THE TICHBORNE TRIAL.

Grey River Argus, Volume XII, Issue 1190, 22 May 1872, Page 2

THE TICHBORNE TRIAL.

...i „?. -V (Concluded. ) THE ABBE SAMS. The Abbe Salis, examined by Sir George Honyman, through an interpreter, said : I live in Tans, Ho; oe^Ruede Clichy, and was living in Paris in 4839, in the Rue St. Honbre, under Mr James .Tichborne. I became extremely intimate , with the family, and coAtinued" so "until" \ they left Paris. r knew ' Roger Charles Tichborne well from 1839 until he left Paris for college, and Ijrjenewed my acquaintance with-'hlmbefoxfe he departed on his long journey. In v|Bs3, the day before he departed on his voyage, I dined with him, his family, M, Ch'atillbn, and?" M. D'Aranza. After M. Chatillonleifc^ M. Laforet became his tutor 'for' a few; ; weeks ; then I gave him lesions for six" weeks; after that, M.Jolivali was his tutor for at least three years. He w^t to a school kept by Mgr.'Dupanloup after., M. Chatilloh had ceased his tutorship. I taught him a little Latin, geography, 1 and, history. I was never his confes i s6rl' j -'He' '• never confessed to me at all, [The plaintiff had said that he had' confessed', to th!e Abbe Salis, who was his confessor 'as a ' boy.] I saw the plaintiff in 'this iCourt last year, when I was requested,' -to be ■•■.: present. After Roger Tichborne - left Paris, he came to see me everyitime he returned, and continued •intimate" with me until his departure for ; Ameriba; The "■ day before he left I dined with'himV " In" 1850 or 1851 I dined with him at 'his. father's. I thien sanr a tattoo, mart on' his arm, and expressed my^^'disappro^al of; it. I saw it perfectly;' but Tcannot' say' now distinctly what it was. I only saw it for a moment, and as I expressed disapH probation he covered : it immediately. I always spoke French with him, as I don't understand English. , Roger spoke French perfectly when I last saw him,' in/Fibril-, : ary, 1853, the day before his departure.' Is he, or- is he not, the Rpger Qharles^ Tichborne whom you knew in Paris;? He is not ; he has nothing of him.;. , It is pos-j---sible there may be a French. translation ' of a book called "The Garden) of -the* Soul," but I do not know it. n[The plaintiff had said that this book was usad to prepare him for his first,communion.] I*A is not true I ever.ad\ds"eli iLady Tichborojr* 1 not to let Chatillon^sed.tfie plaintiff. I never said that 'GhiatUlon^had seen the other, parties, nor did.l. tell.heri jthat, Chatillon had determined not to recognise the plaintiff, whether he was /Roger Tichborne or not ; but after Chatillon had seen the plaintiff I told -her that he did not recognise the plaintiff as Rpj;er Tichborne. [The plaintiff had said that the Abbe Salis had told those things to': the dowager, who told him of.it.] STOPPAGE OP THE CASE. The foreman of the jury said: .The jury" have now heard the ■ evidence as' ,^>. the tattoo marks, and, subject to your.Lord--ship's directions and to the hearing of any further evidence the. learned counsel may desire to place before us, I am au?. thorised to state that the jury do not require any further evidence. (Sensa-; tlOn.) •','.