THE TICHBORNE CLAIMANT

Butcher or Baronet ? If he
was neither, who was he ?
By Sir DESMOND MORTON
THE TICHBORNE CLAIMANT, by Douglas Woodruff & Carter, 30s.).
WERE you the eldest on of a rich Catholic baronet, brought up in relative luxury. educated at a public school, thereafter holding a commission in a cavalry regiment for four years; had you elected at the age of 24, to travel and subsequentlt to disappear: had you reappeared 12 years later. being recognised for ilia you claimed to be despite great changes in tour appearance, not only bt a number of former friends hut even by your alleged mother. would you think it LIMcult to prove your identity even in face of strong opposition?
At the same time, had you for the first 24 y OM'S Of S, our life enjoyed the echnsation and environment described. could t ou in the next twelve years, whatever life you had led in the meantime. have lost almost all trace of culture? Would yOU he unable to write educated English, or to speak an Frencha language more familiar to you than our mother-tongue 12 years previouslt7 Could you mistake Greek letters for Latin?
VouId ou, at the age of only 36. give a fantasticallt inaccurutc description of the school t ou had attended between the ages of 16 and 19? If. on leaving England 12 years helme, you had been deeply in love with a young lady and had left with la VS ycrs a sealed packet concerning her. containing a bequest Of real importance, could )011 have so far forgotten this as to be incapable of describing. even roughly. the contents of the packet?
MARATHON TRIALS
ON the other hand, were you a crooked adventurer posing as the long-lost heir, iel‘ irig on your own cunning to extract unobtrusivelt from credulous friends and supporters convincing details of tour supposed former life. would ou not have taken the utmost care. before y MI emharked on so perilous 2L swindle. to prepare a cast-iron stort explaining why you had made no contact with t our friends and family for twelve years; why yOU had elected to reappear when you did and how it
Invitation to Navarre
NAVARRE, The Fie,Itclwccii Two Monkeys. by Nina Epton (Cassell 25s.).
THIS book is a travel hook in
the highest tradition., it concerns itielf with less familiar ground. it digs deep and turns the soil with a natives sureness.
The author creates prospective travellers by the eacellence of her nartative, and then provides them all the invaluable information sneh a knowiedaialhie traveller Lanni-es-though she 1.ncierro at the Fiesta of St. 1-onon at Pamplona might perhaps best be
was you had forgotten so much of your not far distant past?
For years, these and similar questions locked the British public IL) the exclusion of iflatters of
normally greater interest. 1 here were two trials at law: the first being " the Claimant's" attempt to .prove himself none other than Sir Roger Tichborne, baronet: the second when that claim failed, the prosecution of the Claimant on charges of perjury, forgery, falsepretences and the like.
The were two of the •longest Iiials in British legal histors. At the criminal trial. the speech for the defence lasted for two months. yvhile the Judge summed-up for a ahole month. The jury found the Claimant guilty and that he vvas really a butcher, named Arthur Orton. He eas sentenced to 14 years' penal servitude. Released on ticket of leave in
I 84 toed until 1898. still protesting that he was the genuine Roger Tichborne.
NO FINAL VERDICT
1-11"ek b1.11AS have
" dealt with this astonishing story, notably one by Lord Maugham, published in 1936. The best of them, however, have dealt chiefly on the legal espects: whether the trials were fair and whether the jury reached their conclusions ,correctly upon the evidence brought before them. Most people will agree that they did. through not all will consider the trials perfectly condocted. But the real issue inspiring Mr. Woodruff's present work is whether the right evidence, and all available evidence. was before the jury. His book sets out for the first time facts which have never before been published, together ith others arising after the which. nevertheless. bear deeply upon the truth.
isle Woodruff's account. superb in its studious impartiality. brilliant in exposition and of passionate interest as the balance of interest swings alternatively in favour of either side, makes no attempt to reach a final verdict. Nor indeed does it now seem possible that certainty can ever be achieved. Each reader ma s form his own opinions, but. in the light of the additional facts revealed, it does not Neerll now that the Claimant can have been Arthur Orion.
It is more difficult without further information arid explanation to accept him as Roger Tichborne; though imagination can invent a tale to reconcile the glaring inconsistencies of his statements.
Bot if he was neither Arthur Orton nor Roger Tichborne, who oas he ?