ALLEGED PLOT

Evening Post, Issue 66, 15 September 1936, Page 9

ALLEGED PLOT

£150 FOR THE KING'S LIFE

OFFER BY FOREIGN POWER

SENTENCE OF TWELVE MONTHS' HARD LABOUR

(United Tress Association— By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) (Received September 15, 9.20 a.m.) LONDON, September 14 George Andrew McMahon, the man concerned in the revolver incident when the King was passing Hyde Park Corner on July 16, was found guilty today on one of the charges preferred against him and was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment with hard labour. McMahon caused a sensation when he stated in evidence that a foreign Power had asked him to shoot the King at the Trooping of the Colour for £150, and that he immediately informed the WaxOffice. "I waiit to go to prison. Give me the heaviest possible sentence," he pleaded. "Only by remaining in prison can I save my life from the people I've given away."

A long queue formed outside the Old' Bailey two hours before the Court assembled for the trial. Many wellknown society women were among privileged spectators in the special gallery. Three Vomen were among the jury. McMahon pleaded not guilty to all three charges of unlawfully possessing a firearm with intent to endanger life, of presenting a pistol near the King with intent, to endanger peace, and of wilfully producing a pistol near his Majesty's person with intent to alarm him. The Under Sheriff, picturesquely; dressed in velvet jacket, knee breeches, and lace frills, and two aldermen in blue robes and carrying posies of flowers, pre&eded the crimson-robed Judge. CASE FOR THE CROWN. The Attorney-General, Sir Donald Somervell, K.C., outlined the case for the Crown. ' . The Attorney-General said that the prisoner threw a loaded revolver as his Majesty was passing him. It either hit the leg of the King's horse or fell so near that more than one witness thought the leg was actually hit. The point, perhaps, did not matter. An unloaded chamber of the re-j volver was opposite the barrel, but with this type of revolver the pulling of the trigger would turn the chambers so that it would actually go off. However, perhaps the prisoner did not appreciate this. t lt might be that, having left the chamber unloaded, he thought one pull of the trigger would not discharge the revolver. The Attorney-General said that McMahon made several statements, one of which was that he could easily have shot the King if he had wanted to. The Attorney-General contended that McMahon's offence amounted to the presenting of the weapon, while on the' question of intent it was difficult to imagine any act more calculated to create a disturbance. It was unnecessary to inquire what was in the prisoner's mind, still less to inquire whether his Majesty was alarmed. Intent to alarm was inherent in the act itself. : ,

importance that on the charge of attempting to endanger life McMahon was telling the police all about it the day before.

Mr. Hutchinson then read McMahon's letter to Sir John Simon on July 16.

