« PredošláPokračovať »
age of a due proportion of first com- different. They never owned a commissions should remain with the mon sovereign till now, and they Council, and all else be vested in the have no natural, political, or adminauthorities in India. The Horse istrative unity. Steam communicaGuards must by all means be pre- tion brings them all near enough for vented from seizing the Indian com- instructions from home, and some mands and staff situations for their distinct responsibility in the local own favourites. Neither must it be governments would both avoid such left in their power to withdraw the disputes as have just arrested the European troops at pleasure. With progress of improvement in Madras, all dutiful respect for H. R. H. the and promote a noble emulation Duke of Cambridge, we cannot be among the rulers. At all events, satisfied to leave the safety of India each Presidency should be at liberty to the discretion of the Commander- to develop its own resources, and the in-Chief and the two Secretaries of Crown would derive more informaState. We know how much heavier tion and assistance from the un. the nearer alarms of this country shackled intelligence of the several would weigh in their counsels than Governments, than from melting all the distant and ill-understood neces- thought and action down in the Calsities of India. The very anxiety cutta crucible. It would be sufficient which the illustrious Duke displays to retain the supremacy of the Vicenot to “cripple the imperial re- roy in matters of war and general sources” by locking up a portion of politics, and let the internal adminthe army in India, satisfies us that a istration and finance be restored to legislative provision is indispensable. the local government. Such a diviIt ought to be enacted, at the very sion of responsibility would tend to least, that no regiment should be augment the native influence in the withdrawn from any Presidency in councils of their rulers. We cannot India without the written consent imagine the conditions under which of the local government.
a Legislative Council at Calcutta Another question requiring to be could ever enjoy the confidence of arranged by Parliament, is the rela- the heterogeneous populations of all tion between the Calcutta Govern India : in the several Presidenciés ment and those of the other Presiden- they would have more chance of cies. We can see no necessity for the securing attention to their respective stringent supremacy now exercised by wants and capabilities. We have the Governor-General and his Council experienced the advantage of their over every detail of administration. want of cohesion in putting down There is no greater fallacy than to the Bengal mutiny, and it seems only talk of India as a whole. There is fair to make it reciprocal. We cannot no such country in existence ;-10 but sympathise with the objection region where the natives call their made by the people of Malabar and
India,” or themselves “In- Madura to be taxed for the costs of dians.” It is a term of western geo- a mutiny in Oude and the Northgraphy, like “America,” or “Europe,” Western Provinces, which they not
Australia” – and indicates no only pever encouraged, but shed their greater necessity or feasibility of a blood to put down. central administration. The Punjab, In any case, we repeat, let us have the North-Western Provinces, Ben- an Indian policy, and adhere to it. gal, Madras, Bombay, and Pegu, are Let our foremost men be entrusted regions as distinct as Brazil and the with its administration. After disUnited States in America,-or_as placing the Company which won and Norway, Prussia, and Italy in Eu- kept our Eastern empire, we must rope. The soil, the produce, the not let the Imperial Crown drift into
. traditions of government, the com- its loss, through the incapacity, the merce, social habits, religion, race, neglect, or the wilfulness, of the new and very colour of the people, are administrators.
