history. The defender sets forth, that, on the 12th of July, 1837, he received information of the existence of an old map of Canada, containing certain documents concerning his family, partly written, partly pasted on its back, from Mademoiselle Marie Anne Le Normand, whom he is pleased to style "An authoress of some note, who keeps a library in Paris, and possesses a considerable collection of unpublished MSS."

Mademoiselle Le Normand is undoubtedly a person "of some note," since she turns out to be no other than the person who acquired such questionable celebrity under the Empire, as a Sibyl and Diviner, mixed up in many of the intrigues of the Court of Napoleon, and the Empress Josephine. She appears now to have fallen somewhat in station, though she still practises the arts of divination for hire.

The documents thus furnished are not traced by the defender to any higher source than that of Mademoiselle Le Normand. What they want, however, in extrinsic or historical evidence, is supplied by a profusion of attestations of their genuineness by persons of high contemporary celebrity.

These papers, the most important of which purport to be a private and confidential letter from a supposed ancestor of the defender, and a copy of an inscription on a tomb in Ireland, which cannot, upon any theory, be supposed to have interested any human being except the defender or the family with which he claims to be connected, and the succession to which did not open by the failure of the direct line til long after, are yet actually authenticated by the alleged holograph attestations of such persons as Flechier, Bishop of Nismes, and the illustrious Fenelon. They are farther dignified by a note which is gravely said to be in the hand-writing of Louis XV. a prince who is believed to have written only two words in his reign, his own name Louis R. and the word "bon," as an approval of any document submitted to him. His disapproval was marked by a line deleting the proposal, to save the fatigue of further penmanship, which indeed he so carefully eschewed, that even his notes to his mistresses were written by a secretary.

It may perhaps be considered superfluous to say that these documents, coming from such opposite channels, united in filling up the chasms in the evidence of the defender's pedigree, and supplied-precisely the two links which were pointed out by the Lord Ordinary as wanting.

A difficulty had occurred in the defender's case from the pursuers having proved that a certain John Alexander, who was married to the daughter and heiress of Graham of Gartmore, and whose son the defender claimed as an ancestor, had no son by that marriage. The defender had not discovered nor alleged any other marriage: but in the argument at the bar, he took it for granted that John Alexander was twice married, as the only solution of the difficulty.

The present documents furnish the name of John Alexander's second wife, the date of the marriage, and all other necessary particulars.

The Lord Ordinary had set aside as inadmissible or improbative, an alleged copy of a tomb-stone inscription.

The same inscription, copied word for word, is among the documents furnished by Mademoiselle Le Normand, and it has the advantage of an attestation by an unknown W. C. Gordon, junr.

These extraordinary coincidences, and the singularity of such important evidence coming to light from two quarters, exactly in time to stay the advising of the action, require explanation.

It is unnecessary to point out how much importance attaches to the custody of documents, thus tendered in evidence more than a century after their apparent date. That is felt in all cases of this nature, and certainly not less forcibly felt, when, as in the present case, the documents appear recently to have passed through the hands of an unknown thief-his anonymous relatives-an undiscovered lady of Staffordshire-and a French juggling intriguante. In seeking for some information of their previous custody and history, the pursuers are met by difficulties at the outset, which only the defender can remove-not by the guarded statements of his law advisers, but by undergoing a full and searching personal examination.

The pursuers submit, that they might in strict law go to issue with the defender, on the admissibility of the documents he tenders. They do not, however, demand that they be withdrawn. On the contrary, they hold it of great importance, that they should be detained in the hands of the Court, and they submit, that it is not only necessary for the proper investigation of this important case, but also essential to the ends of justice, that the defender should be examined judicially, in the presence or under the authority of the Court, with regard to the whole circumstances of the alleged discovery of the documents tendered by him in evidence.

Your Lordships are therefore moved to refuse hoc statu the desire of the defender, that he may produce the documents tendered, as evidence in causa; and farther, to appoint the defender to be judicially examined, relative to these documents; or to do otherwise in the premises as to your Lordships shall seem just.

In respect whereof, &c.

C. INNES.

No. VI.

SECOND DIVISION.

DEC. 18, 1838.

DECLAR. RED. - OFFICERS OF STATE,

AGAINST

ALEXANDER.

