were executed by his brother in his lifetime (which were among those which had been discovered), and in which the circumstances of the concealed marriage and the birth of the claimant were acknowledged, it was useless for him to deny the justice of the demand, and he recognised his nephew without demur.  But the excitement of the interview was too great for his failing strength, and he was found dead in bed next morning.  Thus all the hopes of the real heir were dashed to the ground, for it was not to be expected that the next-of-kin, who knew nothing of the supposed Provis, or of Sir Hugh’s marriage, would yield up the estates to an utter stranger, without a severe struggle and a desperate litigation.  He, therefore, refrained from putting forth his pretensions, and travelled the country with his wife and children, obtaining a precarious living by delivering lectures; and he took no steps to enforce his rights until 1851, when, after negotiations with several legal firms, he at length found the means of pursuing his claims before the tribunals of his country.

In support of the plaintiff’s case a number of documents, family relics, portraits, rings, seals, &c, were put in evidence.  At the time when the marriage was said to have taken place there was no public registration in Ireland, but a Family Bible was produced which bore on a fly-leaf a certification by the Vicar of Lismore that a marriage had been solemnized on the 19th of May, 1796, “between Hugh Smyth of Stapleton, in the county of Gloucester, England, and Jane, daughter of Count John Samuel Vandenbergh, by Jane, the daughter of Major Gookin and Hesther, his wife, of Court Macsherry, county of Cork, Ireland.”  In the same Bible was an entry of the plaintiffs baptism, signed by the officiating clergyman.  A brooch was produced with the name of Jane Gookin upon it, and a portrait of the claimant’s mother, as well as a letter addressed by Sir Hugh Smyth to his wife on the eve of her delivery, in which he introduced a nurse to her.  Besides these, there were two formal documents which purported to be signed by Sir Hugh Smyth, in which he solemnly declared the plaintiff to be his son.  The first of these declarations was written when the baronet was in extreme ill-health, in 1822, and was witnessed by his brother John and three other persons.  It was discovered in the possession of a member of the family of Lydia Reed, the plaintiff’s nurse.  The second paper, which was almost the same in its terms, was discovered in the keeping of an attorney’s clerk, who had formerly lived in Bristol.  The following is a copy of it:—­