Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1853-09-10


are less than of these all by different persons
their respective handwritings some in Latin, some in
French and in English and with one or two ex-
ceptions all dated early in the last century, principally
the years 1907 l7l0 with the signatures of the
spective parties Among others is one by Louis XIV,
another by the celebrated Fenelon Archbishop Of Cam
Bray and another by Fletcher Bishop of Nimeshe two
latter dated in 1907, and the former without date
The charge was that Lord Stirling aided by Made
moselle lie Normand the celebrated Partisan fortune
teller had forged this document If they did, they
tainy possessed talents which no other human beings
had unless indeed LIE Normand had the assistance
of the devil, with whom SO many people in France be-
eved she had league in consequence of her proficiency
in the art of fortune-teng, her fame such that
she visited and consulted by most Of the great per-
sonages of Europe, among them Napoleon and Alex
ander.
In addition to the different languages in which, al
ready stated these various endorsements made and
all written in the most grammatical and flushed SEN
fences there were also the signatures of the
parties. They likewise all have the peculiar orhogrophy
of the time, different in instances from the
spelling of the present day and though since then the
change of paeology has not been Marked still this,
too is visible in these writings There is also detail of
facts and in the different pieces relative to
Lord Strings ancestor and his rights and claims
involving the least inconsistency, and which
one after lapse of nearly hundred and fifty years.
could possibly have prepared That such
documents under all the above circumstances connected
with them, should have been forged by any two or any
twenty of the most talented persons, is absolute abb
surdty.
Among other writings the map is letter from John
Alexander the grandson of the first Earl of Stirling and
ancestor of the present Earl and the then heir presump
tive to the e which at the time held by nephew
the of elder brother and who having died whilst
boy, the above John Alexander became the heir and
took the title In this letter, which is separate
sheet of paper, and pasted the back of the original
map, he declares his intention to abandon his claims and
to educate his to the ministry which latter intention
he carried into effect, and this became eminent
divine 1t is hard to conceive how the present claimant
could have an interest object in forging document
of this tenor, though, in view of the fact that Canada
and most of the other present British provinces
then in the possession of the French We readily
derstand how hopeless the writer then was of obtaining
his territory and rights.
And what the grand foundation for the assertion
that all these different pieces forgeries Simply,
that the map the face of it, purported to be published
in 1908 by De Lise, Member of the Academy of Sci
enees and first Geographr 10 the King" whereas, the
prosecution asserted De Lisle appointed Geo.
grapher to the King" until 17ls; consequently map
said to be published by him, with that title annexed to
his NAME in 1903 be spurious. The first question
which strikes the mind is, why parties who had such
transcendan talents to be able to complete such
luminous and difficult forgery should have thought it
cessary give this title to De Lise for it in way
added to the apparent authenticity of the map, but on
the contrary injured it, if he really not entitled
to be designated and of course in preparing such
series Of fOrgeries all the needul Investigations the
subject would have been made to consistency
De Isle was highly celebrated geographer of the
time, and there is doubt he entitled at the date of
that map the title of Geographer to the King"
and that any rate he did it for other maps of his
produced bearing various dates previous to 7l0
in which he gives himself the same designation In
work published in Paris in 1856 reference is made to
this very map Of Canada, being a map published in
1903 "by De se, First Geographer the King" But
still further the patent of l7lS, which, it was alleged
first granted him that tte for the purpose giving
him pension Of livre for fe and instead being
the first grant Of the title, evidently confirmation
of which he previously BORE Pensions it is noto-
rious, granted only for services that have been
dered and this pension therefore, would not have been
given the when he was first appointed to an
Office but only after he had faithfully performed its du-
ties for long period
Independent Of all the above circumstances Mons
Daunau Keeper General Of the archives of France cer
fed in 1885, the map to the genuineness of the hand
writing Of Louis the 18TH Fenelon and Flecher which
venave President Of the Historical Society," and one of
the first scholars and eminent antquaran Of France
said corresponded with other specimens they
had in their possession and desperate the efforts
resored in order procure the conviction that Judge
Meadowbank asked witness who testfying to the
writing Of Louis XIV, whether he knew that Voaire in
his works. asserted that Louis XIV unable to write
This pro ,eedng be properly appreciated from the
fact that assertion Of the kind be found any Of
the writings Of yoltare and though the fact was not
stated by the Judge in direct terms but nterrogatvely
it was not the less dgraceu thus endeavor destroy
the evidence and influence the jury than If he had assert
ed the falsehood in direct terms It. however was an
absurdity suppose that the monarch Of great nation
at the head Of modern civilization the tutors of whose
youth were known to be among the llustrous men
Of the day. should have been allowed grow up to mans
estate and the rens Of Government without even
having been instructed in the simple art of writing
The writing and signature Of Fletcher Bishop of Mines
the document bearing date in 1907 and refer
ring to other parts Of the document was not mpugned
but the contrary, fully proved but the proof was
rejected by order Of the Court grounds purely tech
nica and since the trial further testimony has been pro-
cured which does away with the legal bubbles as
regards the proof connected with that portion Of the do
cumenthe genuineness Of Flecher's writing fully au
acknowledged to have been placed there in 1907 could
not have been Published in 17lS the assertion Of which
latter fact the sole foundation for the charge Of