JUDICIAL DECLARATION

OF THE

DEFENDER in the Action of REDUCTION-IMPROBATION, &c. The OFFICERS OF STATE,

AGAINST

ALEXANDER, calling himself EARL OF STIRLING.

At Edinburgh, in the Second Division of the Court of Session, on the 18th day of December, 1838, in pursuance of an interlocutory order of the Lords made on the 11th day of December current, Compeared Alexander Earl of Stirling, and interrogated by the Lord Advocate, If he had read the

condescendence given in in his name? Declares, That he has. Interrogated, If he desires to make any additions or alterations on that condescendence? Declares, That he is ready to make any further explanations that may be asked. Interrogated, When he was first made acquainted with the note issued by Lord Cockburn, December 10th, 1836 ? Declares, That he was not made acquainted with that, or any part of his Lordship's judgment or proceedings, till the month of March or April following, except as to their general import, which he had learned from the letters addressed to him by his own family. Interrogated, If in the month of December he had not been made acquainted with the note of December 10th, accompanying the draught of an interlocutor which Lord Cockburn intended to pronounce? Declares, That he was not; and even now knows not any thing of the particulars of that note. Interrogated, If he did not receive in the course of the month of December, some information touching the interlocutor which Lord Cockburn, on the 10th of that month, had intimated his intention to pronounce? Declares, Certainly not. Interrogated, If it is to be understood, that during that month of December he had received no communication of the judgment which on the 10th Lord Cockburn had intimated his purpose of issuing? Declares, None whatever; and for this best of reasons, that he was then travelling. Interrogated, If there was any professional person in this Court, or resident at Edinburgh, who usually informed him of the course of proceedings in this cause? Declares, No professional person; but generally he received such information from members of his own family. Interrogated, If in the said month of December any member of his family, or any other person, gave him any information relative to what had been done by Lord Cockburn on the 10th of December? Declares, None whatever: Declares, That he set out on the 18th of December, 1836, to go to France. Interrogated, Under what name he travelled into France? Declines to answer on a point entirely private, further than that he did travel incognito, for economical reasons; the name by which he did travel appeared in his passport. No person travelled along with him: Declares, That a letter was written to Madlle. Le Normand, by Lady Stirling, some time before he set out for Paris; about nine or ten months before: That the reason for this correspondence arose from the previous proceedings in this Court for proving the tenour of a certain charter; and the evidence having been

thought insufficient, he had become desirous of having the records of Annapolis examined, in the view of obtaining further proofs on that matter; and in consequence of the extensive acquaintance of Madile. Le Normand with literary persons, and her known facilities of communication with persons high in office, he was induced to communicate through Lady Stirling with her on that subject; and particularly to request her to bend all her endeavours to find out any documents or charters relative to the possessions of the family of Stirling in that country: That he had never dreamed of seeking in France for documents illustrative of his own pedigree; and it was with the greatest surprise that he afterwards learned that those documents, since produced, had been discovered, and were calculated to throw light on that pedigree; and, in fact, no one was more surprised. Interrogated, Where he had obtained his passport? Declines to answer, being private,and being then in pecuniary difficulties, and unwilling to compromise his friends. He arrived in Paris on the 21st of December-Did not see Madlle. Le Normand for some time; and did not approach her house unless on very particular occasions, when requested by his family. Interrogated, If there was any one week, from his arrival in Paris till the month of June thereafter, that he did not see Madlle. Le Normand? Declares, That for many weeks he did not see her, and only saw her occasionally as above stated. Declares, That he met at Madlle. Le Normand's with a person of the name of Triboul, her private secretary or amanuensis; and this only once or twice for a very short time, and after the discovery of the document. Interrogated, If he did not meet Triboul frequently at Maddle. Le Normand's, and remain in conference with him for hours, and this prior to the discovery of the document? Declares, Certainly not; and never saw him or heard of his name till after the document had been discovered,-when at the declarant's request a copy was made by Triboul, he being a medical student employed by her as an amanuensis, as he understands: and this was for him to bring over to England, to be laid before his counsel; which he did accordingly. Interrogated, Did he grant Madlle. Le Normand any obligation for 400,000 francs, or any other sum in case he should succeed in these proceedings? Declares, That he had received advances of money from Madlle. Le Normand long before the time in question, and more than twenty years ago, and owed her a great deal of money: That she had besides been at great expense in making researches in France, in Germany, and in Holland, for