‘Unhappily, yes. There are flaws, not many, but one or two serious ones, in the chain of evidence. I have no moral doubt myself that the marriage we have discovered is truly that of your father and mother. But moral proofs are not enough in a court of justice. Our difficulty will be to establish identity between this Corporal William Smith and the missing Herbert Farrington.’
‘Mrs. Larkins will swear to him.’
‘She never knew him as Farrington. All she can do is to describe the person she knew as Smith, who ran off with her sister, and we must compare her description with that of Lady Farrington.’
‘But there was the letter addressed and sent to Lady Farrington after my mother’s death; surely that will go some way?’
‘It is a strong presumption, I don’t deny; but not necessarily sufficient, at least to a British jury, when titles and large possessions are at stake. That was why I counselled compromise.’
‘Was it rejected?’
‘Indignantly. Threats, moreover, were used, as perhaps you have heard.’
‘Mrs. Cavendish-Diggle was at the bottom of that, I suppose? She, as heir apparent, would be a principal loser, supposing things remained as they are.’
‘Are you not aware of the change in her prospects? There is a lawful male heir, independent of you, I hear. Ernest Farrington left a son.’
‘A son? By Mimie? He married her, then? Thank heaven for that! If, indeed, it be true.’