Mr. St. John Hutchinson, K.C.; counsel for McMahon, asked the Judge if he was prepared to give an immediate decision on the Attorney-General's submission. The Judge said he would not decide till he had heard counsel. It seemed better to discuss the meaning of the Act when the evidence was disclosed. Mr. Hutchinson replied that he would make a submission at the end of the case for the prosecution. ' ONLY A SHADOW. Samuel Green, a retired journalist, gave evidence that he saw the prisoner look repeatedly at a postcard of the King in coronation robes. Later he saw the shadow of a hand —a backhand throw—then a pistol at the horse's hind legs. Later he picked up a newspaper that McMahon had carried. Crossexamined, he admitted that all he saw of the throwing was the shadow. Constable Flood gave evidence that he turned his horse to face the King as the procession passed. He heard a scuffle and saw the accused overpowered by police. He did not see the throwing of the revolver. Special Constable Dick said he saw the prisoner's hand in the air, just managed to knock his arm, and then seized him. He could not say whether, when he knocked the arm, the object had left it. Asked if he saw anything thrown, Dick replied: "Yes, it looked like a black object." "COULD EASILY HAVE FIRED." The prosecution then called Mary Blencowe, a barmaid at the Two Brewers' Tavern, who declared that the day before the alleged attempt McMahon said he was going away and that something dreadful had happened. She agreed that he had said "has happened" and not "is going to happen." John Reeves, night porter at the Metropole Hotel, Brighton, stated that he first saw the revolver when, it was lying in the roadway, though his wife saw the whole incident. When his wife said, "Look, an insult -to the King," he went up to the prisoner and said: "You swine," and struck him in the face. "He had his glasses on, but I hit him all the same," said the witness. Mrs. Lily Yeoman gave evidence that when the King approached, the prisoner pushed his way past her in a very agitated manner and she saw something bright in his hand. "I did not associate anything with it, she said. "When I looked at the King I saw him staring at McMahon. My eyes were rooted on the object from the moment it. left his hand until it hit The Judge: But you did not tell us anything about that. Did something leave his hand? Mrs. Yeoman: Yes. Counsel: Did it hit the horse? Mrs. Yeoman: It dropped to the ground and the horse's hoof kicked Further cross-examined, Mrs. Yeoman admitted that McMahon could easily have fired it if he had wished, and actually1 threw the revolver with an under-arm action. "WORK FO» THE AUTHORITIES." Inspector Kidd said that when McMahon was remanded at Bow Street till July 24, he said: "I shall be dead before then. I intended to shoot myself in front of the King, but lost my head." Inspector Sands said he had seen the shorthand notes of McMahon's statement. "I obtained the revolver because I wa3 doing important work for the authorities, and I showed it to an officer of his Majesty's service." Mr. Hutchinson indicated that he would call the officer in question, who was a member of the Secret Service known as Ml 5. Mr. Hutchinson revealed that McMahon told Inspector Clarke the day before the incident that something was likely to happen, and arranged to meet him at a tea shop between noon and 1 o'clock on the day the incident occurred. Mr. Hutchinson contended that it was of paramount,

Inspector Sands admitted that McMahon had a grievance because he had been imprisoned for criminal libel, which a higher Court had quashed. Mr. Hutchinson read an extract from McMahon's most recent petition to the King emphasising that he had given valuable information to the Criminal Investigation Department and the War Office, not for a reward, but because, though he had suffered much, he desired to remain a loyal subject of his Majesty. .-,«.* Inspector Sands admitted that McMahon had been in touch with Ml 5. Mr. Hutchinson submitted that there was no evidence to go to the jury in regard to the charge of endangering life, and said that McMahon threw the revolver in such a way that it could not have hurt anyone. TWO COUNTS DISCARDED. The Judge, in directing the jury to return a verdict of not guilty on the first two charges, said: "The first count was presented with a view to discovering whether the evidence could satisfy a jury whether, in the acts the prisoner did, or in possessing a firearm, there was any intention to endanger life, really meaning the life of the King or of his entourage. "As the evidence has turned out, I do not think anyone could form that opinion or that there is sufficient evidence to give such a verdict. I rule that there is no evidence of presenting a firearm in the sense in which the word is used in the Act. It is therefore your duty, and I am sure your pleasure, to find a verdict of not guilty." SENSATIONAL DISCLOSURE. McMahon went into the box after lunch. Speaking in a low voice, he made the sensational disclosure that a foreign Power had asked him to do espionage at the end of October, 1935, and had suggested that he should shoot the King at the Trooping of the Colour, a deed for which he was to receive £150. Arrangements were made for nine others to accompany him and enable him to escape. McMahon said that he immediately informed the War Office. The foreign Power told him that if the plot failed the King would be shot in France. McMahon added that he had continually reported progress to the War Office, from which he,had received no remuneration. He took the money from the foreign Power and gave the numbers of the notes to the War Office. McMahon wrote on a piece of paper which he handed to the Judge, the Jury, and the Attorney-General the name of the person, the Embassy, and the foreign Power to which he had been introduced, and added that if necessary he could give a description of the way he had entered the Embassy room in which the discussions were held. , The atmosphere in court was one or almost unbearable suspense as the case began to. take such an utterly unexpected twist. McMahon disclosed how the foreign Embassy's men dictated the letter he had sent to Sir John Simon. Three of them stood outside a telephone box when he rang up Sir John. The reason why they encouraged "him to telephone was to show that he had a grievance, so that if he was captured suspicion would not fall on anyone else. Thedrama mounted towards a climax when McMahon admitted that what witnesses had said about the incident was substantially true. "I threw the pistol along the ground because I did not want to shoot," he declared. Mr. Hutchinson: Had you ever any intention to alarm his Majesty? McMahon: No, sir, but rather to save him. Mr. Hutchinson: Was that the only way you could protect him? McMahon: Yes, otherwise they might have carried out the act themselves. DETAILS OF THE PLOT. ' ■ McMahon stated further that he was in touch with War Office officials 35 or 40 times. He said'he was introduced to the foreign Power by an English member of a political body which had the same objects as the foreign Government. He met a certain Baron at the Embassy, where officials spoke of wrongs to Ireland and suggested that their system of Government was better. The Baron mentioned certain parts of the Empire which would be handed over to them if the King was not in power, and suggested the planning of a sudden coup somewhere, adding that Britain was less likely to interfere in foreign affairs if there was turmoil there. "The attempt was twice rehearsed," said McMahon, "I was to stand at the back of the crowd, but afterwards my position was changed to a position nearer the Palace. I reported all this to the War Office." McMahon continued that he was in constant touch with the War Office and the official police. On the day before the attempt was to be made Inspector Clarke brought a man who was to follow him at McMahon's request, as he did not wish to give his life for nothing. Actually the police did not carry out the arrangement, and from early in the morning on the day of the incident McMahon was under the surveillance of the plotters. McMahon added that he did not disclose these things at the police station as he thought the other plotters might hang about and be captured, but he told his solicitor that the plotters intended to make a second attempt on the King's life during his holiday to France, and the solicitor informed the authorities. "ONE PLOTTER IN COURT." Cross-examining McMahon, the At-torney-General said there was no suggestion in McMahon's letter to Sir John Simon of an alleged plot. McMahon replied: "Why should there be? I wrote on the dictation of others." Asked why ;he did not disclose this before, McMahon said: "I kept quiet