■:■■• :■■■;< ■ \ 'y': Sergeant Ballantine said he was npfc. merely expressing his own- feeling, but that of the country, that a, debt of gratitude was due to the jury fpr the great attention and care they had' displayed in the course of this case. But he thought, that before he was called on' to' mate atrjf" definite reply or observations, he ought to have some opportunity of communicating with his client, who was -not present. He should therefore ask his .Lordship to, ad-, jouifn the case until next.morning^ '" | The i Attorney-General didi. ns,wanji, to seem in the slightest degree' tb^Ws vp 1 on his learned friend, but af terj the \ intimation expressedi by the juryrin general terms, he did not think it right, to trouble them with any further -evidence himself. At the same time, it was inconvenient not^ to know what course his learned friend proposed to take. ■ His Lordship said it was almost necessary to have an adjournment under pucK circumstances. ■._■■■■■<■•■■ i r.l Serjeant Ballantine* observed' that'Mr Giffard would be telegraphed 'to at onbe, and he asked for the adjournment to' b'e until Wednesday morning, to' allow; of that gentleman's attendance^ ' .' : . ; His Lordship thought it right that there should be such an opportunity/, bf'.'.ioomr municating with Mr .._Qif&|t;'; 'Th^giiry had intimated their opinion upon the matter, which was fresh in their memories, but there were other points to which the learned serjeant .might direct his attention; No greater attention' had ever been paid to a case than the jury, had paid to this case. ./: „ • './p '.■•,., .... .... I' | Serjeant Ballantine would, not ' make any observations upon any point to which the jury did not refeV ' ' ; , : . His Lordship thought the 1 etideiice on both sides as to the ears ought to be referred, to. ■ Serjeant _B/illantine_said._the_.point..he should consider simply would be that to which the jury' had 'dirWted'his 8 attention. He wished the adjournment" to be until Wednesdays -.; ;/ / / . i J/ ;r! -" r t Ultimately it was 'agreed* to adjourn until Wednesday, and the judge directed Mr Baigent to be then in attendance. On Wednesday, " 6th -March, ; the co^rfc was inconveniently crowded, and great excitement prevailed. .- ■;•.!.' v/;i/ Serjeant Ballantine had considered the situation with great anxiety, to consider the rights of ;all parties; , He had received a letter from Giffard, in whose views he entirely concurred. He was therefore in accord with all the counsel and' hi^i 'client in the case. His discretion was 'unfettered, which imposed a great weigntTipon him. He must accept thatTespotfsibility; and pursue what he considered, the proper course to take. He hkd reviewed the evidence given on , behalf ;6f .the claimant since Monday, and had react several communications. He should particularly call attention to what: had, been. called -the "tattooing" part of the. case. ■; It was obvious to everybody that he was: called upon to prove that tbe plaintiff was entitled to the baronetcy and property,; and failing to do so, he must admit that he was not entitled to a verdict.:Buthes'hOUld be glad to know whether the jury were relying on the tattoo marks, or whether they had made up their minds aa to the other parts of the case. It would be unjust for them to make up their minds on Any statement made by the Attorney-GoaeEal, without proof. They must be convinced by evidence. It might appear like (m---pertinence; but the jury, wpuld appreciate his anxiety for his client. As, to the tattooing of Roger Tichborne, they had come upon the plaintiff's advisers entirely by surprise. All he had thought

