The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1872-01-20 00:00:00

[E TICHBORNE CASE.

On 14onday morning the hearing of the Tichborne
ease was reasoned (for the seventy-first day) in the
Westminster Session House, before Lord Chief Justice
ovill and the special jury.
At the commencement of the proceedings a long discus-
sion took place between Mr. (iifford, on behalf of the claim-
ant, and the leas !not judge as to the rejection of evidence on
the last occasion to prove the possibility anti probability
under certain circumstances of persons forgetting their
native language.
The Chief Justice mid he should adhere to the lecition he
pronounced on the last occasion. Ile assumed the
o a person forgetting his native language, but he
said reject any evidence tendered to stow the probability
at because one person had forgotten his or her alive lan-
age therefore the claimant had forgotten his. Ile hoped
decision was perfectly plain.
Mr. Gifford: No, say lord, I can scarcely say it Is
aughter.)
ultimately Mr. Gifford was allowed to call Mdme. Laos-
berg, who said I am a native of Poland, and lived in that
country up to the age of twenty. When in Poland I spoke
German and Polish, and could write and read theca, but I
cannot now speak or understand Polish, though I have tried.
I left Poland at the age of twenty, and returned in 1063. I
could not then speak to my own relations is Polish, thong
could in German.

Mr. I:Ward said he had several other witnesses whom he
wished to call on this point. but in consequence of the deci-
sion of his lordship having been misunderstood on the last
occasion, those witnesses had not been brought here to-day.
Ile had boon allowed to do to-day what he was Out allowed
to do on the last occasion. If he had known he was to be
allowed to give evidence on the point now NeUme the court
he would have had his other witnerbes here to-day.
. . •• • - •

The Dlle de Brine was then placed in the witness-bon with
a view to prove that the claimant's Recount of an accident
which occurred to him in 1839 when at Mournlard, in Brit-
tany, was correct. The witness said lie was present at the
time he accident took place.

The evidence of a witness who had up to eleven years of
age spoken nothing but llindustanee, but who, though
now only thirty years of age, had forgotten all that language,
was then put in and read.

The Attorney-General then proceeded to open the
ease on behalf of the defence ; but as our limited space
precludes us from giving even an outline of the
Attorney-General's opening speech in this remarkable
case, we must content ourselves with giving the fol-
lowing sketch of the seventy-first day's proceedings,
which we take from the Daily News:—

The crowded state of the Westminster Sessions House
during the Tichborne trial is an old story, but its condition
on Monday surpassed all previous experience. There were
more people waiting patiently outside, and more people in
court; there was greater excitement and a stronger exhibi-
tion of feeling than on any of the days on which the claimant
was under examination. The bench, too, was fuller than it
has been yet, and it was plain from first to last that the re-
sources of the court and the urbanity of the oill dal to whom
Lord Chief ,Instice Bovill deputes the duty of giving or re-
fusing orders of admission must have been sorely taxed.

