Tichborne Case

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sir Roger Tichborne (left) and Arthur Orton (right)
Sir Roger Tichborne (left) and Arthur Orton (right)

The affair of the Tichborne claimant was the celebrated 19th-century legal case in the United Kingdom of Arthur Orton (1834–1898), an imposter who claimed to be the missing heir Sir Roger Tichborne (1829–1854).

Contents

[edit] Heir who disappeared

Sir Roger Charles Doughty Tichborne was born January 5, 1829, in Paris as the eldest son of a baronet and heir to the Roman Catholic Hampshire family of Tichborne. King James I of England had made his ancestor Sir Benjamin Tichborne, sheriff of Southampton, a baronet in 1621. His father was James Francis Doughty-Tichborne and his mother French-born lady Henriette Felicite.

Through the influence of his mother, who did not appreciate England very much, Sir Roger mainly spoke French. In fact, he lived with his mother in France until the age of 16. James Tichborne had to claim that the boy was going to a funeral in England before his mother would let him leave. In 1849 he went to Stonyhurst College and later that year joined the 6th Dragoon Guards in Dublin. Apparently his French accent caused ridicule, and he sold his commission in 1852. Next year he left for South America. From Valparaíso he crossed the Andes and arrived in Rio de Janeiro in 1854. In April, on his way back home, his ship was lost at sea with all hands, and he was pronounced dead the next year. The title and the estates passed to his younger brother Sir Alfred Joseph Doughty-Tichborne (who died 1866).

[edit] Claimant emerges

Arthur Orton c. 1872
Arthur Orton c. 1872

On learning the news of her eldest son's death, Sir Roger's mother refused to admit that he was dead. She sent inquiries all over the world, and in November 1865, she received a letter from a Sydney lawyer who claimed that a man supposedly fitting the description of her son was living as a butcher in Wagga Wagga, Australia.

The supposed Sir Roger was actually Arthur Orton, who at the time used the name Tom Castro. Aside from some facial resemblance to Tichborne, he did not fit the description at all. Instead of sharp features and black hair, he had round features and light brown hair. He was also fat and did not speak a word of French. His first letter referred to facts Lady Tichborne did not recognise. However, Lady Tichborne was desperate enough to accept him as her son and sent him money to come to her.

Orton was reluctant to go at first, presumably because he feared exposure, but his associates—one of whom was an old friend of Sir Roger's father—made him change his mind. Sir Roger's former servant Andrew Bogle accompanied him on his trip to Britain. He arrived in London on Christmas Day 1866 and visited the Tichborne estates. There he met the Tichborne family solicitor Edward Hopkins and Francis J. Baigent who became his supporters. When in January he travelled to the Paris hotel where Lady Tichborne was living, the desperate lady "recognised" him instantly as her son. She even handed him Sir Roger's letters from South America. The fact that Orton did not understand a word of French did not bother her, and she gave him an allowance of £1,000 a year. Orton researched Sir Roger's life to enforce his imposture.

After Lady Tichborne's acceptance, various other acquaintances of Sir Roger accepted him as well. They included other officers of the 6th Dragoons, several county families and Hampshire villagers. He even hired a group of manservants who had served in the 6th Dragoons.

[edit] Resistance begins

Other members of the Tichborne family were not so gullible and promptly declared him an impostor. Their investigators found out that this Tom Castro was a butcher's son from Wapping and had jumped ship in Valparaíso, Chile, where he had taken the name Castro from a friendly family. Orton had even inquired about his family members in Wapping when he had come back from Australia. They also found many other discrepancies when Orton tried to fit his own South American experiences to those of Sir Roger.

When Lady Tichborne died in March 1868, Orton lost his most prominent supporter. He would have probably stopped the charade had he not owed a significant amount of money to his creditors. (He sold "Tichborne Bonds" to pay the legal costs when he tried to claim his inheritance from the Tichborne family.) The rightful heir at the time, Sir Henry Alfred Joseph Doughty-Tichborne, was only two years old.

