The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-07-02

are brought together, to be very little alike
or very much less so than was honestly sup
posed.
Medical men are aware of the co-existence
of persons bearing marvellous resemblance
one to another; and so are judges and barris-
ters. Disputed cases of the kind are by no
means uncommon. Early in the present CEN
tury there were two men, Hoag and Parker,
so exactly or so nearly alike that il was no
easy matter to know which was winch. One
of them, a rogue, benefited by this resem-
blance. Being spprehended for some crimi-
nal offense, and placed at the bar, some of
the witnesses swore that the man before them
was Hoag; others swore that he was Parker:
as the benefit of the doubt generally goes
with the accused in such cases, the man was
acquitted.
Very considerable embarrassment some
times arises at coroners inquests, owing to
the difficulty of settling the identity of the
deceased person. Three cases out of several
may be selected to show how honest persons
may be self-deceived.
There was an instance in 1917, in which the
dead body of q woman was found tied to a
boat, drawn up near Greenwich. At an iu-
quest consequently held, an old man came
forward and swore that the deceased was his
daughter, the wife of an out-pensioner.
He described a fierce quarrel which had
taken place between the married couple,
and in which he had interfered to avert
serious consequences; they left his house
together, and he had not since seen
the woman. Other persons also swore
that the deceased was the old mans
daughter. The police were set upon the
track of the husband, who was away;
but they suddenly lighted upon the wife her
self, alive and well The old man and his
neighbors were all surprised at this fact the
Coroner severely reprimanded them for the
blunder they had made; but it was admitted
that the personal resemblance between the
two women was considerable, even to the ex-
istence of mark on one arm. The deceased
body was not identified; nor was it known
whether the death was by murder or by
suicide.
In 1866, the coroner of Burton-on Trent
held an inquest on the body of a man found
in the river near the town. Two respectable
men, who came to view the body, at once
announced it to be that of brother of theirs,
who had been for short time missing from
home. Their statement was believed, their
claim allowed and they were permitted to
bury the body in Burton on Trent church
yard. The inquest was adjourned, in the
hope of obtaining additional evidence as to
the cause of death. When the jury reassem-
bled, they were surprised to see the real
brother enter the room, alive and we'll. There
latives had been deceived by great likeness;
and the parish repaid them the cost of the
funeral In this, as in the aforementioned
instance, failure attended all the attempts
made to identify the dead body, or to ascer-
tain the cause of death.
Perhaps the Hackney Wick case, which
riveted public attention in 1868, was one of
the most remarkable on record in regard to
the persistency with which several persons
taI ,nIa nis
which would have necessitated particular
man being three or four different men at one
time. There were some half finished houses
near the Hackney Wick, or Victoria Park,
station of the North London Railway.
The builder, having determined to finish
them, went to one of the houses in
April of the above-named year, opened
it, and perceived very offensive odor in the
pass ages and kitchen. A little search brought
to light dead body in alarge cupboard under
the stairs. The state of the body denoted
that death must have occurred two or three
months before. There was scar over one
eyebrow, such as might have been occasioned
by fall or bruise. The clothes were good,
but little blood-stained; and an additional
odd boot was found dear the body. An empty
phial, labelled 'laudanum: poison" was on
a shelf in the cupboard, with only Just
sufficient liquid in it to permit of chemical
analysis. The person appeared to have been
about thirty-fve years old, and five feet six
inches high. At an inquest shortly after
wards held, carpenter deposed that, in
the preceding month of February, he had
seen a gentlemanly looking man sitting on
a heap of building materials near the un-
finished houses, cutting up little bits of
wood, as boy might do who was making
a boat. He gave strange and incoherent
answers to some questions put to him;
but, as he was quiet and inoffensive in man
ner, and was not seen again, the incident
went out of recollection.
But now ensued the extraordinary episode
of conflicting identification. The carpenter,
on seeing the dead body at once declared it
to be that of the poor demented gentleman
whom he had seen two months earlier.
lady came forward, and described brother of
hers who had been missing from his home
for some months. He had another sister,
who lived at Hackney Wick, though his own
residence was elsewhere. On seeing the
dead body, she pronounced it to be either
veritably her brother, or very much like him.
ibis ladys testimony was not incom-
patible with that of the carpenter; but the
complication was now to come. A lady and
gentleman came forward to state that man
had deserted his wife and family about eigh-
teen months previously, taking away two
thousand pounds worth of property with
him; they produced a photograph, which
struck those who saw it as possessing much
resemblance to the features of the deceased
person. But while this incident was under
consideration, the friends of an emigrant APP
peared, stating that he had returned from
New Zealand and then disappeared Nothing
was done however, towards identifying the
body in this quarter. DIR. Ellis, physician to
ST. Luke's Hospital, stated in evidence that
on the night of the 1st of February a
lunatic named Heasman had escaped from