the witnesses who would be called to swear to their belief in the claimant being Sir Roger; for from the very beginning Sir Roger has exposed himself to the minutest inquiry -- in fact, he challenges the strictest investigation.' There would be the affidavits of his mother and Mr. Hopkins, and in the flesh would be produced Mr. Scott, Mr. Bulpett, Miss Braine, the family doctor, the house steward, a large number of his brother officers, and .a whole host of soldiers, servants, villagers, and others. Then, with the remark that he was not a maker of long perorations, Serjeant Ballantine sat down, having occupied the atten- tion of the Court for a day and a half. The next two days were taken up with reading affidavits and proving documents; and it was not until well on in the fourth day that the real hearing of the claimant's witnesses commenced, and it lasted for ten days before the claimant himself appeared in the box, They were no less than thirty-one in number; they were called in no par- ticular order, either logical, chronological, or alphabetical, and space forbids me from doing more than indicating the more important points of the evidence, grouping the witnesses together. Let us take first the testimony of Roger's old brother officers. Colonel Norbury first saw the claimant at Malvern, and when he went into the room did not recognise him, but in a very few minutes began to recall his features. The interview lasted for three hours, and long before its close he was convinced that it was Roger Tichborne. In the whole conversation as to past events, the claimant made only one incorrect reply, and was remarkably accurate as to the personal characteristics of old members of the regiment, the quarters in Dublin and elsewhere, and the practical jokes of which he had been a victim. In cross-examina- tion, the witness stated that previous to the interview a copy of the affidavits of Lady Tichborne, Mr. Hopkins, and others had been sent him, which he had read with great interest. He knew that Carter had been in the claimant's service since his return to England, and agreed that as an old officer's servant he would know the names and peculiarities of the officers. His mind had been con- vinced by the combination of small matters, partly the answers to questions, partly the features, partly the voice, which was not altered, though the pronunciation was. Major Heywood had seen the claimant at Alresford in 1867, and had satisfied himself of his identity by his com- plete recollection of a practical joke of which Tichborne had been the victim in the barracks at Cahir. He admitted that he did not recognise him at once, and that before going into the claimant's room he had had some talk with an old troop serjeant-major named Cairns. The whole regiment knew about the joke at Cahir. His intimacy with Tich- borne had been very slight. General Custance gave a graphic description of the Roger Tichborne of 1851, ` a very thin, unwholesome, yellow-looking sort of man, with a peculiar expression about the eyes. He had heavy eyebrows, and wrinkled up his forehead.' He had seen the claimant at Salisbury, and when he first entered the room did not know him, but on his sitting down with his face to the light recognised him at once. He admitted that the change was enormous, but still adhered to his opinion. Captain Sherstone remembered the claimant by his countenance, by the way he spoke, by the shape of his head and face, and by a peculiarly distressed look about the eye. In cross-examination he added that the claimant resembled Tichborne in his walk, but seemed a little taller. He had not been led to the recognition by the substance of the conversation, for he was unable to hit upon , any topic which they both remembered. Mrs. Sherstone, who was also called for the claimant, corroborated her husband, and said it was quite impossible for any one who knew Roger Tichborne in 1853 not to know the claimant. ` Roger Tichborne was a quiet, shy, awkward man, and this one was the same.' Colonel Sawyer based his recognition on the claimant's general bearing, appearance, and voice. His first impulse, he admitted to Mr. Hawkins, was to think him an impostor, and to go out of the room, and but for his voice and what he told him about the regiment, he should have gone off: One regimental reminiscence related to a chestnut horse of Tichborne's which had bolted and killed his servant; and Mr. Hawkins asked if he was aware that that circumstance had been disclosed in Carter's affidavit months before the interview. Witness replied that he was not. Then come a group of old soldiers below the com- missioned rank. M'Cann had been Roger's servant during the latter part of his time in the regiment. He had been sent for to Croydon by Mr. Holmes, and had at once recognised his old master; he had seen him several times since, and had no doubt whatever. He spoke to the bleeding of Roger Tichborne on the ankles, at which he had been present. In cross-examination he said he had recognised him from his forehead, head, and ears. The ears he knew well by seeing Roger in bed every morning for two years; there was nothing extraordinary