in order to catch the men engaged in the plot. There is one of them in court this morning." The Attorney-General: But why didn't you tell us? McMahon: I did tell. That's why his Majesty's life is endangered, because no one would pay any attention to me. The Attorn ey-General suggested that the plot was a product of McMahon's imagination, and McMahon said in dramatic fashion, "I wish to God it were." The Attorney-General recalled that McMahon had told the Court at Bow Street that he had intended to fling a paper at his Majesty, and said: "Your friends would not have given you £150 for that." McMahon replied: "I am not here to crave mercy; I am here merely to tell the truth. I don't care what you do ■ with me." The Attorney-General suggested that i McMahon had demanded £1000 before ( he disclosed the information regard- , ing the plot. McMahon said that he simply wanted ( a guarantee that his wife would be looked after. He had not mentioned a', sum, and had not refused to make the \ information conditional upon that; but naturally he expected that his wife would be cared for if he threw his life. ] away. He even went to Mrs. Baldwin, : wife of the Prime Minister, to hand , over the information. . i The Attorney-General said: • "The j authorities were satisfied in April that j there was nothing in your story." ( McMahon: That's their view. The ] very fact that I was able to do the thing : afteritheir knowing about it shows that there is no safety for the King in his own country. The Attorney-General: ' The only danger to the King came from yourself. ' McMahon retorted: "Yes, because of bungling officials. "I am not pleading for mercy," he said. "I am safer in prison than outside. You did not want me to give evidence of the offer made to me. I pleaded guilty so as to get off with a light sentence. I want to go to prison. Give me the heaviest possible sentence. Only by remaining in prison can I save my life from. the people I've given ' away." The Attorney-General: Nobody wants ] to hide anything. ] Mr. Hutchinson (re-examining the « accused): You gave certain information, j about the King going abroad directly \ after you were tried at Bow Street? ; McMahon: Yes. , Mr. Hutchinson: And have you told , the truth? . McMahon: As God is my judge, I , have nothing to gain otherwise. ( The case for the defence then closed, j and McMahon, wiping perspiration from his forehead, left the box. j COUNSEL'S ADDRESSES. ' The Attorney-General, addressing the jury, asked it to disbelieve the greater part of McMahon's story. "The whole of the evidence," he said, "is to the effect that he had real or imaginary grievances to which he wished to draw attention. A large number, of things said today are inconsistent with what he said under oath in the Police Court. A man who treats his oath in such a way is wholly unreliable. The only issue before the jury is whether the revolver was produced to alarm his Majesty." Mr. Hutchinson said that the jury might think McMahon was muddle- j headed and not quite normal, but when 1 he had a perfectly good story which < would have enabled him to escape at c least lightly, why substitute, for it a s story which sounded like E. Phillips s Oppenheim or Edgar Wallace? But be- r cause it was fantastic it was not necessarily untrue. Nobody had denied that he was in touch with; the War Office or that he had been employed by a foreign Pov&r. Nobody had denied that four days before the incident he gave details to the War Office, including even the names of the people which the Secret Service could check. If he was telling the, War Office nonsense, would they have kept him running there from last October to July? .■..-„

