Be pleased now, unlearned reader, to bear in mind that "Dreddlington" at the top of the above table, is the common ancestor, having two sons, the elder "Harry Dreddlington," the younger "Charles Dreddlington;" the latter having, in like manner, two sons, "Stephen Dreddlington" the elder son, and "Geoffrey Dreddlington" the younger son; that Mr. Aubrey, at present in possession, claims under "Geoffrey Dreddlington." Now it will be incumbent on Mr. Titmouse, in the first instance, to establish in himself a clear, independent, legal, and possessory title to the estates; it being sufficient for Mr. Aubrey, (possession being nine-tenths of the law), to falsify Titmouse's proofs, or show them defective—"because," saith a very learned sergeant, who hath writ a text-book upon the Action of Ejectment, "the plaintiff in an action of ejectment must recover upon the strength of his own title, not the weakness of his adversary's."[[25]]
Now, rebus sic stantibus, behold the astute Lynx advising (inter alia) in manner following; that is to say—
"It appears clear that the lessor of the plaintiff (i. e. Tittlebat Titmouse) will be able to prove that Dreddlington (the common ancestor) was seised of the estate at Yatton in the year 1740; that he had two sons, Harry and Charles, the former of whom, after a life of dissipation, appears to have died without issue; and that from the latter (Charles) are descended Stephen, the ancestor of the lessor of the plaintiff, and Geoffrey, the ancestor of the defendant. Assuming, therefore, that the descent of the lessor of the plaintiff from Stephen can be made out, as there appears every reason to expect, [on this point Lynx had written two brief pages,] a clear primâ facie case will have been established on the part of the lessor of the plaintiff. As, however, it is suspected that Harry Dreddlington executed a conveyance in fee of the property, in order to secure the loan contracted by him from Aaron Moses, it will be extremely important to ascertain, and, if possible, procure satisfactory evidence that the decease of Harry Dreddlington occurred before the period at which, by his father's death, that conveyance could have become operative upon the property: since it is obvious that, should he have survived his father, that instrument, being outstanding, may form a complete answer to the case of the lessor of the plaintiff.[[26]] The danger will be obviously increased should the debt to Aaron Moses prove to have been paid off, (as it is stated was rumored to have been the fact,) by Geoffrey Dreddlington, the younger son of Charles Dreddlington; for, should that turn out to be the case, he would probably have taken a conveyance to himself, or to trustees for his benefit, from Aaron Moses—which being in the power of the defendant, Mr. Aubrey, would enable him to make out a title to the property, paramount to that now attempted to be set up on behalf of Mr. Titmouse. Every possible exertion, therefore, should be made to ascertain the precise period of the death of Harry Dreddlington. The registries of the various parishes in which the family may have at any time resided should be carefully searched; and an examination made in the churches and churchyards, of all tombstones, escutcheons, etc., belonging, or supposed to belong, to the Dreddlington family, and by which any light can be thrown upon this most important point. It appears clear that Dreddlington (the common ancestor) died on the 7th August, 1742:—the question, therefore, simply is, whether the death of his eldest son (Harry) took place prior or subsequent to that period. It is to be feared that the defendant may be in possession of some better and more direct evidence on this point than is attainable by the lessor of the plaintiff. The natural presumption would certainly seem to be that the son, being the younger and stronger man, was the survivor."[[27]]
The above-mentioned opinion of Mr. Lynx, together with that of Mr. Subtle entirely corroborating it, (and which was alluded to in a late chapter of this history,[[28]]) and a pedigree, were lying on the table, one day, at the office at Saffron Hill, before the anxious and perplexed partners, Messrs. Quirk and Gammon.
Gammon was looking attentively, and with a very chagrined air, at the pedigree; and Quirk was looking at Gammon.
"Now, Gammon," said the former, "just let me see again where the exact hitch is—eh? You'll think me perhaps infernally stupid, but—curse me if I can see it!"
"See it, my dear sir? Here, here!" replied Gammon, with sudden impatience, putting his finger two or three times to the words "Harry D."
"Lord bless us! Don't be so sharp with one, Gammon! I know as well as you that that's about where the crack is; but what is the precise thing we're in want of, eh?"
"Proof, my dear sir," replied Gammon, somewhat impatiently, but with a smile, "of the death of Harry Dreddlington some time—no matter when—previous to the 7th August, 1742; and in default thereof, Mr. Quirk, we are all flat on our backs, and had better never have stirred in the business!"
"You know, Gammon, you're better up in these matters than I—(because I've not been able to turn my particular attention to 'em since I first began business)—so just tell me, in a word, what good's to be got by showing that fellow to have died in his father's lifetime?"