JUDICIAL PUZZLES.--THE ANNESLEY CASE,
When the Captain of the Great that he had been educated and Britain ran that unfortunate vessel acknowledged as such son until he on to the sands of Dundrum Bay, it was nine or ten years of age; that was urged in his excuse, that so many upon the death of his father he had marvellous tales are told about Ire- been kidnapped and sold for a slave land, that he was justified in con- in America ; that he had passed thircluding that no obstacle lay in his teen years in servitude, and at last road from the Isle of Man to New (after a series of romantic and not York; that Dublin was as fabulous very credible adventures, which have as Blefuscu; and that the Mourn nothing to do with our present submountains had no more real exist- ject) had effected bis escape. Adence than the loadstone hill which miral Vernon furnished him with proved fatal to the ship of Sindbad. the means of proceeding to England, The story we are about to tell, might where he arrived shortly afterwards. almost justify such incredulity; yet On his arrival in England he went it is only one of many equally strange to lodge at Staines, in the neighbourand equally well authenticated. hood of Windsor, and here a circum
In the year 1706, Arthur Lord stance occurred which had no doubt Altham, a needy and dissolute Irish a considerable effect on the subsepeer, married Mary Sheffield, an ille- quent proceedings. Oue of his assogitimate daughter of the Duke of ciates, a man of the name of Redding, Buckingham. They lived together was gamekeeper to Sir John Dolbini, for three years; but in 1709 Lord the Lord of the Manor. One mornAltham went to Ireland, leaving his ing James Annesley was out with a wife in England, where she remained gun shooting small birds, when Reduntil 1713, when she joined her hus- ding called him to assist in capturing band in Dublin. From that time a net with which a man of the name until 1716, they resided together, of Eyglestone was fishing in the principally at Dunmaine, in the river ; Annesley's gun unfortunately neighbourhood of Ross, in the county went off in the scuffle, and mortally of Wexford. In 1716 they separated, wounded Egglestone. There could under circumstances which we shall be little doubt that the discharge of presently have occasion to notice the gun was purely accidental; but more minutely, and never met again. Lord Anglesea (for Richard, Lord In 1727 Lord Altham died, and was Altham, had in the meantime suicsucceeded in his title and estates by ceeded to that title also) seized the his brother Richard Annesley, who opportunity to destroy, as he thought, remained in undisturbed possession the claimant of his title and estates. of both for a period of thirteen years. He instituted a prosecution against Lady Altham survived her husband James Annesley for murder; he was for about two years, which were prodigal of money and promises passed in sickness and poverty, but amongst the witnesses; and he dedoes not appear ever to have taken clared that he would willingly give any step to prevent Richard Annes- ten thousand pounds to get him ley's assumption of the character of hanged. The jury at the Old Bailey heir to her husband, to which, of acquitted Annesley, and Lord Ancourse, he would have had no title if glesea's machinations recoiled upon she had a son living at the time of bimself; for there can be no doubt Lord Altham's death. In the year that they greatly influenced both the 1739, however, a young man of about court and jury against him on the four-and-twenty years of age made subsequent trial. his appearance in the fleet which, On the 11th of November 1723 under the command of Admiral Ver- the trial for the recovery of the non, was lying off Porto-Bello. He estates came on in the Court of Excalled himself James Annesley, stated chequer in Dublin. It lasted fifteen that he was the son of Lord Altham, days, and above ninety witnesses
were examined. The issue between of concealed or doubtful marriage, or the parties was of the simplest and obscure birth, such as have frequently boldest character. On the one hand, occupied the courts. From the arit was asserted that, in the spring of rival of Lady Altham in Ireland unthe year 1715, Lady Altham had til her separation from her husband, been delivered at Dunmaine of a son a period of about three years, they and heir; that all the customary so- resided publicly together; kept a large lemnities and rejoicings, had taken establishment of servants, and visited place; that the child was uniformly ac- and associated with persons of the knowledged and treated both by Lord most various rank and position in and Lady Altham as their son ; that the neighbourhood. It seems increhe was shown and spoken of as such dible that any dispute should ever to visitors and friends; that when have arisen upon a point so easy of the separation between his parents proof as whether persons of their took place, the mother passionately rank, and so circumstanced, had or entreated that she might be per- had not a child; and as we read the mitted to take the child with her, evidence adduced, the testimony on which the father refused, keeping the one side seems absolutely conthe boy and educating him as the clusive, until it is met by contraheir to his title and estates. On the dictory evidence, to all appearance other hand, it was denied that Lady equally conclusive, on the other. Altham ever had a child at all. It The household at Dunmaine was was asserted that the very ground of large and disorderly, consisting of the separation between herself and sixteen or seventeen servants, from her husband was the discomfort and the English housekeeper, who was disappointment occasioned by her sent over by my lady," and who rebearing no heir ; that it was known joiced in the appropriate name of to every relation and visitor, to every Mrs Settright,' down to "Smutty servant in the house, that Lady Al the dog-boy, who was very ugly." tham never had a child ; that the Poor Smutty! immortalised by his servant who had attended her from ugliness. He shows his ill-faroured her