« PreviousContinue »
the back is partly obliterated, and entirely covered over with slips of paper, with the exception of the words, “ A Paris.”
On the contents of this letter I have only to observe, that between the words « that I have received,” and the words, “ new evidence yesterday,” one word, of three or four letters, has been lost, in consequence of a perforation made by tearing or rubbing out the substance of the paper at that spot.
The second letter, dated - London, April 23d, 1837," consists of two sheets of post paper. On the three first pages of the first sheet is contained the letter from which excerpts have been produced. The second sheet contains copies, in a different hand, of the five documents therein referred to. These
pages; and on the fourth page the address has been written, but is now obliterated and covered over, except the words, “ A Paris."
The first and second of these sheets are of different kinds of paper, and that the first was enclosed in the second there is no evidence, but their general correspondence in size. It is only from the first sheet that excerpts have been produced, the contents of the second being the five documents produced in process, and already printed.
Of the letter itself, a great many lines and passages have been either obliterated or covered by slips of paper. The places and extent of these omissions will be best understood by the annexed transcript of the excerpts, in which corresponding spaces have been left. A few words, not given in the excerpts, but which are not obliterated on the original, have been given in this transcript.
In examining the post marks on these letters, I have availed myself of the skill of Mr Bokenham, superintending president of the inland department of the London Post Office, and of Mr Joseph Moule, president of the general sorting office in Edinburgh, both of whom have been intimately conversant in the business of their departments. On their authority I am warranted in reporting, that the Post Office stamps impressed on these letters are genuine, and correspond with the dates of the letters. But on examining the postages marked on the second of these letters, they have expressed a confident opinion that it must have passed through the London Post Offices as a single letter; and that the second sheet, above described, could not have contained within it the other sheet on which the letter of April 23, 1837, is written.
(Signed) · Tho. THOMSON.
EXCERPTS from Letters from Mr EUGENE JOHN ALEX
ANDER, Son of the EARL OF STIRLING, to his Father.
London, April 22d. 26.
your 24. My Dear Father,
At į to seven to-night, I write a few hasty lines to say, that I received ...... new evidence yesterday, and ever since have so occupied as not to be able to do any thing —not write a letter. It contained 4 documents, and a beautiful portrait of John of Antrim
haste. I will write on Monday full particulars.
Your affectionate Son,
I opened this letter again from the misdirection.
London, April 23d, 1837. My Dear Father,
You will receive my 26 of yesterday with the great news of the new evidence. I now proceed to give you full particulars. I received your last (24,) on Friday morning, and went to Golden Square to see W. Pearson and Angela. It was on my return home that I called at De Porquet and Co. about 2 o'clock, when the young man at the counter said, that they had received a packet by the 2d post about an hour before I called, which he put into my hands. It was directed to Messrs De Porquet and Co. 11, Tavistock St. Covent Garden, London. They had opened it, and found the following note with another packet, addressed - The Right Honble. the Earl of Stirling." The note was as follows, in a lady's hand, without disguise, “Mrs Innes Smyth's compliments,” &c. (here the note is copied.) I took the packet with the cover and note to De Porquet just as they received it. in my pocket upon my getting home,
and taking off the cover to De Porquet, I read again the note, and examined the packet addressed functionary, to have his testimony of being present at the breaking of the seal. I then went to Lockhart, (who is living close by me, having taken lodgings in Surrey St.)
I sat to consider what I would do. It all at once struck me, that I would go before a magistrate, or some other public
To resume and consulted with him. He highly approved of my idea, and advised me to go to our solicitors, Fennell and Vaux, and ask thein, as English lawyers, whether it was the proper mode of proceeding to go to a magistrate. I saw Fennell, and after long debating, he said that never having had any thing similar to it before, he really did not know what to advise. It was too late that night to get any thing done. We then fixed 10 o'clock yesterday morning for Lockhart and all of us to meet at their office. We decided at last when we met, that a public notary was the proper person to open the packet. Fennell and I then got into a cab, and to the great notaries of the Royal Exchange. The packet was then opened, and within it another packet cased in parchment, was discovered with the following words upon it, “ Some of my wife's family papers." In an instant, I exclaimed, “ That is my grandfather's handwriting!” The parchment packet was sealed with three black seals--all the same impression, evidently my grandfather's seals,—not like those we have. I cannot describe them. We then examined the cover-it was addressed to you as before mentioned, and inside are the following remarkable words :—66 The enclosed was in a small cash box,” &c. (here copied at length.) Here follows the notary's certificate upon the same paper, “ This note was opened in my presence,” &c. (here the certificate is copied.) The sheet of paper is a mourning one, with a deep black edge round, owing to the death of the thief. The notary then said his duty ended there; as he could not venture to witness the parchment packet, he said we must go to Doctors' Commons before a Proctor. We then went to the Proctor, Thomas Blake. Here we were five hours. I cut the parchment, and four persons as witnesses watched me. I cut over the middle black seal, and was then able to draw out the contents. I refer you now to the copies of the documents accompanying this letter; they have all been numbered by the Proctor, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. No. 4, Lockhart tells me, we need not produce in Court, because it is only a beautiful miniature painting of John of Antrim, which I had better perhaps get framed, that it may not be spoiled. There is also the pedigree beautifully executed both by the same person, Mr Thomas Campbell, and dated 1759.
tents of the parchment packet must, I suppose, have remained untouched, if it was put up just before the removal to Fair Hill, 50 years which accounts for the admirable state of preservation it is in. The thief never dared break the seals. The Proctor and the other three witnesses have put their initials upon every document, and a formal paper has been drawn up and signed by all 4, to prove that they all saw the packet opened.
The Proctor also made verbatim copies of every document, which have been compared with the originals, and signed by the examiners.
You will see that the inscription is now made a good document, being confirmed by the letters of B. Alexander, and A. E. Baillie.
The cause is enrolled to be heard on the 31st of May.
Seventeen lines covered.
Good news to-day that reassure her. I must close for want of room.
your affectionate son, (R. 26.)
Ε. Ι. Α.
On page 4th, a P.S. of six lines, covered over.
FEBRUARY 28, 1839.
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND PRODUCTIONS
THE OFFICERS OF STATE
ALEXANDER, EARL OF STIRLING.
“ Edinburgh, December 22, 1838.— The preceding Excerpts having been produced in process, the Lords, on the motion of the Lord Advocate, appoint the original letters to be exhibited to the Clerk of Court, and direct him to compare the same with these Excerpts, and to report on such points thereanent as he shall find proper, for the information of the Court; and appoint the Excerpts, with the Report thereon, to be printed and boxed quam primum.
“D. BOYLE, I.P.D."
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND PRODUCTIONS
THE OFFICERS OF STATE, Pursuers,
ALEXANDER, EARL OF STIRLING, Defender. Edinburgh, February 12, 1839.- Since the date of the foregoing Report, there has been transmitted to me a letter, addressed by the solicitors in London for Lord Stirling, to Lieut.-Col. Maberly, with a certificate indorsed thereon by one of the officers in the foreign department of the Post-Office, relative to the post-marks on the letter of the 24th April,