Mr. Hutchinson added: "One of the most striking features of the case is that the police do,not seem to have kept McMahon under observation. Would any police out of Bedlam have failed to keep a man under observation if he said: 'I am going to be connected with a murderous attempt on the life of your King.'? A frightful tragedy might have resulted had McMahon been serious. He is entitled to think that the police have at least one man following him. If that had been done they would have seen whether his story was true. I hope this case shows that it is worth while to watch a man, whether you believe or disbelieve his story." THE SUMMING-UP. The Judge, summing up,, said that a man's intention might be gathered from the acts he performed, and therefore, if the jury believed the evidence of Mrs. Yeoman that McMahon/threw a loaded revolver at the feet of the King's horse, surely that act was calculated to alarm his Majesty. It was hard to see how anyone could reconcile the stories told to the Court and at Bow Street; The jury might reasonably say, if it thought so, that McMahon acted as he did without intention to alarm but merely to deceive those employing him. On the other hand, if it thought he was trying to draw attention to his own grievances by taking steps which might reasonably alarm his Majesty, the verdict should say so. . , j The jury retired for ten minutes ana then returned a verdict of guilty. The Judge, in sentencing McMahon to twelve months' imprisonment with hard labour, said he was satisßed that McMahon did not intend to harm the King, otherwise he would be bou"a to take the severest measures. The prisoner was one of those misguided persons who thought that by notoriety they could draw attention to their grievances. Luckily the police, who had been criticised in this case, had been quick enough to save misguided persons from the consequences of their ""The* Judge added that he had to consider the seriousness of the prisoners offence. He was not going to make him a sort of fancied hero. No description would be further from the truth. "At the same time," he said, 'allowing for the fact, that there vi nc.evidence of intent to endanger life,.l find it possible to pass a lower sentence than I otherwise should do. The Judge also paid a tribute to the impartiality of the police. McMahon seemed to moisten his lips, but gave no other sign of emotion as he awaited sentence. On hearing the sentence, he turned swiftly and walked from the court. Mr. Hutchinson has not decided whether to appeal.

The letter to Sir John Simon re-' ferred to in Court is as follows:— "I deeply regret the necessity for this note, but I cannot contain myself any longer. For some years I have been a victim of organised persecution. Your hirelings have tortured me for many months with unjust imprisonment for the reason that I unsuccessfully endeavoured to stop systematic blackmail by your subordinates. Whatever employment I obtained .was wrested from me by your servants. Tho persecution continued, despite repeated appeals to the highest authority, yourself included. It is my bounden duty, as a supposed subject of the King, to demand justice, as previous appeals to his Majesty have been unsuccessful. I demand full satisfaction within fourteen hours for such un-

British conduct by your servants, and tlie retraction of vile accusations levelled against me. In the event of your failure I will exercise my own perogative and obtain the necessary satisfaction my own tortured mind considers adequate. This is no idle boast. I demand justice irrespective of the consequences. My greatest desire and ambition has ever been to help my fellow-subjects, irrespective of class or creed."