it referred to was the tattooing of Arthur Orton. If they had known of it, questions might have been asked of certain witnesses, and it ought to. have been put forward as a main question. This point had come as a surprise, and supposing the jury to have been governed by the evidence upon it, and not by tho general features of the case, it would not be his duty to withdraw from the case, because he would be in a position ( $o recall witnesses, and to call others who would throw a great deal of doubt upon the subject. He had had a very anxious task imposed upon him. He might have been naturally desirous to address the jury upon the whole case ; but whatever his own wishes might be on that point, public duty and the interest, of , the, parties on both sides compelled him to adopt the course he had done. If the! jury would present their views intelligibly to him, he should not hesitate, .and he would have the sanction of all engaged with him in dealing with their views in ■ • .1 (For continuation of JV ews sed 4th Page.

what he traced would bo a rarnner sativ fftctuiy to the country. The Attorney-General desired to say that with regard to the matter of the tattoo marks, if the learned seijeant said he was taken by surprise he would accept the statement implicitly ; but it would be remembered that Dr Lipscombe was cross-examined at gjeat length as to the marks on Sir Roger Tichborne's arm> of a cross, an anchor, and a heaib. Serjeant Ballantine said these marks had not been mentioned, but the letter " R.0.T." The Attorney-General said, at any rate, ho was cross-examined as to tatto marks on the arm ; and Cole was asked in chief by Mr Giffard, whether Mr Tichborne had tattoo marks on his arm. He said he never knew that Mr Tichborne had any. He was cross-examined for some time about the tattoo marks ; and the claimant was asked by him (the Attorney-General) whether he had any tattoo marks, or whethor any such had ever existed upon him. Upon receiving an absolute denial of that, he (the Attorney-General) felt it his duty to stop ; and having given notice by cross-examination — whish was the only notice that counsel could give to the other side — that the tattoo marks formed a question in the case, he left them to meet it or leave it alone, or to deal with it as they thought proper. He must assert that there was no intention to take Serjeant Ballantine by surprise, and that enough had been said to give the clearest indications of what their course was to be on the 'subject. Every one appreciated the difficulty, in which his learned friend was placed, and ho concurred in the observation that the jury must not be influenced by anything ho said which was not supported by evidence ; but he called attention to the fact that the evidence laid before them already on the part of the defendants had not been confined to the evidence of the tattooing. Then, if the jury felt satisfied by his arguments upon the facts already before them on the part of the plaintiff, they ought to be at liberty to express it. The jury retired for half and hour, and then The foreman said : lam authorised to state that the views of the jury, expressed in their communication to the Court the day before yesterday, were based upon the entire evidence, as well as upon that relating to the tattoo marks. Serjeant Ballantine said that after that intimation he had no difficulty whatever, because his client had given him full authority to act, and he (Serjeant Ballantine) had advised him under the circumstances to submit to a nonsuit. (Laughter.) The Attorney-General said that before the plaintiff was called, he must ask his Lordship to take some step with regard to the papers brought by Mr Holmes, by making an order that they should be impounded, in case it should be necessary to use them hereafter. His Lordship said that he should first desire to ask Mr Baigent a question. Mr Baigent then went into the witnessbox, and was asked to look at his letter to Rouse of the 29th of March, 1869. At the commencement of the third page were these words: " That letter is very awkward, and I should like to see it. Mr Hingston says if it is not Sir Roger's handwriting it is marvellous in its resemblance. Arthur Doolin is enough to take one's breath away." Asked by his Lordship to explain this, Mr Baigent said : All that I remember is, Mr Rouse had communicated to me that he bad heard that the man who Cator thought was Arthur Orton was a man — or an Irishman — named Arthur Doolan. Having been told so, and believing it to be a fact, of course Cator's affidavit became worthless. I had great faith in Cator, and upon his statement in the affidavit ; therefore, the statement took me by surprise. It was merely an exclamation of that surprise that I intended by those words. I don't think I meant anything more — merely an expression such as people use when they say, " You might knock mo down with a feather." That is all I can say, my Lord. His Lordship had thought it only right to give Mr Baigent the opportunity of explaining the reference to Arthur Doolan. He then asked if the plaintiff was in court. Mr Spofforth said he was not in court, nor in the building. His Lordship : He elects to be nonsuited, on that statement, by the jury. Sergeant Ballantine : Yes, my Lord. His Lordship : Then let the plaintiff be called. Mr Davis, the clerk of the court, then called aloud three times, "Sir Roger Charles Doughty Tichborne, come forth, or you will be nonsuited !" There being no reply, His Lordship said he should enter a nonsuit. After the opinion expressed by the jury, the plaintiff's counsel having elected to be nonsuited, another question arose as to what course he should take under the Act^ of Parliament. The opinion of the jury upon the case was placed beyond all doubt by their answers; and although it was his duty, on an occasion like this, to come to a conclusion himself as to the truth or falsehood of the plaintiff's case, he should be governed by the finding of the jury. That waa evidently a finding for the defendants, and he entirely concurred in it. It did appear to him that the plaintiff had been guilty of wilful and corrupt perjury in his evidence. There was, therefore, reasonable cause for the course he was about to pursue, and he should direct that a prosecution be instituted against the plaintiff on a charge of perjury. In pursuance of the Act, he should also commit the plaintiff to the custody of the sheriff at Middlesex, that he might take his trial at the next sessions of the Central Criminal Court, unless the plaintiff should in the meantime enter into recognisances to the amount of LSOOO personally, and two sureties of L 2500 each, or four sureties of L 1250 each, to surrender J himself to take his trial at the next i session of the Central Criminal Court. The act also said that he should bind over certain parties to prosecute in such a case. He had some difficulty in saying how this should be done, when he considered the enormous expense of this trial. The estato had been nearly exhausted, withr out any prospect of getting any of the costs from the plaintiff. It seemed to him that the expenses of the prosecution must be defrayed by the country- -(applause)— < and the right course would be that the country should undertake the prosecution; He was not aware of any case in which the Attorney-General had been bound ! over to prosecute, and he should not set j a precedent by doing so ; but the Government ought to direct what should be done iv the matter. He should therefore bind

