Editing Tichborne case (section)

===Support and opposition===
[[File:TichborneClaimantSketch.jpg|thumb|left|upright|The Claimant in about 1869, having acquired much extra weight since his arrival in England]]
The Claimant quickly acquired significant supporters; the Tichborne family's solicitor Edward Hopkins accepted him, as did J. P. Lipscomb, the family's doctor. Lipscomb, after a detailed medical examination, reported that the Claimant possessed a distinctive genital malformation. It would later be suggested that Roger Tichborne had this same defect, but this could not be established beyond speculation and hearsay.<ref>Woodruff, pp. 139–140</ref><ref>McWilliam 2007, pp. 199–200</ref> Many people were impressed by the Claimant's seeming ability to recall small details of Roger Tichborne's early life, such as the [[fly fishing tackle]] he had used. Several soldiers who had served with Roger in the Dragoons, including his former [[Batman (military)|batman]] Thomas Carter, recognised the Claimant as Roger.<ref name= McW24>McWilliam 2007, p. 24</ref>{{refn|Carter, along with another former soldier, John M'Cann, was taken into the Claimant's household as a servant.<ref name= McW24/>|group= n}} Other notable supporters included [[Horace Pitt-Rivers, 6th Baron Rivers|Lord Rivers]], a landowner and sportsman, and [[Guildford Onslow]], the [[Liberal Party (UK)|Liberal]] [[Member of Parliament (United Kingdom)|Member of Parliament]] (MP) for [[Guildford (UK Parliament constituency)|Guildford]] who became one of the Claimant's staunchest advocates. Rohan McWilliam, in his account of the case, calls this wide degree of recognition remarkable, particularly given the Claimant's increasing physical differences from the slim Roger. By mid-June 1867 the Claimant's weight had reached almost {{convert|300|lb|st kg}} and would increase even more in the ensuing years.<ref name= McW25>McWilliam 2007, pp. 25–26</ref>{{refn|Douglas Woodruff, in his study of the affair, gives the Claimant's weight in June 1868 as {{convert|344|lb|st kg}} and by summer 1870 as {{convert|378|lb|st kg|0}}.<ref>Woodruff, p. 81</ref> |group= n}}

Despite Lady Tichborne's insistence that the Claimant was her son, the rest of the Tichbornes and their related families were almost unanimous in declaring him a fraud. They recognised Alfred Tichborne's infant son, Henry Alfred, as the 12th baronet. Lady Doughty, Sir Edward's widow, had initially accepted the evidence from Australia but changed her mind soon after the Claimant's arrival in England.<ref>Woodruff, p. 74</ref> Lady Tichborne's brother Henry Seymour denounced the Claimant as false when he found that the latter neither spoke nor understood French (Roger's first language as a child) and lacked any trace of a French accent. The Claimant was unable to identify several family members and complained about attempts to catch him out by presenting him with impostors.<ref name= McW25/><ref>Woodruff, pp. 78–81</ref> Vincent Gosford, a former Tichborne Park steward, was unimpressed by the Claimant, who, when asked to name the contents of a sealed package that Roger left with Gosford before his departure in 1853, said he could not remember.<ref name= W90>Woodruff, pp. 90–91</ref>{{refn|At the time he was asked about the package, the Claimant did not know that Gosford had destroyed it. When he became aware that it no longer existed, he gave an account of the contents.<ref name= W90/>|group= n}} The family believed that the Claimant had acquired from Bogle and other sources information that enabled him to demonstrate some knowledge of the family's affairs, including, for example, the locations of certain pictures in Tichborne Park.<ref>Woodruff, p. 66</ref> Apart from Lady Tichborne, a distant cousin, Anthony John Wright Biddulph, was the only relation who accepted the Claimant as genuine;<ref name= McW25/> however, as long as Lady Tichborne was alive and maintaining her support, the Claimant's position remained strong.<ref name= ODNB/>

On 31 July 1867 the Claimant underwent a judicial examination at the [[High Court of Justice#Chancery Division|Chancery Division]] of the [[Royal Courts of Justice]].<ref name= W94>Woodruff, pp. 94–96</ref> He testified that after his arrival in Melbourne in July 1854 he had worked for William Foster at a cattle station in [[Gippsland]] under the name of Thomas Castro. While there, he had met Arthur Orton, a fellow Englishman. After leaving Foster's employment the Claimant had subsequently wandered the country, sometimes with Orton, working in various capacities before setting up as a butcher in Wagga Wagga in 1865.<ref>Woodruff, pp. 99–101</ref> On the basis of this information, the Tichborne family sent an agent, John Mackenzie, to Australia to make further enquiries. Mackenzie located Foster's widow, who produced the old station records. These showed no reference to "Thomas Castro", although the employment of an "Arthur Orton" was recorded. Foster's widow also identified a photograph of the Claimant as Arthur Orton, thus providing the first direct evidence that the Claimant might in fact be Orton. In Wagga Wagga one local resident recalled the butcher Castro saying that he had learned his trade in Wapping.<ref name= McW28>McWilliam 2007, pp. 28–30</ref> When this information reached London, enquiries were made in Wapping by a private detective, ex-police inspector [[Jack Whicher]],<ref>Annear, pp. 122–123</ref> and the Claimant's visit in December 1866 was revealed.<ref name= ODNB/><ref>Woodruff, pp. 108–109</ref>