[edit] Trials

The Illustrated London News, January 24, 1817. Henry Hawkins addressing the Jury
The Illustrated London News, January 24, 1817. Henry Hawkins addressing the Jury
Contemporary engraving of the principal players in the Tichborne case
Contemporary engraving of the principal players in the Tichborne case

The trial to establish his inheritance began in the Court of Common Pleas on May 11, 1871, and lasted 102 days. Orton weathered the attacks against the discrepancies in his story and his outright ignorance of many key facts Sir Roger would have known, including how to speak French as the heir had spent most of his youth in France.[1] Over 100 people vouched for his identity as Sir Roger—except Orton's brother who claimed otherwise. Eventually Sir John Coleridge revealed the whole case in a cross-examination that lasted 22 days, and the evidence of the Tichborne family eventually convinced the jury. The case was closed on March 5, 1872, when Orton's counsel William Ballantine gave up, and Orton lost his upper-class supporters.

Charles Chabot gave evidence as an expert witness on questioned document examination.[2]

Orton was promptly arrested and charged with perjury. His criminal trial began in 1873 and lasted 188 days with the judge, Sir Alexander Cockburn, 12th Baronet taking 18 days to sum up.[3]. The jury was eventually convinced—based on, for example, testimony by Orton's former girlfriend—that this claimant was false.

The Beggar's Petition
The Beggar's Petition

Orton's defence was led by Edward Kenealy, who would later be disbarred for his aggressive behaviour during the case. Orton was convicted on two counts of perjury on February 28, 1874, and was sentenced to 14 years' hard labour. The legal costs amounted to £200,000 (at least ten million pounds sterling or twenty million US dollars adjusted currency)

[edit] Aftermath

Commemorative plate, held in the National Museum of Australia, Eternity gallery. The text around the rim reads: "Would you be surprised to find that this is Tichborne".
Commemorative plate, held in the National Museum of Australia, Eternity gallery. The text around the rim reads: "Would you be surprised to find that this is Tichborne".

Many people who had supported the claimant's efforts refused to believe the truth and claimed he was unjustly persecuted. Rumours included conspiracy theories about Jesuits.[4] Kenealy was elected to Parliament, but failed to convince other members to take the Tichborne case to a Royal Commission in April 1875. As a result, Orton's supporters started a small-scale riot in London.

Orton served ten years in prison and was released in 1884, by which time the public had forgotten him. He alternately confessed and claimed he was innocent but aroused little interest. He died in poverty on April 2, 1898. His coffin still carries the name Sir Roger Charles Doughty Tichborne.

[edit] Cultural references

  • Jevons's Logic, 1876, a small textbook by the economist who invented marginal utility theory, mentions this case to illustrate proof by weight of evidence. The claimant, for example, was unable to distinguish Greek text from Latin.
  • The slang words tich, meaning a small person, and titchy, meaning "small" or "tiny", come from the stage name of music hall star Harry Relph, known as Little Tich, an ironic reference to the size of the Tichbourne Claimant.
  • In 1933 Jorge Luis Borges published a short story, "El impostor inverosímil Tom Castro" ("Tom Castro, the Implausible Impostor"). It is an accurate account of the Tichborne case except for the enhanced role of Ben Bogle, although it has often been taken for a work of fiction.
  • The Link: A Victorian Mystery (1969) is a fictionalization of the Tichborne case by British novelist Robin Maugham.
  • Michael Innes' detective novel A Change of Heir (1966) has a plot very much along Tichborne Claimant lines, though its hero was provided with interminable diaries to make his recollections convincing.
  • The 1998 movie The Tichborne Claimant is loosely based on the facts of this case.
  • Mary Elizabeth Braddon's novel Aurora Floyd contains a quote written in Orton's notebook and used against him during his trial. It reads: "I should think fellows with plenty of money and no brains must have been created for the good of fellows with plenty of brains and no money."

[edit] References

  1. ^ University of Texas, Tarlton Law Library - notes on the Tichborne Case
  2. ^ Henderson, T. F. (2004) "Chabot, Charles (bap. 1815, d. 1882)", rev. John D. Haigh, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press , <accessed 27 July 2007> (subscription required)
  3. ^ [Anon.] (1911) "Sir Alexander Cockburn", Encyclopaedia Britannica
  4. ^ page 352 of The Tichborne Case
  5. ^ Morgan, Janet. Agatha Christie, A Biography. (Pages 113-115) Collins, 1984 ISBN 0-00-216330-6

[edit] Bibliography

  • Annear, R. (2002). The Man Who Lost Himself: The Unbelievable Story of the Tichborne Claimant. Melbourne, Australia: Text Publishing. ISBN-1-877008-17-6. 
  • Twain, Mark [1897]. "Chapter XV", Following the Equator. literaturecollection.com. Retrieved on 2007-05-06. 

[edit] External links