t liberty to go
where he pleased, when he pleased, and how he pleased; and that
therefore there was no need for him to abscond. I reply, if he was at
liberty to go away, whither, when, and how he pleased, why do we express
surprise that he has made use of his liberty? My learned friend points
out that the testator notified to nobody his intention of going away and
has acquainted no one with his whereabouts; but, I ask, whom should he
have notified? He was responsible to nobody; there was no one dependent
upon him; his presence or absence was the concern of nobody but himself.
If circumstances suddenly arising made it desirable that he should go
abroad, why should he not go? I say there was no reason whatever.

"My learned friend has said that the testator went away leaving his
affairs to take care of themselves. Now, gentlemen, I ask you if this
can fairly be said of a man whose affairs are, as they have been for
years, in the hands of a highly capable, completely trustworthy agent
who is better acquainted with them than the testator himself? Clearly it
cannot.

"To conclude this part of the argument: I submit that the circumstances
of the so-called disappearance of the testator present nothing out of
the ordinary. The testator is a man of ample means, without any
responsibilities to fetter his movements and has been in the constant
habit of travelling, often into remote and distant regions. The mere
fact that he has been absent somewhat longer than usual affords no
ground whatever for the drastic proceeding of presuming his death and
taking possession of his property.

"With reference to the human remains which have been mentioned in
connection with the case I need say but little. The attempt to connect
them with the testator has failed completely. You yourselves have Heard
Doctor Summers state on oath that they cannot be identified as the
remains of any particular person. That would seem to dispose of them
effectually. I must remark upon a very singular point that has been
raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, which is this:

"My learned friend points out that these remains were discovered near
Eltham and near Woodford and that the testator was last seen alive at
one of these two places. This he considers for some reason to be a
highly significant fact. But I cannot agree with him. If the testator
had been last seen alive at Woodford and the remains had been found at
Woodford, or if he had disappeared