his wife, was ready to prove
their residence there. And they not only maintained that dark work had
been carried on in Paris by the parties concerned in the affair, but
alleged that Sir John Stewart, Lady Jane Douglas, and Mrs. Hewit, had
stolen from French parents the children which they afterwards foisted
upon the public as real Douglases.

The claimant, and those representing him, on their part, brought
forward the depositions of several witnesses that Lady Jane Douglas
appeared to them to be with child while at Aix-la-Chapelle and other
places, and put in evidence the sworn testimony of Mrs. Hewit, who
accompanied the newly-wedded pair to the continent, as to the actual
delivery of her ladyship at Paris upon the 10th of July 1748. They
also submitted the depositions of independent witnesses as to the
recognition of the claimant by Sir John (then Mr.) Stewart and his
wife, and produced a variety of letters which had passed between Sir
John Stewart, Lady Jane Douglas, Mrs. Hewit, and others as to the
birth. They also added to their case four letters, which purported to
emanate from Pierre la Marre, whom they represented to have been the
accoucheur at the delivery of Lady Jane.

Sir John Stewart, Lady Jane's husband, and the reputed father of the
claimant, died in June 1764; but, before his decease, his depositions
were taken in the presence of two ministers and of a justice of the
peace. He asserted, "as one slipping into eternity, that the defendant
(Archibald Stewart) and his deceased twin-brother were both born of
the body of Lady Jane Douglas, his lawful spouse, in the year 1748."

The case came before the Court of Session on the 17th of July 1767,
when no fewer than fifteen judges took their seats to decide it.
During its continuance Mrs. Hewit, who was charged with abetting the
fraud, died; but before her death she also, like Sir John Stewart,
formally and firmly asserted, with her dying breath, that her evidence
in the matter was unprejudiced and true. After a patient hearing seven
of the judges voted to "sustain the reasons of reduction," and the
other seven to "assoilzie the defender." In other words, the bench was
divided in opinion, and the Lord President, who has no vote except as
an umpire in such a dilemma, voted for the Hamilton or illegitimacy
side, and thus deprived Archibald Douglas, or Stewart, of both the
title and the estates.

But a matter of such importance could not, naturally, be allowed