Those who have visited the Sessions House or Westminster
Ilan on any of the seventy precedisag days of this trial, and
who have thought either place full, would have been speedily
convinced of their mistake on Monday. For shelves winch
had not bees found out before, crevices which had been
neglected, steps which mere condemned an affording a view
of nothing but the clock and the ceiling, were then
as much sought after as the most eligible situations
were on any previous day. Another infallible sign
of the high value put upon the privilege of a seat, was
the appearance of the court during luncheon hour. Those
who had good places kept them. There was none of that
faith in human nature which requests a sister or a brother
to keep a scat inviolate while its owner goes•out to
lunch. The rash person who undertook any such trust
would have been infallibly sacrificed to the wiid
rage—all the wilder because it had to be sup-
pressed—of those who were balancing themselves
uneasily OD tip.toe, Or supporting stout spectators on their
chests. Any vacant seat would have been taken by
storm, so the general public ate its luncheon in
court, or bore its hunger as best it might.. It is
a plain fact that to leave the court while the proceedings
were in progress was a matter of almost insuperable diffi-
culty. Those whose duties impelled them to make the at-
tempt suffered its person and in clothes: for they had to
knead and burrow their way through a crowd which was so
closely packed, that to penetrate it was as severe a trial as
the most active athlete might wish for. Woe to the stout.
They failed altogether, and were kept in court if they were
in, Sr outside if they had failed to effect ass entrance early.
This was the ease with the claimant. He, poor man, pre-
sented himself as usual at the side door before luncheon, and
attempts were made to clear a passage for him as before. It
was impossible. Several excellent people squeezed themselves
against the wall of the banisters' hot on the one side, and
on that of the box holding the ladles and gentlemen who
are credited with being the claimant's friends on the other—
with a vigour and persistency which were highly praise-
worthy, and spoke volumes for their elastic compressibility,
but all was useless. The claimant could no more have
passed through the narrow gangway than the proverbial
quart could be put in a pint pot, so the attempt was given
up, and he retired, it was understood, to a side room.
There was a certain flatness about the first part of the
proceedings. Everyone was eager for the Attorney-General's
speech ; and when, first, the Lord chief Justice and Mr.
Gitfard held a long argument as to the admissibility or the
reverse of evidence and when witnesses were examined, an
air of heavy diaappoiutment fell upon the court. How long
would the preface last would the examination of the new
witnessee close to-stay? Were there any other formalities
to go through before Sir John Coleridge was "up ?"
These were the questions which were whispered softly for
the first three hours or as Then, at about one, there
was a sigh of relief, for the Attorney-General rose and began
his speech in terms of uncompromising vigour. • There has
been a good deal said in London society on who has
been strong and who weak, in the Tichborne trial;
and controversies have risen as to the relative develop-
ment of these qualities in the various people concerned
in the case. No question can arise as to the strength of
the language of Sir John Coleridge on Monday. With
great deliberation of manner, and with all the appearance of
having weighed Isis words well, the Attorney-General re-
m.arked that he would show, or at least try to show,
that the claimant was "a cunning and audacious conspira-
tor" (a pause), a perjurer (another and longer pause), a
forger (a look, as it seemed, of quiet triumph at the jury),
an impostor rin a slighting tone this, as if that part of
the question were already proven , and a villain (a slightly
melodramatic accent on the last word, and a full stop). At
this moment the occupants of what is called the Tichiforne
family-box—namely, Sir John Coleridge's clients, seemed to
find it impossible to restrain their feelings longer, and
there was a noise of approvingly derisive laughter,
and of applause, Ishii would have been particularly appro-
priate in a theatre. The Attorney-General was, in short
cheered, precisely as if he were a well-graced actor. Each
epithet he hurled at the claimant roused the enthusiasm
of this sectioo of his auditory: until when he stopped
(as it seemed, because he had exhausted the vocabulasy
of vituperation) there was tile unseemly outbreak
we have named. As a matter of course, this kind
of thing must be put down, and that promptly, in
a case in which as much and such bitter personal
feeling has been introduced, and Lord Chief Justice Bovill
exerted his authority in a few timely and serusible words, and
the offence seas not repeated. The Attorney-General was
frequently as strong as this. When he denounced the part
played by Mr. Baigent, for example, he did no with his
hand reified against that gentleman ; and with a
motion in the direction of Mr. Spolforth, which recalled
Mr. Disraeli's self -congratulations at the table of the
House of Commons, being between him and his opponent.
When he declaimed against "tile blackguard letters" of the
claimant, he seemed to linger over the adjective, and to en.
joy its iteration ; and when he spoke of the mass of flesh
which the jury had seen in court, and the physical miracle it
would require to convert a slim and slender young man into it,
he seemed to enjoy the phraseology he employed, and at
being able to use it to the jury. But there were no more in-
terruptions, and the occupants of the crowded court cora
forted themselves en the whole with as much patience as the
veritable Jobs who spent the day on the curb-stone outside,
and whose only excitement was makings perfectly hopeless at-
tempt to corrupt or to beguile the policemen who guarded the
entrance to the court.

The Duke of Wellington, Lady Alfred Tichborne, Mr. and
Mrs. Radcliffe, Bogle, the black servant, and a vast quantity
of faces which havebecome familiar to those who have watched
the cadre were there and the seventy-tirst clay of this
memorable trial, certainly surpassed all its predecessors in
the outward and visible manifestations of popular interest.