arrival in Dublin to the hour countenance for a moment, and disof her death, who had dressed and appears into utter obscurity. Lord undressed her every morning and Altham had about him also a number evening, and had never been absent of hangers-on, and humble companfor more than one single week dur- ions; but besides these he associated ing the whole of that period, was with gentlemen of his own rank and living, and would prove, not only position; and one of the first witthat no child ever was born, but that nesses called on behalf of the claimthere never was the slightest chance ant was a Major Richard Fitzgerald. or probability that Lady Altham The Major deposed that in the would have a child. It is impossi- year 1715 he was in the town of ble to conceive a simpler issue or Ross, having had occasion to go there one which might be supposed to be on account of some business, arising easier for conclusive proof one way from the death of his uncle, a Mr or the other; yet two juries came Pigott, who lived in the county of to diametrically opposite conclusions, Wexford. In Ross he met Lord Aland so positive is the testimony on tham, who invited him to dinner. each side, that it seems even now, The Major excused himself, as he was after carefully reading the contra- engaged to dine with some brother dictory evidence which is preserved officersin upwards of five hundred columns of the State Trials, to be impossible dine with him, and come to drink some
“But Lord Altham said deponent must to arrive at any satisfactory result. It is to be observed that the ques
groaning drink, for that his wife was in tion raised in this case was not one
labour. Deponent told him that was a of personation or disputed identity. tham would not take an excuse, and
reasou he ought not go; but Lord AlIf Lady Altham ever had a son, it sent the deponent word the next day to was admitted that James Annesley Ross, that his wife was brought to bed of a was that son. Nor was the case one 80n; and the deponent went to Dun.
maine and dined there, and had some tham at a tavern in Dublin, the boy discourse about the child, and Lord Al- was sent for, and Lord Altham said tham swore that the depouent should to deponent, “You were seneschal see his son, and accordingly the nurse to Earl Arthur and Earl John, brought the child to deponent, and de- and you may be seneschal to the ponent kissed the child, and gave half-a
child." + guinea to the nurse ; and some of the company toasted the heir-apparent to
During the eight-and-twenty years Lord Anglesea at dinner. That this was
that had elapsed between the birth the day after the child was born : and of the child in 1715 and the trial deponent says that he left the country in 1743, it was to be expected that the next day, and went to the county of many of those whose evidence would Waterford, to his own house at Prospect have been most valuable should have Hall. Says deponent saw the woman to died; amongst them were those who whom he gave the half-guinea, this day stood sponsors for the child at its of his examination; that he remembers baptism; Mr Colclough, Mr Cliff
, her well, because he took notice of her and Mrs Pigott, members of families when he gave her the half-guinea, that still holding high positions in the she was very handsome ; that he did not stay at Dunmaine that night, but county of Wexford; but the fact of came to Ross at nightfall, and was at
the christening, the rejoicings that tacked in the road by robbers ; that he took place, the bonfires and festivicrossed the ferry on his return home- ties, were proved by servants who remembers that Lord Altham was in high lived in the house at the time, and spirits with the thoughts of having a son proved repeatedly and consistently. and heir."
It is impossible within the narrow
limits of an article to give even an It seems impossible to add to the outline of the evidence of the fifty force of this testimony. No attempt witnesses who were called to substanwas made to impeach the character tiate the claimant's case. It would or credibility of the witness. Every; seem almost needless to strengthen thing concurred to fix the time and the evidence of Major Fitzgerald circumstances in his mind ; mistake and John Turner. Every conceivable appears impossible; and no motive confirmation, however, was given. is assignable for wilful falsehood. Friends of Lord Altham swore to Nor is the evidence given by the conversations with him, in which he next witness less conclusive. John had spoken in the most open manner Turner was seneschal to Lord of his son, and of the disappointAnglesea. He had lived at Dun- ment of his brother's expectations maine for ten years ; he had visited of being his heir. Witnesses were Lord Altham; and soon after his produced who had been present and own marriage, which took place in assisting at the very birth of the December 1714, he observed ap- child; and it is very remarkable that, pearance of pregnancy in Lady Al- although these witnesses were drawn tham. He says, that the next time from every rank of life, no successhe saw Lady Altham she told him ful attempt was made to impeach she had a son ; that he afterwards the credibility of any of them, nor saw the boy, and had him in his was any inconsistency to be disarms at Dunmaine when he was covered in their testimony further about a year and half old; that Lady than might be satisfactorily acAltham led the child across the par counted for by the long period that lour, and Lord Altham kissed him had elapsed betwen the events to and called him “Jemmy;" that he which they spoke and the time saw the child subsequently at Ross, when they gave their evidence. and afterwards at Kinnay and Car- now come, however, to the most rickduft, after the separation be- remarkable conflict of testimony tween Lord and Lady Altham, when which occurs in the whole case. A he was treated by his father in all woman of the name of Joan Laffan respects as his legitimate son ; that was called. She deposed that she in the year 1722, meeting Lord Al- entered Lord Altham's service in
* State Trials, vol. xvii. 1153.
