“That it has been legally acknowledged by the experts that this letter is written in the hand of Lorenzo Chiappini.
“That the word of a dying man is proof in full, since he has no longer any interest in lying, and it is to be presumed that he is thinking only of his eternal salvation.
“That such a confession ought to be looked upon as a solemn oath, and as a bequest made for the good of his soul and his own salvation.
“That the Trustee would vainly endeavour to deprive the said letter of its force, on account of its containing no indication as to who were the real father and mother of the Plaintiff; since although, in fact, such indication is really wanting, recourse has been had, on the part of this same Plaintiff, to the testimony of witnesses, to presumptions and conjectures.
“That, where there exists in writing a beginning of proof, as in the present case, it is allowable, even in State questions, to introduce testimonial proof and all other evidence.
“That if, in questions of State, after the original written proof, that by means of witnesses is admissible; there is still stronger reason to accept the same proof in this case when a document is produced to be used in the question of State.
“Whereas, from the sworn legal depositions of the sisters, Maria and Dominica Bandini, it is clearly shown that there was an agreement between M. le Comte and le Sieur Chiappini to exchange their respective children, should Mme. la Comtesse give birth to a girl and Chiappini’s wife to a boy; that the agreed exchange did really take place, the case having been provided for; that the girl was baptized in the church of the Priory at Modigliana, by the name of Maria Stella, and falsely registered as the daughter of the Chiappini couple.
“Whereas the said witnesses swear as to the time of the exchange as coinciding with that of the Plaintiff’s birth.
“Whereas, the Trustee, likewise in vain, urges the improbability of this evidence; since, not only no improbability is to be met with in the witnesses’ statement, but, on the contrary, it is upheld and verified by a great number of other presumptions and conjectures.
“That one very forcible conjecture is deduced by the public voice and the rumours which were then spread as to the fact of the exchange.