Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

WATERFORD PEERAGE.

THE CLAIM FAILS. Received Feb. 3, 5.5 p.m. London, Feb. 1. The defence in the Waterford legitimacy suit was a total denial of plaintiffs' allegations. Witnesses swore that the son of the fifth Marquess was stillborn in' March, 1873, and was buried at lirotnpton cemetery, later being buried iii.iiis mother's grave in Ireland. The plaintiff suggested that the body was that, of another child, which was placed in the. coffin. The register of the Holborii workhouse (produced) showed the birth of a child, John Tooth, alleged by the defence to be plaintilf. The case was dismissed. The court decided that claimant was not the child of Lady Waterford. AN INTERESTING LAWSUIT. A recent cable stated that the hearing of the Waterford peerage case had begun. George Bevesford, or George Tooth, gardener, was asking for a declaration .tliat.be is the lawful son of the firth, i.Mflrquis of Waterford, who married j Florence Vivyian after a divorce action '.in 1370. The respondents allege that JBeresford is the natural- soil" of • Georgina'Tooth, and was born inia Holborn workhouse. Georgina Tooth was a sister of Mrs. Viwan's cook. ,

The London Daily Mail of November l.'J. reports that the Court of Appeal, 'on' the previous day, hearA an appeal from, an order of Mr. Justice Horridge .in . a .claim of a gardener, known us .George Tooth, that he was the legitimate son of the fifth Marquis of Waterford. ,The case was that of Beresford v. the Attorney-General (the Marquis of Wllterford and others cited),'.in which the judge had refused an application for leave to u.ie in a suit for declaration, of legitimacy evidence already given in another suit, but made an order that the evidence should be taken on commission.

Mr. Hume-Williams, for the appellants, said the plaintiff, a gardener, asserted that lie was Marquis of Waterford, and entitled io the title and the estates. The defendants alleged 'that on' March 29th, 1873, the wife of the iifth Lord Waterford died, after having had a stillborn child, and they were buried together. The marchioness had hAd a'cook, whose Mater, a woman named Tooth, about that time or a little earlier, gave birth lo an illegitimate child. Out of sympathy, Lady Walorib'rd took Tooth's child out of the workhouse, and after her death the Marquis liad it educated. The defendant's ease was that that child was the claimant, but the claimant said lie was the child aliened to have been stillborn.

'About Jf)o;s, said counsel, the plaintiff began to make these assertions, ahd as the only people who knew anything about I lie matter were getting old the trustees of the present Lord iValeiTord brought an action to, perpetuate testimony. The chief person who knew anything about the matter, was Mrs. Priscilla White, formerly maidcempanion to Lady Waterford. who was instrumental in taking the., child out of the workhouse. In 1013 aii order was made for tlic examination of the witnesses before an examiner in London, and Mrs. White was examined aiid crossexamined at great length. Another witness was a Mrs. Vivyan, a great friend of Lady Waterford, who was in possession of some facts with regard to the birth of the stillborn child. •■■': AN ACTION JOT SLANDER. . '-In 19H the claimant began an action for slander against Mrs. White for a statement that he was not the Mar-, quia of Waterford. The statement of claim was struck out, and his appeal dismissed. Then he began to send abusive and scurrilous letters and postcards to Mrs, White. One of them was:

' . "Mrs. Wiiite. You wicked liar and murderess. Look at the morning papers. You will see they are protecting vou for a - little while. I mean the public to; know what you are receiving your [money for." _, x .In another he wrote: ■ , '"lf the Waterford family tell your husband the truth he will do without lyoiir .dirty money." ! Mr. Colam, for the defendant, here said that the claimant's ease was that iLady Waterford's child was not • stillborn; According to his ease, the child Was brought from the marquis's house, where the birth took place, to the house of ft Mrs. Jones, where it had been, ever 'since. They wanted to put dates to Mrs. White which would show that her "story that the claimant was fifteen months old when taken from the work■house was absolutely untrue. The re-,, fereiice to money related to a suggestion' that she received £SOO a year for life for' "what she did.

Lord Justice Swinfen Kady: l "Is it your ease that both children woreliv-' ing, and that there was r.o burial of a' child at all?" Mr. C'olan: "Our ease is that the dowager marchioness refused to allow the marquis to bring his wife to any of the family mansions." '■' "NOT A COOK'S SON."^ Mr. Hume Williams read other 'postcards, one of which ran: ;,: "To keep it fresh in your memory that X am the sixth marquis and not a. cook's son, and also that I am not an impostor, you wk-ked liar.-—G. Tooth, ','fi.tli Marquis of Waterford." hi another communication the claimant charged 'Mrs. White with having murdered Lady Waterford, his mother, by putting arsenic in her medicine. '. the claimant was arrested, and at the Old Bailey, where he pleaded "guilty," his counsel offered profuse apologies and he was bound over. 'The court allowed the defendant's appeal and discharged the orders of Mr. Justice Horridge, holding that the evidence taken was available and could be read in court at the trial. They also refused to compel Mrs. White, who was seventy-one, and Mrs. Vivyati, who was seventy-eight, to attend the trial.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19180204.2.7

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Daily News, 4 February 1918, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
934

WATERFORD PEERAGE. Taranaki Daily News, 4 February 1918, Page 2

WATERFORD PEERAGE. Taranaki Daily News, 4 February 1918, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert