Earl Poulett persistently refused to ac knowledge the child born twenty-five weeks after marriage and did all l1e could to pre vent him succeeding. The question will be, first as to the legitimacy and then as to the legality of the cutting off the entail and re settling the estates. Viscount Hinton says he is able to prove that his father knew Miss Newman and lived with her two years before the ceremony of marriage, and that the chaffing only made him determined to "make an honest girl" of the barmaid. It is true that the earl took no action towards the annulling of the mar riage, and when his first wife died she was buried as "The Right Honorable Elizabeth Lavinia, Countess Poulett, wife of William Henry, sixth Earl Poulett." In Debrett's Peerage, Viscount Hinton figures as heir to the title, though some of the other peerages ignore him. Soon after his wife's death the earl mar ried a second time, but this wife died with out children. In 1879 he married Rosa de Melville, by whom he had a son, William John Lydston Poulett, who now claims the title and estates. Some few years ago the late earl took le gal proceedings known as " perpetuation of testimony," whereby he hoped to establish the illegitimacy of Viscount Hinton. The claimant is not the uneducated man generally supposed; he received a good ed ucation in his youth, can speak French, German and Spanish. His education was paid for by members of the Poulett family and his children have been educated by the Dowager Duchess of Cleveland, mother of Lord Rosebery. One of the sons now holds a good official position. The claimant inherits the extravagance of the Pouletts, and to that inheritance he owes his strange career. He has been clown, actor, ballet dancer, and lastly organ grinder, carrying, displayed on the front of the organ a card setting forth that he was " Viscount Hinton, eldest son of Earl Poulett," and that
he was disinherited by his father. His wife was a ballet dancer and afterwards a chorus singer, known as Mademoiselle Conquest. She has been a faithful wife to him and has stood by him in all his vicissitudes of fortune. There is another peculiar question in volved. The House of Lords having called Lydston Poulett and acknowledged him to be Earl Poulett, cannot, by its rules, recog nize the claimant even if he proves his title. Should then the claimant succeed he will demand that the oath be administered to him as a member of the upper house, and two Lords Poulett will have seats there, for once admitted always a member, and a certificate of the courts that Viscount Hinton is the successor to the title would give him a right, which the lords cannot deny, of a seat in the house. This would undoubtedly be used by the opponents of hereditary legislators and strengthen the hands of Lord Rosebery in his movement for the reform of the House of Lords. The estates have been re-settled by the late earl, but it is a question whether the entail could be cut off without the consent of the heir, and if the claimant should prove his title, that would give him the right to a voice in the disposition of the property. So, while the claimant may be a worthless character as an individual, the questions to be raised by the fortheoming trial may work a revolution in parliament and the courts. There have been many " romantic " epi sodes in the Poulett family since the day when Sir Amyas Paulet, as the jailor of Mary Queen of Scots, refused to assassinate her at command of Elizabeth. Many of the episodes arc similar in character to that which is the cause of the new complications. The third Duke of Bolton married an ac tress by whom he previously had three ille gitimate children, and as the English law, unlike the Scotch, did not legitimize chil dren born before marriage and as he had no children born in wedlock, the title and es tates went to his brother. The fifth duke