particular about them, only he knew them. It was Carter who came with the note from Mr. Holmes, and Carter had told him he would hardly know Sir Roger, as he was so altered in appearance and grown so stout, and he admitted having said that he should never have known that the claimant was his old master if Carter had not told him that he was to see him. He had been kept by the claimant in his house at Croydon from June 1867 till it was given up in April 1868. His final answer was noticeable: ` I could not recognise him from his appearance, but he knew so much about the regiment that I was convinced.' Serjeant-Major Quinn, who from his employment in the recruiting service prided himself upon his memory for faces, had been sent for to Croydon, and did not at first recognise the claimant; but on getting him to write his name, and comparing the signature with one of Roger's in a book of his own, found that they were identical. He also detected the same peculiar gait, twitching of the eye- brows, and French or foreign accent that he remembered in Mr. Tichborne, but the latter was not now so noticeable. William Fry, a mess-waiter at Sandhurst, had re- cognised the claimant at Alresford without any one pointing him out, and had said to him, ` It was a bad thing which happened to your first servant'; to which the claimant replied, ` Yes, poor Clark, he was killed.' He had been told by Carter that he would find Sir Roger much stouter than he used to be in the regiment, and he admitted having had a good deal of preliminary corre- spondence with M'Cann and Cairns. Serjeant Moody had only been a short time in the regiment with Sir Roger, but had a good recollection of him. The claimant had come up to him at Colchester in 1868, tapped him on the back, called him by name, and said he had been an assistant farrier at their last meeting. After two or three seconds he knew him; the features and the large, full, rolling eyes were unmistakable. The claimant had told him the number of his horse, and many details about the regiment. Witness asked him if he remembered Christmas Day at Cahir, and the claimant recalled an incident of two men absenting themselves from Church Parade, whose names he gave correctly. In cross- examination he said he had been accompanied to the inn where the meeting took place by another old trooper called Carroll, who might have known all about the horse's number and the rest, and who did not tell him until long afterwards that he had seen the claimant previously. Carter also might quite well have known these facts. Lessware, an old trumpet-major, and his wife, both swore to the claimant's identity with Roger, though they admitted that there was a good deal of difference in the hair, which had been thin, lank, smooth, and dark in the old days. Mr. Greenwood, the old regimental tailor, described his interview with the claimant at Croydon, when after satis- factorily answering test questions respecting old days in Ireland and the tricks played in the regiment, he astounded his examiner by his recollection of a `monkey jacket,' a drab driving-coat, ' the same as for Captain Heywood,' and a scarlet hunting-coat with H. H. buttons. Reference to his ledgers, now produced in Court, had shown the witness that all these details were correct. His son was called to prove that the books had never been out of the firm's keeping. But in cross-examination it transpired, after much hesitation and fencing, that his father had had a good deal of conversation on the subject of these books with Baigent, and that the scarlet hunting-coat, at any- rate, had been mentioned to the latter, but he put the interview as taking place in October 1870, long after his father had seen the claimant. Carter's examination in chief merely amounted to the fact of his having been originally Mr. Tichborne's soldier- servant, and of his having re-entered his service after he had satisfied himself that the claimant was the man he was represented to be. But his cross-examination by Mr. Hawkins was bitter and searching. He was a thoroughly untrustworthy and prevaricating witness, and was more than once cautioned by the Court. Drink was his failing; he had many quarrels with the claimant, who had finally discharged him. It was put to him that he had said ` that there was nothing but damned bribery from the commence- ment,' and ' me and M'Cann are the only people who got the officers to come forward who had known Roger Tich- borne in the army,' but he would not swear one way or the other. It was shown that his position as officer's servant had made him acquainted with many of the details and circumstances with which the claimant had astonished his visitors, and he acknowledged having been sent far and wide over the country, looking up the military witnesses, and spending his master's money freely. The account he gave of his own recognition of the claimant was very unsatisfactory, and he admitted that his affidavit on the subject was utterly incorrect, which drew from the Chief-Justice the significant remark that if it had been drawn up from statements of a similar character to those which the witness was now