On Tuesday the Attorney-General, in continuation
of his speech, gave the following explanation with te-
svect to the relations between the real Sir Roger
ichbome and Miss Doughty :

The true facts-of the connection between Roger and Miss
Kate Doughty, except as boy aunt girl, commenced in 1859.
Sre was born in April, 1834, and in 1849 she was still
a school girl, but In June of that year she was home for
the holidays and they were together at Tichborne. lie was
then 20. On the 2nd January, 1850, he went to Tichhonie to
spend some time, and she gave him, as a birthday present, a
purse worked in the colours of his regiment. This he kept
In his possession until the last moment of his time in Eng-
land, when he handed it to Mrs. Gosford. He also
handed her a locket, Which Aliss Doughty had given
Roger in exchange for one of his. Both these things
Mr. Gosford gave to Alias Doughty when the news
of his death arrived, and they would be produced.
lie came of age in Jannary, 1850, and no doubt at
that time he was deeply and passionately in love
with her, Mit both Sir Edward and Lady Doughty disap-
proved of the connection. She had both a very strong
feeling and religious obligation, and one objection to the
marriage was that they were first cousins. That was not all.
Roger hail a great deal that was attractive and winning
about him ; but he hail been badly brought lip, and, as ap-
peared from his letters, he had got into the habit of drinking
a great deal more than he should have done, though it was
quite untrue to say that he was ever rolling about drunk.
Sir Edward and Lady Doughty were much wrapped
up in the interests of their only daughter, and they did not
think It safe to trust her happiness in his keeping. On the
I Itlyianuary, 1852, Sir Edward sent for Roger. warned him
that no engagement hail better the place between him and
his Cousin, and he bad better go away. On that sanie day
Roger saw Kate, and found that there was a reciprocity of
feeling between them, and they exchanged locks of hair ;
and, in fact, there was then an engagement formed between
them. On that day Roger gave her a written document,
In which he detailed his feelings on finding that he was
obliged to leave her, and he wrote another document in these
terms

• -
" I promise to nip own dearest Nate, on my word of
honour, that I will be back in England, if she is net then
married nor engaged, towards the end of autumn, 1854, or
In the month of January. 1855. If she is so engaged, I shall
remain in India ten or fifteen years, In wishing wishes for
her happiness, svhich I shall always be but too happy to
promote.
At the end of January Sir Edward became seriously ill,
and sent to Roger, who wrote down on paper what passed
between them in the hed.rooni of the Sick man. It is dated
February Ist, 1852, and it represents what his uncle said to
him in these terms:—" My Dear Roger, I know the mutual
attachment which exists between you awl yonr cousin. If
you were not in nearly related, I should not object at all to
a marriage between you but, however, wait three years ;
then, if the attachment still exists between you two, get your
father's consent, as also leave from the Church, then it will
be the will of God, and I shall not object to it any longer."
After this Roger remained and nursed his uncle, and on
one occasion whilst there It was found that he had drunk too
much, probably to keep him up during his watching, and in
conserpience he wrote to Miss Doughty to promise to abstain
from drinking, and he also detailed at length Ma state if his
mint and feelings. Beth of these documents bad already
been laid before the jury in the cause of the ;
plaintiff's case. it WM os[ the date of the last docu-
ment, 11th February, 1152, that they exchanged lockets,
and the locket of Roger with a portion of his hair
in it would be produced by Mrs. Radcliffe. Roger went
away and did not see the Doughtys until June, 1852 when
he was with lady Doughty and Kate from the Bth to the loth
of that month. On the latter day they went back to Tich-
borne because Sir Edward was again unwell, and Roger went
with them. On the 22nd June he left Tiehborne, and from
that day to this hour Mrs. Radcliffe had never seen him. It
was on this day that he wrote this document, and handed
it to her :
'2 make on this day the promise that if I marry my
cousin, Kate Doughty this year, or before three years are
over at the latest, to build a church or chapel at Tichborne
to the holy Virgin, as a thanksgiving for the protection she
will have showed us in praying God that our wishes may
have been fulfilled.— Feb. 22nd, IR2.'