ovev the Inspector of Police, so as to give j the Government a direct control over the prosecution, and not merely such a control as would be given by furnishing the funds. The Attorney-General said he stood in a somewhat difficult position, acting, as he did, as counsel for the defendants and also as Attorney-General. However, what ; his Lordship had said relieved him from any personal feeling in the matter ; and as Attorney-General he undertook that the prosecution should be a public one, and undertaken at the expense of the countij'. (Applause.) Inspector Eleazer Denning, of the Metropolitan Police Force, was then bound over, in the sum of LIOO, to prosecute "Thomas Castro, falsely calling himself Sir Roger Charles Doughty Tichbo. rie. " The Attorney-General applied for the issue of a Bench warrant for the apprehension of the plaintiff. His Lordship said of course it ivas intended that a Bench warrant should issue at once. He then pointed out that the act directed that the commitment should be to the next session within the jurisdiction, in which the perjury was committed. It must therefore be at the next session of the Central Criminal Court, which commenced on Monday next. . The Attorney-General then applied for immediate execution, and requested that his Lordship would certify for a special jury. The application was granted. His Lordship said that Mr Holmes had expressed his regret that he had not been called as a witness. In the course of the case, an objection had been raised as to the privilege of an attorney, and he (the judge) intimated that uhder some circumstances such a privilege did not exist. Mr Holmes had not been put in the witnessbox, after it had been stated that he would be called ; but it must not be understood that he (the learned judge) gave the slightest privilege for a client who consulted an attorney for the purpose of concocting a crime or a fraud. It would be monstrous if the law were otherwise. It it turned out that a consultation had taken place for the purpose of crime or fraud, there was no privilege to close the lips of an attorney from speaking the truth. He thought it right to make that observation, as the question had arisen in the course of the cause. He also said that Mr Holmes might know what was his duty under circumstances in connection : with this case. His Lordship then said he should forbear making any observations upon the case generally, because the learjacd serjeant had elected to be nonsuited ; but he thanked the jury in the name of the country for the patience, circumspection, and care they had brought to bear upon the case. He could not remember a jury so well constituted to try such a matter, or a case more properly disposed of. ;As to what had taken place at the bar, taking the length of the trial and every thing else into consideration, although there might have been many I words spoken on both sides which the speakers regretted, yet they might under f the circumstances mutually forgive. The tax upon men's feelings, nerves, and strength had been so great that it was but natural to expect that provocations wo'ild arise. There was another matter. Inconsequence of the sad results of the adjournment which took place in the autumn, he must now express his entire belief in the evidence of Mrs Radcliffe, confirmed as it was by the other evidence and correspondence in the case. (Loud applause.) He believed that closed their proceeding?, and he had only to repeat his thanks and acknowledgments to the jury. The foreman of the jury said that he only expressed the feelings and wishes of those with whom he was associated in I conveying to his Lordship their united thanks for the kindness with which every want of theirs had been considered ; and also to every officer of the court— police and others — for their kiudness and consideration. (Applause.) His Lordship concurred in the commendation of those having the arrangements of the court ; and trusted that a clause would be introduced into the new Jury Bill, exempting every Tichborne juryman from serving on another jury so long as he desired to be exempt. (Laughter and applause.) The Court then rose. THE ARREST OF THE CLAIMANT. Immediately after the rising of the Court at Westminster Hall, Mr Superintendent Williamson, the head of the Metropolitan detective police force, accompanied by Inspector Clarke, and two other officers, went to the Waterloo hotel, in Jermyn street, and there arrested the claimant under the warrant of the Lord Chief J ustice of the Common Pleas. They found him in a sitting room, which he has occupied there for some time, and he was joined after the arrival of the officers by one of the firm of solicitors by whom his case has been conducted and by a friend — a gentleman of some position. The superintendent told him that it would be his duty/to apprehend him on a charge of wilful and corrupt perjury committed in the trial of the suit of Tichborne v. Lushington, at Westminster, and he read to him the warrant of the Lord Chief Justice— a lengthy document — under which he was committed for trial on that charge at the next sessions of the Central Criminal Court, and ordered to be detained in the gaol of Newgate, failing his entering into recognisances to the amount of LIO,OOO. The claimant, who displayed considerable nonchalance, expressed his willingness to accompany the officers, adding that it might cause him some temporary inconvenience, and that it was hardly fair that the case should have been stopped at that juncture. He was then taken into custody. He and the supertendent went to Newgate in the claimant's brougham, and the other detectives followed in a cab. There was very little stir at the hotel or in tho nigbborhood, and it was not until the carriage reached Ludgate Hill, where it was stopped by the traffic, that the now well-known form of the claimant was recognised, and cries were raised of "Sir Roger, "Arthur Orton," and "Wagga Wngga," causing considerable, commotion. By the time the vehicle reached the entrance to the gaol, which it did about two o'clock, a goodly crowd had assembled, and as the claimant and the superintendent left the carriage a cheer was raised, which the former acknowledged in his accustomed manner. Inside tho gaol he was asked his name in the ordinary way, and ho replied, "Roger Charles Doughty Tichj borne, "(although upon the warrant he was described 'as Thomas Castro, in which name he appears on the prison bojks. Ho was aßked in the usual form, to give up

anything he might have upon him, and he at once handed over a quantity of jewellery which he was wearing, including a haudsotne watch and chain and snuffbox, all engraved with the Tichborne coat of arms. He also gave up L 73 odd in money. He was then taken to one of the cells. The warrant, which is written on many sides of foolscap, upon which the Governor of Newgate (Mr Jonaa) detains him, states, among other things, that " it appears, and does appear to me, the said Lord Chief Justice, that the said plaintiff was guilty of wilful and corrupt perjury in his said examination and evidenop upon oath, and that there was and is rea^ sonable cause for directing him to be prosecuted ;" and it empowers the sheriffs of Middlesex to detain him in the gaol of the county until the next sessions of Oyer and Terminer, unless previously he enters into his recognisances in LSOOO, and prci vides sureties for other LSOOO, to appear and surrender at those sessions, and not to depart the court without its leave. The sessions of the Central Criminal Court will commence on Monday, the Bth of April, and between this and then the formal indictment, specifying the various allegations of perjury upon which the prisoner will be tried, will be prepared.