itness; a suppressed
titter arose from the body of the Court, and a faint voice from the
bench inquired:

"Are you _quite_ incapable of giving a straightforward answer?"

Miss Dobbs' only reply was to burst into tears; whereupon Mr. Loram
abruptly sat down and abandoned his re-examination.

The witness-box vacated by Miss Dobbs was occupied successively by Dr.
Norbury, Mr. Hurst and the cloak-room attendant, none of whom
contributed any new facts, but merely corroborated the statements made
by Mr. Jellicoe and the housemaid. Then came the laborer who
discovered the bones at Sidcup, and who repeated the evidence that he
had given at the inquest, showing that the remains could not have been
lying in the watercress-bed more than two years. Finally Dr. Summers
was called, and, after he had given a brief description of the bones
that he had examined, was asked by Mr. Loram:

"You have heard the description that Mr. Jellicoe has given of the
testator?"

"I have."

"Does that description apply to the person whose remains you examined."

"In a general way it does."

"I must ask you for a direct answer--yes or no. Does it apply?"

"Yes. But I ought to say that my estimate of the height of the
deceased is only approximate."

"Quite so. Judging from your examination of those remains and from Mr.
Jellicoe's description, might those remains be the remains of the
testator, John Bellingham?"

"Yes, they might."

On receiving this admission Mr. Loram sat down, and Mr. Heath
immediately rose to cross-examine.

"When you examined these remains, Doctor Summers, did you discover any
personal peculiarities which would enable you to identify them as the
remains of any one individual rather than any other individual of
similar size, age, and proportions?"

"No. I found nothing that would identify the remains as those of any
particular individual."

As Mr. Heath asked no further questions, the witness received his
dismissal, and Mr. Loram informed the Court that that was his case.
The judge bowed somnolently, and then Mr. Heath rose to address the
Court on behalf of the respondent. It was not a long speech, nor was
it enriched by any displays of florid rhetoric; it concerned itself
exclusively with a rebutment of the arguments of the counsel for the
petitioner.

Having briefly pointed out that the period of absence was too short to
give rise of itself to the presumption of death, Mr. Heath continued:

"The claim