coincidence of a corporal kindviz., that Roger Tichborne was inkneed, with the left leg turned out more than the right, and the Claimant was in-kneed in a similar way. This is a remarkable coincidence, and cross-examination failed to shake it. But when he attempted to prove a second coincidence of corporal peculiarities like the above, which being the work of nature, cannot be combated, what a falling off in the evidence. B. They found in the Claimant a congenital brown mark on the side; but they could only assert or imagine a similar mark in Tichborne. No viva voce evidence by eyewitnesses to anything of the sort. C. They proved, by Dr. Wilson, a. peculiar formation in the Claimant; but instead of proving by some doctor, surgeon, or eyewitness a similar formation in Tichborne, they went off into wild inferences. The eccentric woman, who kept her boy three years under a seton, had also kept him a long time in frocks; and the same boy when a moody young man, had written despondent phrases, such as, in all other cases, imply a dejected mind, but here are to be perverted to indicate a malformed body, although many doctors, surgeons, and nurses knew Tichborne's body, and not one of all these ever saw this malformation which, in the nude body, must have been visible fifty yards off. In short, the coincidences B and C were proved incidences with unproved "Co's."

Failing to establish a double coincidence of congenital features or marks, the Claimant went off into artificial skin marks. Examples: Roger had marks of a seton: the Claimant showed marks of a similar kind. Roger had a cut at the back of his head, and another on his wrist; so had the Claimant. Roger had the seams of a lancet on his ankles; the Claimant came provided with punctures on the ankle. Roger winked and blinked; so did

the Claimant. . . . These doubtful coincidences were also encountered by direct dissidences on the same line of observation. Roger was bled in the temporal artery, and the Claimant showed no puncture there. Roger was tattooed with a crown, cross, and anchor by a living witness, who faced cross-examination, and several witnesses in the cause saw the tattoo marks at various times: and it was no answer to all this positive evidence to bring witnesses who did not tattoo him, and other witnesses who never saw the tattoo marks.

But the Claimant also opened a large vein of apparent coincidences in the knowledge shown by him at certain times and places of numerous men and things known to Roger Tichborne. These were very remarkable. He knew private matters known to Tichborne and A, to Tichborne and B, to Tichborne and C, &c., and he knew more about Tichborne than either A, B, C, &c., individually knew. It is not fair or reasonable to pooh-pooh this. But the defendants met this fairly; they said these coincidences were not arrived at by his being Tichborne, but by his pumping various individuals who knew Tichborne : and they applied fair and sagacious tests to the matter. They urged as a general truth that Tichborne in Australia would have known just as much about himself, his relations, and his affairs as he subsequently knew in England. And I must do them the justice to say this position is impregnable. They went into detail and proved that when Gibbs first spotted the Claimant at WaggaWagga, he was as ignorant as dirt of Tichborne matters; did not know the Christian names of Tichborne's mother, nor the names of the Tichborne's estates, nor the counties where they lay. They then showed the steps by which his ignorance might have been partly lessened and much knowledge picked up; they showed a lady, who longed to

be deceived, and all but said so, putting him by letter on to Bogle Bogle startled, and pumped - the Claimant showing the upper part of his face in Paris to the lady who wanted to be deceived, and, after recognition on those terms, pumping her largely; then coming to England with a large stock of facts thus obtained, and in England pumping Carter, Bulpitt, and others, searching Lloyd's, &c. Having proved the gradual growth of knowledge in the claimant between Wagga-Wagga and the Court of Common Pleas, they took him in court with all his acquired knowledge, and cross-examined him on a vast number of things well known to Tichborne. Under this test, for which his preparations were necessarily imperfect, he betrayed a mass of ignorance on a multitude of things familiar to Roger Tichborne, and he betrayed it not frankly as honest men betray ignorance, or oblivion of what they have once really known, but in spite of such fencing, evading, shuffling and equivocating, as the most experienced have seen in the witness box. Personating a gentleman he shuffled without a blush; personating a collegian, he did not know what a The inscription over quadrangle is. the Stonyhurst quadrangle, "Laus Deo," was strange to him; thought it meant something about the laws of God. He knew no French, no Latin. He thought Cæsar was a Greek. . . . judge his whole vein of coincidences, and their neutralising dissidences, the jury had now before them three streams of fact: 1. That at WaggaWagga the Claimant knew nothing about Tichborne more than the advertisements told him; 2. That in England he knew an incredible number of things about Tichborne ; 3. That in England he took Mrs. Towneley for Roger's sweetheart, and even at the trial was ignorant of many things Tichborne could not be ignorant of. Now, in all cases,

he

To

I will now show, in contrast, the indisputable coincidences, which, converging from different quarters, all point to one conclusion - that the Claimant is Arthur Orton, of Wapping.

Arthur Orton, born September 13th, 1832, was the youngest son of George Orton, a shipping butcher and an importer of Shetland ponies. He used to ride the ponies from the Dundee steamers, and so got a horseman's seat. . . The Claimant in Australia lived by riding, and slaughtering, and dressing beasts. On this point, his own evidence agrees with that of every witness who knew him. And when he came up the Thames in the "Cella" to personate Tichborne, he asked the pilot what had become of Ferguson, the man who used to be pilot of the Dundee boats. All this taken together is rather a strong coincidence. It may seem weak; but apply a test. To whom does all this, as a whole, apply? The riding the slaughtering - and the spontaneous interest in an old Dundee pilot? To Castro? Tichborne? To any known man not an Orton ?

