THE STORY OF SEVENOAKS. 
83 
liberty to procure the signature of the pat- 
entee.” 
“ I did not. I refused to do so on the 
ground that he was not of sound mind — 
that he was not a responsible person.” 
“ When was this ? ” 
I have no record of the date, but it was 
after the 12th of May, i860 — the date of Mr. 
Benedict’s admission to the asylum.” 
“ That is all,” said Mr. Balfour. 
Mr. Cavendish tried to cross-examine, but 
without any result, except to emphasize the 
direct testimony, though he tried persistently 
to make the witness remember that, while 
Mr. Belcher might have shown him the as- 
signment, and that he read it for the pur- 
pose which he had stated, it was another 
paper to which he had wished to secure the 
patient’s signature. 
Samuel Yates was next called. 
“You are a member of our profession, I 
believe,” said Mr. Balfour. 
“ I am, sir.” 
“ Have yoh ever been in the service of 
the defendant in this case ? ” 
“ Yes, sir.” 
“ What have you done for him ? ” 
“ I worked many months in the endeavor 
to ascertain whether Paul Benedict was liv- 
ing or dead.” 
“ It isn’t essential that we should go into 
that; and as the defendant has testified that 
he procured the autograph letters which are 
in the possession of the Court from you, I 
presume you will corroborate his testimony.” 
“ He did procure them of me, sir.” 
“ Did he inform you of the purpose to 
which he wished to put them ? ” 
“ He did, sir. He said that he wished to 
verify some signatures.” 
“Were you ever employed in his library 
at Sevenoaks, by his agent ? ” 
“Yes, sir, I wrote there during several 
weeks.” 
“ May it please the Court, I have a letter 
in my hand, the genuineness of whose sig- 
nature has been recognized by the defend- 
ant, written by Robert Belcher to Paul Bene- 
dict, which, as it has a direct bearing upon 
the case, I beg the privilege of placing in 
evidence. It was written the next day after 
the date of the alleged assignment, and came 
inclosed from Benedict’s hands to mine.” 
Mr. Belcher evidently recalled the letter, 
for he sat limp in the chair, like a man 
stunned. A fierce quarrel then arose be- 
tween the counsel concerning the admission 
of the letter. The Judge examined it, and 
said that he could see no reason why it 
should not be admitted. Then Mr. Balfour 
read the following note : 
“ Sevenoaks, May 5, i860. 
“ Dear Benedict : I am glad to know that you 
are better. Since you distrust my pledge that I 
will give you a reasonable share of the profits on 
the use of your patents, I will go to your house this 
afternoon, with witnesses, and have an independent 
paper prepared, to be signed by myself, after the 
assignment is executed, which will give you a defi- 
nite claim upon me for royalty. We will be there 
at four o’clock. 
“Yours, Robert Belcher.” 
“ Mr. Yates,” said Mr. Balfour, “ have you 
ever seen this letter before ? ” 
Yates took the letter, looked it over, and 
then said : 
“ I have, sir. I found the letter in a 
drawer of the library-table, in Mr. Belcher’s 
house at Sevenoaks. I delivered it un- 
opened to the man to whom it was address- 
ed, leaving him to decide the question as to 
whether it belonged to him or the writer. I 
had no idea of its contents at the time, but 
became acquainted with them afterward, for 
I was present at the opening of the letter.” 
“ That is all,” said Mr. Balfour. 
“ So you stole this letter, did you ? ” in- 
quired Mr. Cavendish. 
“ I found it while in Mr. Belcher’s service, 
and took it personally to the man to whom 
it was addressed, as he apparently had the 
best right to it. I am quite willing to re- 
turn it to the writer, if it is decided that it 
belongs to him. I had no selfish end to 
serve in the affair.” 
Here the Judge interposed. 
“ The Court,” said he, “ finds this letter 
in the hands of the plaintiff, delivered by a 
man who at the time was in the employ of 
the defendant, and had the contents of the 
room in his keeping. The paper has a di- 
rect bearing on the case, and the Court will 
not go back of the facts stated.” 
Mr. Cavendish sat down and consulted 
his client. Mr. Belcher was afraid of Yates. 
The witness not only knew too much con- 
cerning his original intentions, but he was a 
lawyer who, if questioned too closely and 
saucily, would certainly manage to bring in 
facts to his disadvantage. Yates had al- 
ready damaged him sadly, and Mr. Belcher 
felt that it would not do to provoke a re- 
direct examination. So, after a whispered 
colloquy with his counsel, the latter told the 
witness that he was done with him. Then 
Mr. Belcher and his counsel conversed again 
for some time, when Mr. Balfour rose and 
said, addressing the Court : 
“ The defendant and his client evidently 