+ 1b., vol. xvii. 1154.
1715; that she was employed as lord, with some difficulty, consented, nursemaid to attend on the child as and' then my lady drove away to soon as he came from the wet-nurse; Ross.” + that he was at that time three or four Such is Joan Laffan's story, and months old, and was in her charge we must keep in mind that at a subfor about a year and a half; that he sequent period it was confirmed by was treated in all respects as their another witness; I but in the mean child by both Lord and Lady Altham, time, let us turn to Palliser's account who showed great fondness for him, of the same transaction. and into whose bedroom she was in He stated that when he was very the babit of bringing the child in the young, he spent much of his time at morning.
Dunmaine, which was within about She then gave an account of the three miles of his father's resiseparation between Lord and Lady dence, and used to ride Lord AlAltham. “It was,” she said, “on tham's horses hunting. That one account of Tom Palliser.”. “My Lord day as they were returning home, had laid a plot against him, and on Lord Altham told him that he was one Sunday morning pretended to determined to part with his lady; my lady that he was obliged to go and upon deponent's asking him his out to dinner. That Mr Palliser reasons, my lord replied, “I find breakfasted with my lord, and they Lord Anglesea will not be in friendhad a bottle of mulled wine for ship with me while I live with this breakfast. As soon as my lord was woman, and since I have no child gone out, Mr Palliser went into my by her, I will part with her.” Pallady's room, and, the plot having liser then gives an account, in all been laid before, a signal was made material circumstances the same as that brought my lord back; that my Joan Laffan's, of his being entrapped lord ran up with his sword, and had by Lord Altham into his wife's him brought out of the room, and the room, and falsely accused of being groom came to Palliser and said to there for an improper purpose; he him, 'Is this the way you keep my takes off his wig and shows the jury lady company ?' and took out a case- where his ear was cut, solemnly asknife in order to cut his nose, but he severates the innocence of Lady Al. was ordered only to cut his ear. tham, and declares not only that no That deponent wus stanıling by in child was present upon that occasion, the room, and she had the child in but that he “
never saw a child in her hand, and he showed her the blood the house." Upon this the Court, out of Palliser's ear; it was the soft“ apprehending that there was some part of the ear that was cut, and the contradiction between the evidence chill pointed at the blood that came of Palliser and that of Joan Laffan," out of the ear."* The same witness as indeed they well might, ordered deposed that “she was present when Laffan to be recalled, and the two my lord and lady parted; that she witnesses to be confronted. Each saw my lady at the door with the repeated the story, each was equally child in her arms; that my
clear, distinct, and positive. We out of the house in a great rage, and have said that Joan Laftan's evidence asked where his child was, and upon was subsequently confirmed by anbeing told that he was with his other witness, who deponed to havmother, he ran up to her and snatch- ing been present at the parting of ed the child out of her arms; that Lady Altham and her child. The my lady begged very hard she might same is, however, the case with the take the child along with her, but testimony of Palliser, which was my lord swore he would not part with confirmed by Mary Heath, Lady Althe child upon any consideration; tham's woman, who went with her that my lady, finding she could not in the carriage to Ross, and who prevail, burst out a - crying, and swore, most positively, that no such begged' she might at least give the child 'ever was in existence. It is child one parting kiss; that my to be observed that Palliser and
* State Trials, vol. xvii. 1280.
+ Ib., vol. xvii. 1168, 1170.
I 16., 94.