A PARALLEL TO THE TICHBORNE CASE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 3184, 20 April 1872, Page 3

A PARALLEL TO THE TICHBORNE CASE.

(Cassett's Matjazine.)

A notable case occurred not many years sago. There was a claimant to a baronetcy whose identity was vigorously disputed, and there was a searching cross--examination by one of the leading counsel •of the day, Sir Frederick Thesiger—now Xord Chelmsford— touching the claimant's remembrance of personal incidents, and the extent of his educational acquirements, which, when we refer to the reports, reminds us of the now famous ""Would you be surprised to hear?" of Sir John Coleridge. It is worth notice, too, that the claimant's leading counsel was Mr Bovill, the presiding Judge in the Tichborne trial; and that the Judge in the trial to which we are now referring was Mi- Justice Coleridge j father of the •present Sir John, the Attorney-General.

The case came on at the August Assizes at Gloucester, in 1853. The claimant professed to be the son of the late Sir •Hugh Smyth, of Ashton Hall, near Bristol, who, as generally supposed, had died without isaue, and whose title had passed to the grandson of his sister, a minor. It was known that he had been twice married ; but the claimant asserted that there had been a prior marriage in Ireland, in 1790, with Jane, daughter of 'Count Vandenbergh, and that he was the issue of that union, his mother having died in giving him birth. Hia father,

he alleged, kept the marriage secret, and shortly .after the death of his Avife Jane, married a daughter of the Bishop of Bristol. Tlie claimant had been brought up by a carpenter named Provis, at Warminster, and passed as his son, but had been educated at Winchester School—he supposed at the expense of Sir Hugh. There, he asserted, he Avas visited by the Marchioness of Bath, and others (since unfortunately dead), who. had recognised him as the real heir to the Smyth estates—Avorth about thirty thousand a year. He produced in Court a document purporting to be signed by Sir Hugh, acknoAvledging him to be his son ; letters from the Irish clergyman who had celebrated the marriage ; a brooch, and j other jeAvellery, marked Jane Gooken, which he asserted was the maiden name of the mother of Jane Vandenbergh. An old Bible with the name of Vandenbergh Avritten on the fly-leaf and an entry of tlie marriage of Sir Hugh Avas also produced, besides a large oil painting, represented as being a portrait of Sir Hugh, Avith his autograph on the back of the canvas. In the document, a peculiar mode of spelling Avas observable, "set aside" being written " sett asside;" "rapid," "rappid;" "whom," "whome." Those in Court, not in the secret, Avere surprised at the pertinacity with which Sir Frederick Thesiger questioned the claimant (who stated that he had been a lecturer on educational subjects) as to his mode of spelling certain words. His orthography exactly agreed with--the peculiarities in the document, arid Avith amazing audacity he maintained that his • spelling Avas correct, a,nd sanctioned by all good authorities. He maintained that he had accidentally found the document in the possession of a kwyer's clerk in London. Just as Sir Frederick was concluding his cross-examination, one of the most sensational incidents ever witnessed in a court of justice occurred. Amessage Avas handed to Sir Frederick, who immediately forwarded a reply, and then looking steadily in the face of the claimant, said:—"Did you, in January last, apply to a person in Oxford street to engrave for you the crest upon the rings produced, and the name Jane Gooken on the brooch ?" The man, who had already exhibited signs of confusion, turned deadly pale, and utterly unable to collect his faculties to invent another falsehood, stammered out, "I did." A moment of intense excitement ensued, and the Judge asked the claimant's counsel what course they intended to pursue. Mr Bovill, after a very brief conference -with his colleagues, said:—"After this, most appalling exhibition—after an exposure unparalleled in the Courts of Justice—we feel it inconsistent Avith our duty, as gentlemen of the Bar, any longer to continue the contest."

The jury, of course, under the direction of the Judge, returned a verdict for the defendant; the documents, jewellery, Bible, and picture were impounded, and the claimant ordered into custody on the charge of -wilful perjury. He was tried for perjury and forgery at the next Assizes, and then his history Avas revealed. He was Tom Provis, and not a baronet's son ; the portrait was that of a member of the Provis family, and he had himself Avritten the name of Sir Hugh on the back. He had married a servant in the Smyth family, and so become acquainted with some particulars of the family history. He had been a schoolmaster, disgraced for abominable conduct, and he had been tried and sentenced to death for horse-stealing. The Bible was picked up at a stall in Holborn, and the name Vandenbergh, Avritten in it, had suggested the fiction of the Irish marriage of Jane Vandenbergh, with her father the count, entirely imaginary persons. \Tlie telegram, which was the first step in exposing the fraud, was forwarded by the engraver, who had read in the Times the report of the first day's proceedings.

Provis, horse-stealer and worse, was sentenced to twenty-one years' imprisonment, and he' died in gaol. He maintained in court that he waa a baronet's son, and showed a pigtail (previously hidden in the collar of his coat) which he declared he was born with, and which was an infallible mark of aristocracy! The annals of fraud scarcely record an attempt exhibiting similar audacity, and perseverance. It was generally believed, and on good grounds, that the funds necessary for him tb carry on the proceedings were furnished by the subscriptions of speculators who were to have received an enormous per-centage had he succeeded. Tlie Smyth family were put to an expense of six thousand pounds in resisting the claim of this unscrupulous impostor.