making on his oath it conveyed a most erroneous impression. This exhausted the soldier witnesses for the moment, and John Moore, Roger's servant on the voyage to America, was called. It will be remembered that Serjeant Ballan- tine introduced him as having been converted from utter incredulity to belief by the claimant's cross-examination at the Law Institute. He now stated that after watching him closely for two days he had declared that he was no other than Roger Tichborne or the devil himself. He had not entered into communication with him until January 1871, but since that date they had had frequent inter- views; and the claimant's knowledge of events on the voyage and in South America, and of occurrences in old days at Upton, had served largely to strengthen his convic- tion. The most striking circumstance which he said the claimant had recalled to him was an accident sustained by Roger Tichborne on board the Pauline, through a fish- hook, suspended for the purpose of skinning an albatross, entering his eyelid and having to be filed off, though, oddly enough, when at the Law Institution the claimant had only said that he received a blow on the eye from the bird's wing. Moore's cross-examination was by consent deferred until the claimant should have been in the box; when it came it was of a damaging character, but one extract from it must suffice. He admitted that on hearing of the claimant's recognition by the Dowager he had said to a fellow-servant that if they had sent over to her an Egyptian mummy, and ticketed it Roger Tichborne, she would have acknowledged it as her son. Mr. Anthony Biddulph stated that his first convictions, on hearing about the claimant, had been strongly adverse to him, and that he thought `he was the greatest impostor of modern times, except Tom Provis' ; but he was induced by a message from Lady Tichborne, through her solicitor Mr. Norris, to go down to Croydon in May 1867, and after an interview of three hours with the claimant was convinced that he was the real man. He had only known Roger comparatively slightly, and could not recollect his face or swear to any physical likeness, but the voice of the claimant greatly resembled that of the deceased Sir Alfred, and there was a general resemblance to other members of the family. It was by the reminiscences of old time that the claimant established his identity, by recalling the name of a hotel in which they had stayed together at Bath, and particularly by describing some death's-head pipes which Roger used to smoke there. From that moment he and his wife had acknowledged the claimant as their cousin, and had stood sponsor to one of his sons at Tichborne chapel; and in a drive round the Park there the claimant had recalled to the witness a particular ride they had taken fifteen or sixteen years before, which had completely escaped his memory. In cross-examination he admitted that the claimant was not unprepared for the visit; that he himself might have talked to other persons of the tests which he was going to submit the claimant to; and that Bogle might not improbably have known about the pipes. The claimant, he said, presided at table with as much repose as any gentleman, with the exception of some inaccuracies of language ; ` howsomdever,' quoted the Solicitor-General from a letter, and Mr. Biddulph ad- mitted that that was one of his relative's expressions. Miss Braine, who had been governess to Miss Doughty during 1849 and 1850, had only known Roger for the week or ten days when he was at Tichborne for his birthday festivities; but had ample opportunities of observing him, she said, and had been particularly struck by the fact that his knuckles were dimpled like the plump hands of a lady. She had gone to Croydon early in 1868 at the claimant's request, and at first was struck by his enormous size. `There seemed to be two men; the old Roger Tichborne appealed as if floating about over the large man who came in.' After a careful scrutiny she came to the conclusion that the eyes and forehead were Roger Tichborne's, but the nose was not. She was reassured on this point by learning that the claimant had had a fall from his horse in Australia, and injured that organ. Since their meeting she had seen him frequently, and lived for weeks in his house; she was as certain about his identity as she was of her own. In her cross-examination she was quite a match for the Solicitor-General, and succeeded in provoking him to unusual heat, nor was anything material extracted from her beyond the fact that she had helped the claimant in his correspondence. She attributed the grosser mistakes in his pronunciation and spelling to his French education; e.g. `mountaynious' from ` montagne,' and `familyiar' instead of `familiar.' In the case of `worrat' ? suggested the Solicitor- General. ` I should consider that peculiarity colonial,' was the answer. The use of `anchoring' for `hankering' she explained by a confusion with the French word ancre. Mr. Scott of Rotherfield, one of the earliest, as he was the most important of the claimant's Hampshire adherents, had been originally of the opinion that he was an impostor, on