By Zadie Smith.

How shall I summarise this novel? In essence, it focuses on Mrs Eliza Touchet (apparently the name is to be read in the French manner), who is the housekeeper to and occasional spanker of William Ainsworth, a prolific author who was at times more popular than Dickens, but now mostly forgotten. (Aside: I have heard of his novel, Rookwood.)

The tale begins with domestic doings in the Ainsworth household, jumping around from one decade to another when Ainsworth, Dickens and George Cruickshank were friends and then not so friendly.

Into Mrs Touchet’s life intrudes the case of the Tichborne Claimant. A lengthy court case is trying to determine whether the man claiming to be Sir Roger Tichborne really is the missing heir rather than Arthur Orton, a Wapping butcher. Mrs Touchet starts to attend the trial and strikes up an acquaintance with the Claimant’s man, Andrew Bogle, who has worked for the Tichborne family and now with a degree of dignity, supports the the claim.

There is an interlude in which Bogle tells Mrs Touchet the story of his life, how his father was enslaved, about the various characters on the island of Jamaica, and his life there, which eventually took him to England.

The Claimant has a large following of supporters who believe he is a victim of the Establishment (boo! hiss!), but is eventually convicted of perjury. Initially, his lawyer, Edward Kenealy, campaigns for his release.

But to return to the original story, Ainsworth eventually drops dead, leaving Mrs Touchet to ponder her future.

As I said, the story is really about Eliza Touchet, observing the Ainsworth family and their foibles, and the trial of the Tichborne Claimant. Her interest in the latter seems to stem from how the working-class Arthur Orton was allegedly denied his allegedly rightful inheritance, which parallels her own lot in life as she’s mostly intellectually superior to those around her (the ironic exception is Ainsworth’s second wife, Sarah, who was an illiterate maid, but who often makes insightful comments on the trial).

Touchet’s character is somewhat spiky. She seems to have a low view of just about everyone (including Dickens) apart from the Bogles, and everything. But in spite of her innate superiority, she really doesn’t achieve anything much. She seems to be as much a fraud as Ainsworth is a fraud of an author and Arthur Orton is a fraud himself. She, too, becomes obsessed with the trial and yet seems to miss that for the audience of onlookers, it’s lowbrow, music-hall entertainment.

William Ainsworth is mostly a talentless, tedious ass whose books benefit from Mrs Touchet’s critical eye. His daughters are mostly beneath her contempt.

Andrew Bogle and his son, Henry, are superior sorts, but the motivation for the former’s support for the Tichborne Claimant is unclear beyond what to me seems to be a misguided attempt to hitch his financial horse to the wrong cart, allowing himself to lose an income of £50 a year in perpetuity from the Tichborne family. Mrs Touchet’s association with him feels somewhat contrived.

The narrative itself is somewhat convoluted, with the story jumping between decades, forwards and backwards, which, I feel, interrupts the flow, but which avoids the potential grind of a chronological narrative. It does take some time to get to the Claimant, and it’s not entirely clear where the story is going. The Tichborne Claimant does seem to loom a little too large.

Overall, The Fraud isn’t about the Tichborne Claimant, but is about Eliza Touchet in an inadequate world. It does feel a bit aimless, which is magnified by Mrs Touchet having no real goal. She bequeaths a sizeable amount of money from her husband to his two illegitimate, mixed-race daughters as the climax of a late episode, thus partly atoning (?) for events on Jamaica during Bogle’s youth.

Appendix

From what I’ve read about the Tichborne Claimant, it seems highly likely that Arthur Orton was a fraud, bearing little physical resemblance to the real Roger Tichborne, and lacking earlobes and a crucial tattoo. At the time the Claimant had widespread support as some sort of working-class hero being denied his inheritance (which as George Bernard Shaw noted, was ironic because a positive ruling would’ve elevated him socially), but this seems to have been romantic, wishful thinking on the part of the vulgar mob.

Orton’s refutation to the claim after he left prison seems to have been to squeeze some money out of the papers so that he could set up a business. The card which the Tichbornes allowed to be placed on his coffin, stating that he was Sir Roger would appear to have been an attempt to kill off any further fraudulent claims.