To

In 1848, Arthur Orton, aged 16, sailed to Valparaiso, and subsequently, in June, 1849, made his way to Melipilla. He was young, fair, the only English boy in the place, and the good people took to him. He made friends with Dona Hayley, wife of an English doctor, and with Thomas Castro and his wife, and many others. They were very kind to him in 1849 and '50, particularly Dona Hayley, and in these gentle minds the kindly feeling survived the lapse of time, and his long neglect of them. Not foreseeing in 1850 his little game in

1866, Arthur Orton told Dona Hayley he was the son of Orton, the Queen's butcher, and as a child had played with the Queen's children. Not being a prophet, all this bounce at that date went to aggrandise Orton. He spoke of Arthur's sisters by name, and Dona Hayley, twenty years after, remembered the names with slight and natural variations.

Tichborne's alibi during Arthur Orton's whole visit to Melipilla is proved by a cloud of witnesses, and his own writing, and is, indeed, admitted; he sailed late in 1852, and reached Chili in 1853. Arthur Orton was back in England, June, 1851. Now so much of this as respects Arthur Orton is the first branch of a pure, unforeseen coincidence. The second branch is this - The Claimant on the 28th August 1867 wrote from his solicitor's office, 25 Poultry, to prepare the good Melipillians for a new theory that Arthur Orton, 17 years old to the naked eye, was not Castro · (that cock might fight in Hobart Town, but not in Melipilla); not Castro, but Tichborne, age 23. He wrote to Thomas Castro, complained he was kept out of his estates, and begged to be kindly remembered to Don Juan Hayley, to Clara and Jesusa, to Don Ramon Alcade, Dona Hurtado, to Senorita Matilda, Jose Maria Berenguel, and his brothers and others, in short, to twelve persons besides Castro himself. . . . The whole coincidence is this The Claimant stayed a long time at Melipilla in 1849 and 1850, and called himself Arthur Orton, by giving full details of his family, and left Chili in 1850, during all which time an alibi is proved for Tichborne, but none can be proved nor has ever been attempted, for Arthur Orton. On the contrary, a non-alibi

was directly proved for him. He was traced from Wapping to Valparaiso, and Melipilla, in 1848. His stay there till 1850 was proved, and then he was traced in 1850 into the "Jessie Miller," and home to Wapping in 1851 just as he had been traced out - by ships' registers and a cloud of witnesses. The coincidence rests on the two highest kinds of evidence, the Claimant's written admission, and the direct evidence of respectable witnesses unshaken by crossexamination (see scale of evidence), and it points to the Claimant as Arthur Orton. Those who can see he is not Tichborne, but are deceived by the falsehoods of men into believing he is not Orton, should give special study to this coincidence; for here the Claimant is either Tichborne or Orton. No third alternative is possible. At Melipilla, in 1850, he was either Orton, who was there, aged 17, or Tichborne, who was in England, aged 23. .

Your readers, especially those who have paid me the compliment of drawing the circle with radii converging to one center, can now fill the interstices of those radii, and so possess a map of the fifteen heterogeneous and independent coincidences, converging from different quarters of the globe, and different cities, towns and streets, and also from different departments of fact, material, moral, and psychological, towards one central point, that this man is Arthur Orton. Then, if you like, apply the exhaustive method, of which Euclid is fond in his earlier propositions. Fit the fifteen coincidences on to Roger Tichborne if you can. . . You will conclude with Euclid, "in the same way it can be proved that no other person except Arthur Orton is the true center of this circle of coincidences."

This was an instance in which the guilt of a crime was brought home to the perpetrator through the indentifying of a body after it had been separated limb from limb, submitted to chemical processes, and to the inordinate heat of a furnace, and mingled with the countless bones of anatomical subjects in their common burying-place. One Professor Webster was brought to trial for the murder of Dr. Parkman. It was shown that the professor had urgent pecuniary motives, at the time when the crime was committed, to get Dr. Parkman out of the way. The prisoner had a residence at the Medical College, Boston. He made an appointment to meet the deceased at this place at two o'clock on Friday, the 23d of November, 1849, in order to discuss certain money matters. Dr. Parkman was seen about a quarter before two o'clock apparently about to enter the Medical College, and after that was never again seen alive. The prisoner affirmed that Dr. Parkman did not keep his appointment, and did not enter the college at all on that day. For a whole week nothing was discovered, and when search was made the prisoner interfered with it, and threw hindrances in the way.

On the Friday week and the day following there were found in a furnace connected with the prisoner's laboratory in the college, fused together indiscriminately with the slag, the cinders, and the refuse of the fuel, a large number of bones and certain blocks of mineral teeth. A quantity of gold, which had been melted, was also found. Other bones were found in a vault under the college. There was also discovered in a tea chest, and embedded in a quantity of tan, the entire trunk of a human body and

other bones.

The parts thus collected together from different places, made the entire body of a person of Dr. Parkman's age, about sixty years, and the form of the body when reconstructed had just the peculiarities shown to be possessed by Dr. Parkman. In no single particular were the parts dissimilar to these of the deceased, nor in the tea chest or the furnace were any duplicate parts found over and above what was necessary to compose one body. The remains were further shown to have been separated by a person possessed of anatomical skill, though not for anatomical purposes.

Finally, three witnesses, dentists, testified to the mineral teeth found being those made for Dr. Parkman three years before. A mold of the doctor's jaw had been made. at the time, and it was produced, and shown to be so peculiar that no accidental conformity of the teeth to the jaw could possibly account for the adaptation. This last piece of evidence was conclusive against the prisoner, and he was convicted. Without this closing proof the evidence would certainly have been unsatisfactory. The character of the prisoner, the possible confusion throughout the college of the remains of anatomical subjects, the undistinguished features, and the illusiveness of evidence derived from the likeness of a reconstructed body, were all facts of a nature to substantiate assumptions in favor of the prisoner's innocence. It is singular that the block of mineral teeth was only accidentally preserved, having been found so near the bottom of the furnace as to take the current of cold air, whose impact had prevented the thorough combustion that would otherwise have taken place.