the ground that no one with a substantial balance at the bank and a pressing need for money would refrain from communicating with his bankers ; but a visit paid by the claimant to Rotherfield, his explanation of his con- duct and his knowledge of facts in Roger Tichborne's past life, had entirely converted him, to use his own words, into a decided partisan, though his wife was still an unbeliever. The answers given by the claimant he thought most remarkable; `indeed, no impostor could have answered such a question if he had not been there,1 or heard some- thing about it.' He admitted in cross-examination that he had known Roger Tichborne very little, and never saw 1 `I said, "Do you remember staying with a person at the Tumble- down Dick, at Farnborough ? " He answered, ' No ; I never heard the name of the Tumble-down Dick; but I remember spending several days with a person at a pothouse near Sandhurst." This turned out to be the very place that I meant, the Tumble-down Dick.' him later than his Stonyhurst days, when Mr. James Tichborne used to bring the boy to luncheon sometimes- a queer, taciturn, and not at all captivating lad. He considered his manners now to be those of a gentleman, and he noticed a decided resemblance between him and other members of his family. The recognition by Mr. Hop- kins had had great weight with him, and he still believed that the claimant was speaking the truth when he denied the authorship of the I Stephens' letters at Alresford. Sir Talbot Clifford Constable had known Roger Tich- borne at Paris, and they had been constant companions previous to the latter's entering the Carabineers. At the request of the Dowager he had invited him to Burton- Constable; and though he did not `exactly personally recognise him as the person I had known as a boy,' he had been astounded at his recollection of the incidents of Roger's visit there in 1848 -- e.g. an occasion when the butler got drunk, and Roger handed round the wine, and some circumstances connected with the sale of a black mare. The cross-examination was directed to show that there were servants at Burton-Constable in 1867 who had been there during Roger's original visit; and that persons in the claimant's interest had been down to make inquiries beforehand. He could give no explanation of the claimant's letters to Lady Tichborne evincing distrust of himself.1 Dr. Lipscombe of Alresford was the Tichborne family doctor, and had attended Roger once or twice shortly before his departure for South America. Since the claimant's return he had seen a good deal of him, had examined him, and attended him professionally. Judging 1 P. 219 supra : ' I don't lick the way he writes, I think he must have been tampered with by the other side.' from what the claimant had told him, from the expression of his countenance, and from all the circumstances, he believed undoubtedly that he was Roger Tichborne. In cross-examination it was suggested that his evidence was inconsistent with his affidavit; that he had refused to show his attendance books to Mr. Bowker; that the claimant might have had prior information of their contents through the medium of a former assistant; and that Carter, who had been formerly attended by Dr. Lipscombe, might have contributed to the claimant's knowledge. And a very important subject was now broached for the first time. The witness had said that in old days he distinctly remembered seeing some one at Tichborne having a mark on his arm with initials, and a ship or a mermaid, or some other device over it; and on suggesting that the person who did it must have been either a novice in the art of tattooing, or drunk -- because the initials were leaning different ways -- he had been told that.the author was a schoolboy. He was now pressed as to whether he had not told Mr. Bowker that this some one was Roger, and that the initials were `R. C. T.,' but without decisive result. It ought to be added that subsequent evidence considerably discounted the value of Dr. Lipscombe's testimony on behalf of the claimant. It would be tedious to go through more of this evidence, but I will make an exception in the case of an old groom of Roger's named Muston. He had been told the claimant was an impostor; but about a month before the trial he was taken to the solicitor's office, and though by gaslight he saw only the shadow of a resemblance, he fully recog- nised his former master by daylight the next morning after he had correctly told him where various horses and dogs had been purchased, and had given the names of the latter, 'Spring' and `Pie-crust.' ` Do you remember buy- ing Spring ?' Muston had asked. `Yes; I think somewhere about Grosvenor Street.' --` Was it in Mount Street ? -- ` Yes, and I went through a little shop into a back-yard.' Witness was very forcibly struck by this, as he well might have been, but he admitted that he was not then aware that other persons had made affidavits about `Spring' and ` Pie-crust' long before the interview. His first impres- sion on conversing with the claimant was that he was a Tichborne, but it was some time before he felt sure of its being the missing Roger. |
