Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1874-03-25
THE TICHBORNE CASE.

. THE TICHBORNE CASE. "j
A Condensed History Of the Affair which has
p Created so Great Sensation in Eng
l. lana. s.-e
&c. The following sketch of the Itch
bornescas the claimant of which has
just been sentenced to fourteen years
transportation, will be read with inter-
est at this time: z7 ol g.ss et5 ....
I In March, 1855, Roger Charles Doughty
Tichborne, born January 5, 1929. sailed
for Valparaiso, Chill In March, 1854,
he embarked at Rio Janeiro for New
York, in the Bella, which was subse-
quently lost at sea, all her passengers
and crew having been drowned. Roger
Tichborne, who would have been Sir
Roger Tichborne had he lived, was re-
garded as dead by all his family and
friends with the exception Of his mother,
the Dowager Lady Tichborne. Sir
James, Rogers father, died, and was
succeeded by his second son, Alfred, in
the title and the estates. In the year
1866 Lady Tichborne inserted an adver-
tisement in an Australian paper, which
met the eye of Mr.. William Gibbs, an
attorney of Wagga- Wagga, who fixed
upon a man named Thomas Castro, with
whom he was acquainted, as the missing
Roger. Castro was stock-keeper by
occupation, and when Gibbs called his
attention to the Tichborne inquiry he
declared himself to be the lost Roger.
His story was that after the wreck of
the Bella he had been picked up-being
the only survivor-by passing vessel,
the Osprey, bound for Australia, which
had conveyed him to Melbourne. He
had remained thenceforth in Australia,
employing himself, under the name of
Thomas Castro, as keeper of stock, as
before related.
Lady Tichborne, in Europe, was i'm
mediately informed of the important
discovery that had been made, letters
passed between her and Castro, and in
September, 1866, the latter sailed for
Europe, accompanied by his wife and
by an old negro, Andrew Boyle, for
mer servant of the Tichbornes and a
resident of Sydney, whose acquaintance
he had made, and who recognized in
him the missing Roger.
Lady Tichborne received Castro JOY
fully and recognized him as her son !;
but none of the other Tichbornes iden-
tifiedhim. Roger, when he disappeared,
was slight, effeminate looking person,
while Castro was very Falstaff in
physique. When Castro made his
appearance in England Sir Alfred Itch
borne, Rogers brother, was dead.
Little time was lost by Castro, fortified
by Lady Tichborne's recognition and
advocacy, in preparing to lay proof
before the courts of his identity with
! Roger Tichborne. Commissions were
sent to Australia and Chill to take evil
dence in all that concerned the wander
ings and fate of Roger and the Austria
liam life of Castro, who, the Tichborne
side maintained, was an imposter and a
man named Arthur Orion, butcher of
High street, Mapping, who had once
spent several years in South America
and had afterwards gone to Australia,
where he had lived until his return to
Eng land falsely to assume the name of
Roger Tichborne.
A suit in Chancery for the recovery
of the Tichborne estates was the pre-
liminary to the first great trial in which
Castro, now the claimant. figured,
This cause was the ejectment action in
the Court of Common Pleas, the late
Lord Chief Justice Bowl presiding, of
Tichborne vs. Washington. the latter
representing the Tichborne family In
the course of the trial, which commenc-
ed in 1870, and lasted for about nine
months, running far into 1871, inter-
rupted by occasional adjournments of
the Court, hundreds of witnesses were
heard on either side, about half of whom
averred that he was Roger Tichborne
and the other half that he was not. He
himself was subjected to q long and
arduous examination. The claimant
proved himself to be deficient in edu-
cational requirements which Roger
Tichborne had possessed. Although
showing an extraordinary knowledge of
numerous episodes in Roger Itch
borne's life, he also displayed ina more
marked degree gross ignorance of
many persons, places, and events with
which Tichborne was undoubtedly
familiar. ..
The close of this case was as remark
able as has been it's continuance. The
jury had been FESTIVE for some time,
and finally, before the Judge had deliv-
cred his charge, they announced in
court that they had made up their
minds, and that they did not need to
hear any more on the subject As this
was equivalent to verdict against the
claimant, had the case gone to the Jury,
his legal advisers consented to a non
suit, and the Lord Chief Justice imme-
diately committed him for trial on the
charge of willful and corrupt perjury.
He was imprisoned for five weeks, and
at the expiration of THAT time he was
released on bail. Lord Rivers, Messrs.
Onslow and Whalley, members of Par
lament, and one other, going his sure
ties. He was himself also required to
give bail in $4,000. The claimant
passed many of athe following months
in visiting various towns in England,
accompanied by Messrs. Onslow and
Whalley, and making public addresses,
to hear which an admittance fee was
charged. This money was intended to
assist in defraying the expenses of his