The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1871-12-30

and flesh TgWilf find out tiI6 man df pssai-
bIe''s A. Yes i have seen many Of Rogers
letters. !.
o. Have you ever met the word areeeyeds
SO spelt there? A. Not to my recollec tioit !,
the number of Rogers letters that have
seen. however, IS very limited you liave great
bundles of them; If had your opportunity
rather think / should find such Instances 1
found this upon his habit of bad spelling l
went through Rogers misspeltngs for coun-
sci, but did not notice the word 6 received :;
have not got the memoranda made; Idare
say they were destroyed after they were
copied. @
slr. sergeant Ballantine The copy Is in
MY possession.
o. Here Is letter Of Arthur Orton's to
Mrs. Jury, dated January %, 1853, In which
he says, az have got fue very good custom
ers that will keep me going till I get rue
nore.n Now, "few" In both cases is spelt
@fi1e.o A. 1t may be so, or It may be some
thing else-"feuo or "fue." .
q. In Orton's letter to Miss Loder, from
Toruuay, he writes "I take the OPP
portunity of writing these fue lines!" a.
Yes.
Q. In the plaintiff g letter of the 18th june,
1866, to Lady Tichbone-in the "Dear
Cousing Kate" letter, and in one or two
other letters Of the plaintiff, the word "feW ;"
is spelt "fue." Did you ever find that spell
ing in Roger Tichborne's letter. a. ! don't
recoliect; that is all can say.
@. The words cit hear" occurred In Or
toms writing in "The Rivals" and in somt-
thing by the plaintiff. Are those words very
similar in the two? A. To my mind the TWO
are not similar. don't see myself that there
is any resemblance. I have had my atteE-
ton called to the word "trouble," and / have
heard that plaintiff spells it without the 60"
@. Did Roger Tichborne spellit troubleE'
4. have not had my attention called to the
spelling of that particular word.
The Lord Chief Justice said that the word
was spelled "truble" in several instances in
the plaintiffs letters.
Mr.. Hawkins Do you find many instances
in which the spelling is different in Rogers
spelling and in that of the plaintiff?
Witness: Yes, but he has been knocking
about the bush for fourteen or fifteen years.
DR.. Livingstone says he almost forgot his
own language whilst in Africa.
O. DO you look upon life in Australia
and in the bush rs similar? A. Yes; he can
now write q very nice letter; Miss Brline
has not been giving him lessons he is one of
the readicst lcttcr-writers / know; he writes
off at once, and never considers.
@. Can you account for his using large
"i's" before he left England, and small dis ;"
Of erwards? A. Yes; hewould be educated
to write small as" in France. have heard
Roger used small CPS"
@. The small "i's" in England would be
a return TO his early education? a 1t would
be owing to his indifference.
O. Is Arthur Orton's small OPS" owing
to his French education? A. To bis imper-
feet education.
Q. Now the plaintiff is using large ops"
and returning to his English education? A.
Yes.
@. Did it occur to you that the large "I's"
in the Wagga-Wagga letter might have been
due to Mr.. Gibbs having looked it over? A.
No, it did not.
@. Was the plaintiff, in 1867, allowing
money to Orton's sisters? A. I did not
hear Of it so early as that; as far as l know,
the plaintiff never saw Mrs. Jury or Charles
Orion until July, 1868. l never saw receipts
they gave; the plaintiff never told me he
had destroyed them; [ never heard plaintiff
was corresponding with Charles Orion early
in 1868, orion using tho name of Brand
do not know that orion is in the plaintiffs
service now; believe not; | cannot account
for his being i'll the court months after he
had been examined. .s ....
Mr.. Hawkins said that he was at length
done With the witness.
In addition to the above testimony the
London correspondent of the New York
World writes:
"This is all very rough for Roger; there
is no mistake about that. The feeling to-
night is that the case has received fatal
blow"