When Roger Tichborne gave her that document he told I
her that there was a duplicate of it which had been given
sonic months previously to Mr. Gosforth. The 2.2nd of June
was the last time that Roger Tichhortie and his cousin Kate
Doughty nict, and on that last day of their meeting Roger
Tlchborne gave her this document, and told her at the same
time that there was a duplicate of several month's standing
left with and in the hand. of Mr. thasforth. That Is the
simple and short story which I have to tell you on the part
of Mrs. Radcliffe. That I. the truth, and that, as you will
see In a moment, feconlimied by the documents which are
already in existence in the case.
- - - - - • • • -

The Attorney-General then, in foreshadowing the
line of the defence, toll the jury that it was the
plaintiff's duty to satisfy them that he was Boger

Tiehbonie, and it was no part of the defendant's duty
to sffow cflus the claimant really was. It might be
possible that nobody could say who the plaintiff
really was, whilst still it was clear that he was
not Roger Tiehbome. He would not conceal that
he had a great body of evidence to show that the
plaintiff probably was Arthur Orton, but still
it was no part of his duty to show to demon-
stration that he was this person. He should, how-
ever, contend that the plaintiff's own story, and
what he hail written, showed that he was not Roger
Tichborne, and that the conclusion was almost inevit-
able that he was Arthur Orton. The speaker then
placed before the jury an outline of the case support-
ing the Orton hypothesis, and was proceeding to com-
ment upon the circumstances under which the dis-
covery of the claimant was made in Australia, when
the Court adjourned.

