HOME TOPICS.

Evening Star, Issue 2916, 24 June 1872, Page 3

HOME TOPICS.

THE TICHBORNE CASE. The Tichborne claimant still has his friends. In the House of Commons the other evening Mr G. Onslow presented a petition signed by 891 inhabitants of the parish of Ticbbourne and the adjoining parishes in Hampshire, professing their belief in the identity of the claimant, and humbly submitting that “if the public money were to be applied to the prosecution of the claimant, it should also be provided in his defence, because, as the petitioners were informed and believed, this was a case in which widely different opinions prevailed. The petitioners, therefore, earnestly entreated the House to refuse to apply the public money to the prosecution of the claimant.” Mr A. Guest also presented a petition from 523 inhabitants of the town of Poole and its neighbourhood, wherein the petitioners stated that “immediately adjacent was the estate of Upton, formerly the property of Sir E. Doughty, and now claimed by Sir R. C. D. Tichborne, recently consigned a prisoner to Newgate ; that the prisoner bad been recognised by numerous persons who formerly knew him at Poole, some of whom had sworn, while others were prepared to testify to his identity; and they prayed that the House would take due and proper precautions that no advantage would be afforded to the prosecution in .this case which was not in like manner afforded to the prisoner, in order that no public suspicion might exist th-t the said prisoner was likely to be crushed by public means at the instance of inveterate enemies, and of relatives seeking to possess themselves of his inheritance.” On the other hand, eleven officers of the Carbineers have signed a document asserting “ their firm and undoubted conviction that their old brother-officer, Roger Tichborne, had never been seen in England since he left this country in 1803.” But then it is said that six officers have written, saying that they had no recollection of Roger being tattoed ! The Attorney-General has, on several occasions, shown so strong a feeling on the question, that many who do not sympathise with the claimant have objected to his appearing in the management of this prosecution. It was intimated that the trial might possibly be postponed another year, seeing that the deposition of witnesses in Chili and Australia, though available in a civil case, could not be used in a criminal one, and that the witnesses themselves must be called. It was also pointed out that in a criminal case the jury would have to be locked

up every night till the trial was finished ! It will be in the recollection of our readers that at the trial the claimant declined to answer c rtain questions put to him with regard to his life in Australia, and when he was asked by the judge whether bis answering these questions might not involve him in a criminal charge, he answered “yes.” It is now stated that the charges to which the legal questions referred were for horse-steal-ing, and for a more serious offence, and ever since the commencement of the Tichborne case the Melbourne police have been assiduously endeavoring to discover the whereabouts of Arthur Orton, and it is said that a warrant Is now out, and is at present in London for the apprehension of that person on the more serious charge. The warrant is stated to be signed by a Melbourne magistrate, but before it can be put in force in London it must be backed by a magistrate for the country in which Arthur Orton lives. The serious offence alluded to is that of murder, committed in the bush near Melbourne. It is not the intention of the Australian police constables, who are, we are informed, at present in London, and who have been here for some months past, to attempt to put that warrant in force until after the identity of Arthur Orton is proved to their satisfaction.