On Wednesday, the Attorney-General, in continuation
-said that lie was afraid that he must go at length through
the Australian currespongence, because in his view that
initiation of this fraud was of the utmost importance for
the consideration of the jury. One noticeable thing was the
curious manner in which the plaintiff's information hail, so
to speak, " grown "as matters progressed. It would be seen,
also, that at hint the plaintiff was unwilling to coma for-
ward or to leave the country, and that there seemed to
be the impression on his mind that if Lady Tichborne ac-
knowledged him that would be sufficient, and that without
any trial or any cross-examination he would take the profits
of the estates, and enjoy himself in the Colony. Ile had no
thought at the time of leading the life of an English country
gentleman, which, as they had seen he was so eminently
qualified to adorn. (Laughter.; This impression was the
cause of his buying an hotel at Sydney, and was arrangingfor
the purchase by giving a cheque for £lO,OOO upon a bank
where he had not a shilling. (A laugh.) For a time the
name by which the plaintiff went was concealed from tossup-
posed mother, and from his acquaintance in Australia he
concealed equally the name which he was about to take. It
was difficult to understand why, in an honest case,
there should be this double secresy. The teamed
gentleman then read in detail the correspondence whith
has already been laid before the public. Ile drew at-
tention to a passage in one of Mr. Gibbe's letters, in which
he described the claimant as "subject formally and still
partially from the nervous twitch called St. Vitus' dance," and
said that, low as he had descended, he had done nothing
unworthy of his position. He wondered, he said,
whether at this time Mr. Oilibes knew that the plaintiff had
been tried for home stealing, or, as they seemed to call
it in the colony, "unlawfully using a horse." (Laughter.)
In the plaintiff's first letter to Lady Tiehborne, after a
silence of twelve years, lie referred to the date of his
last letter as being slated April 22, 1854, but where
he could have got the date it was difficult to say.
There was no letter of that date at all. It was quite
plain that the plaintiff bad then before him some informa-
tion, true or false; if true, they would have had the letter
but if false there was reason why no letter should be
produced. It was now clearly established that the
Bella left on the 20th April, and therefore the plaintiff,
when he wrote, must have been well at sea, if not in
the open boat with the bag of biscuits beside him.
Again, the plaintiff, when asked for soms thing that he
could be known by, mentioned to Lady Tichborne
"the brown mark on my side and the card-ease at
Brighton." It was singular that he could have mentioned
nothing more particular than these two things, and, 69 to
the "brown mark," it was plain that the plaintiff had it,
but it was equally plain also that Roger had no such mark.
People had gone about saying "that the plaintiff has a brown
mark on his side, and therefore he must be Sir Roger,- but
they forgot to inquire whether Roger had any such mark. As
his learned friend (Mr. Hawkins) reminded him in the farce of
Box and Cox, there was this passage, "Have you got a straw-
berry mart en your arm? Yes. Well, then, you must he my
brother." (Laughter ) That was just this case. As to the other
point, the card-can at Brighton Lady Tichlmnie said " For
God's sake don't let him mention it, for it will set people
against him !" This first letter of his the plaintiff himself
hail produced from the papers of the Dowager, but in truth
It was only the fragment of a letter. But where was the
rest of it? Ills learned friend had suggested that the de-
fendants had mutilated it; but there was not a scrap of
evidence to show that the defendants had ever has access
to it. Ile (the Attorney-General) should have various
imputations himself to make but he pledged him-
self in every instance to produce proof in support of it.
Ile imputed that it was highly probable that the plaintiff
himself had mutilated the letter. Lady Tichbome men-
tioned that she could not understand some state-
ments of the plaintiff. She could not understand
that "he never knew Ids grandfather." No letter of
the plaintiff had been produced in which he referred in any
way to his grandfather ; but if there had been any such re-
ference in this letter it would be then very easy to say why
the document had been mutilated. Another point was that
it would have been exceedingly important to see the sign's-
tare affixed to the first letter the plaintiff wrote, for they
knew that the Dowager did not recognise the writing.
Before the letter was produced the plaintiff had seen
Balgcnt and Miss Brain and Roger's real writing, and all
these things would probably furnish reasons for mutilation.
The "Brighton card case" woos matter which was developed
upon a trial before Chief Justice Jervis in 1852 It was a
case in which Johnny and Harry Broome were concerned,
and a Mr. Hemp was swindled out of £1,500. The plaintiff
said he was swindled out of £1,500. It would be shown,
however, that Roger Tiehborue was not at Brighton in
1852 ; and it was singular that Orton was hi England at that
time, though whether he was in ally way connected with
the "Brighton card ease" it was impossible to say.
The plaintiff said that Lady Tiehborne paid £.500 for
him on the occasion but in truth she was then only
plain Mrs. Tichborne, by no means rich, and could not have
produced the £5OO. Probably they might have raised it upon
account ; but then there most in some hard-hearted lawyer's
office be a full record of any such proceeding. There was,
however, no such record, no cheque, nor anything what-
ever to show ally such transaction. It was like the Bella
and the o,,prey, the whole aff air had vanished into
space. The plaintiff himself, after being much pressed
indeed, said that the repayment was arranged for by a
settlement; bet there was no trace likewise of any such
settlement having been made by Roger. This first letter
66.9 a most absurd one for the plaintiff to write, and one
which it was impossible to believe that Roger himself could
have written ; and he contended that it bore upon the
face of it patent evidence of fraud. In one of the letters of
Lady Tichborne she wrote to Mr. Cnbitt, "There is a man of
colour in Sydney who could tell you now-the family stands, his
name is Bogle; he is quite black, sod Roger knows him very
well," and she expressed her apprehension that if this mau
saw Rogerhe would write home at once, and she was afraid
of the consequences. What consequences could she be afraid
of? At thls time she had not seen a scrap of the plain-
tiff's writing ; the name he went by was even concealed
from her, and yet she wrote of the plaintiff as her
son. If in her morbid desire she was prepared to
recognise anybody as her son, then indeed there would
be a reason why she should lie afraid of Bogle writing.
On the 15th February a letter was written by tubitt to the
Dowager, in which he referred to the plaintiff's " extra-
ordinary indifference to resume his place in society." That,
certainly was not "just like linger"— a laugh —who
was an educated gentleman, who seemed always ready to
take his position in society. The writer also spoke of
something which, if he communicated to Lady Tlchborne,
would probably "keep the plaintiff in the colony." Now
what could this possibly lie? A gentleman would have felt
no disgrace in having been in a lowly position if lie had done
no ViroDg.

"A man's a man for a' that,"

but if it had been found that the plaintiff was hopelessly
Ignorant of Tichbome affairs, that might account for it.
The Attorney-General, in continuation, referred to several
other letters and incidents, occupying the time until the
rising of the Court.