THE FORGED LETTERS.

Evening Star, Issue 7876, 8 April 1889, Page 4

THE FORGED LETTERS.

ASTOUNDING ADMISSIONS AND COINCIDENCES. [Fkoju Our Special Cokrespondent.J (Continued.) Lonuon, Fobruary 23, The point of the examination on the Egan correspondence was to provo that ho had received letters from Purncll and Egan which may have served as the originals from which the disputed letters were forged. Pigott fenced a long time about admitting one of Egan's letters. Then we came to one of the crucial pointn in the case. The disputed letters were shown to correspond line by line and word for word, with merely trivial alterations—a date was altered here or thero— with lotters addressed to Pigott by Parnell and Egan, relating, not to murder and outrage, but only to the purchase of his newspaper. The forged letter of the 18th of June, 1881, corresponded to a genuine letter of the 18th of June, ISSI ; the 10th of Juno, ISSI, corresponded to the genuine letter of the 19th of May, ISBI ; that of the 11th of March, 1881, appeared as the 11th of March, ISS2. The damning similarity between the admitted innocent business letter addressed to Mr Pigott and the disputed letter found by Pigott's mysterious stranger was ogain and again brought to Pigott's attention. He could not explain it, he said. It was a remarkable coincidence. So remarkable indeed, he said, that it was difficult, he admitted, to account for it except ou the hypothesis of forgery and fraud. But, he cautiously added, thero may have been forgery and fraud on the other side.— (Laughter). "Supposing you did forge," said .Sir Charles. " 1 cannot make any such supposition," said Pigott; "I have no experience in that work." " Never mind," said Sir Charles, and then came a curious battle between the two as to the easiest way to do a forgery. Pigott said Sir Charles's suggestion of using tracing paper was much easier than his own method, which would simply be that of copying without tracing. The suggestion, however, was well borne in upon the mind of everyone in tho Court that Pigott had used tho general letters in his possession aa models and originals in which to build up word for word, letter by letter, figure for figure, tho forgeries which he afterwards, on the theory of Sir Charles, palmed oil' upon tho unlucky ' Times' of a ikwi ex nutchinu in the shape of a mysterious stranger named Murphy met quite by accident in the streets of Paris.

After lunch Mr Parnell was in his place. Michael Duvitt was absent, as ho was in the morning. In one minute past two Mr Pigott was in the box awaiting the ranewal of the cross-examination. Sir Charles Russell began with the spelling of the word "hesitancy." "I used an 'a' instead of an 'e.'" "No," said Sir Charles, "you have spelled it lIESITENCY. Now," said Sir Charles, " on January 9,1852, the writer of the alleged forged letter also spells hesitancy with 'e.' " "Oh, yes," said he, "I heard so much discussion about that misspelling that it got into my brain, so that it came out of my linger ends. That i 3 why I misspelled it yesterday." Now, tho misspelling ho should explain on this theory occurred in a letter dated January 9, 18S2, which he first laid hands on in 18SG. But on June S, 1881, fivo years before he first reud "hesitency" in the disputed letter, he spelled the word in the same way. Poor Mr Pigott could give no explanation of this beyond the fact that spelling never was his strong point. [Note as * significant symptom that tha occupants of' The Times' bench have thinned dowu. Mr Alfred Walter sticks to his post. Mr Soarres of courso is there, and Mr Houston. But the others have disappeared.] Then came a very important examination as to where was tho letter of tho I6th June, 1881, which seems to have served as the original for the two disputed letters of June, 188:-. He. had given it, he said, to hia solicitor, who had returned it. He k< n' .. l 'py of it to a priest, and then sent Uieo.cjiial to Ur Walsh. Dr Walsh sent it back, and it wan subsequently lost or

stolen. Sir Charles pressed him as to the phrases that appeared in both letters. At last Pigott got red in the face, and exclaimed —it was after lunch: "I think it scandalous to bo so questioned." " Witness," said the President, "wo arc the judges of that." " Well," said he, "I positively deny that I forced these letters, and I would not be hero if l""had forged them." "Not if you could help it," said Sir Charles Russell. Then avo got on to the Forster letters once more. Mv Reid made a selection of about thirty, and marked the more important passages. But Sir Charles insisted upon having all the selected passages read, and so, with a sigh, the president resigned himself to the inevitable. Pigott is now on his letters at the stage- of borrowing money from Mr Forster, representing that Mr Parnell had ofl'ered him money. The correspondence with Mr Forster was a bit of a bore, for Pigott as a begging-letter writer is prolix and wearisome to a degree. Mr Forster had promised him LSO or LIOO. He demanded LIOO. Mr Forster squirmed, and offered him LSO and an introduction to Mr Knowles, of the ' Nineteenth Century.' Pigott demanded both, although with unaccustomed modesty he doubts whether his literary style is not too rugged for a London editor. Mr Forster sent him LIOO out of his own money, telling him not to let the necessity of repaying the loan weigh on his conscience. "Oh no," says the grateful Pigott, " I will repay when I can. I am to the last day of my Vife your devoted servant." In \)ecemuer, 1881, Mr Forster saw the Pigott-Egan correspondence in tho ' Freeman,' and at once asked what it meant. Mr Pigott sent a long letter, saying that ho had said things he wished were unsaid. He would be the most wretched of men if he were not grateful for Mr Forster'a sentences and expressions. " These letters I never wrote. I kept no copies, so it is possible that Egan garbled them."

Mr Asquith is not a good elocutionist. He read one letter, Sir Charles tho other. On December 14, ISSI, Pigott again wrote to Forster explaining that when he told Egan that ho knew Castle secrets ho only meant that » relation of his, M'Dermott, an auditor of the local Government Board, and a clerk in a Government office lived next door ; but he never heard anything but gossip. Then ho writes again that ho is nearly penniless, declares that Egan garbled his correspondence, and bogs for a small Government grant to enable him to go to America, seeing that ho had lost his living in their service. Pigott then had an interview with Mr Forster, blod him once more for some money, and then wrote another long letter maintaining that he hud a claim upon the Government, and he wanted to bo appointed assistant librarian at King's Inn. At this point Pigott's unpopularity in the Court attained its maximum. Ho was proved out of his own lips to be a liar ; ho was vehemently accusod of forgery ; but now he filled up the measure of iniquity by becoming a bore—a prosy, dreary, prolix bore. By way of continuing tho proceedings Sir Charles Russell read some extracts from Pigott's article in ' Macmillan's,' showing that hft declared it to be his honest belief that the Land League had rooted up Funianism. The device failed. No one cared a straw for wh*t Pigott wrote at any time about anything excepting whether or not he wroto tho disputed letters. More interesting was Mr Forster's indignant repudiation of any claim upon him. He expressod a hope that he had not hurt his feelings by giving him L2O, and told him bluntly that when he had assisted him at first he little thought that ho had at that moment practically mortgaged the paper to Egan. Oh ! the prosy, prosy Pigott! When will he ever be done with his cant of gratitude and his hypocritical protestations? Mr Justice Smith is sketching Mr Pigott's portrait in his note-book. Everyone else wishes that they could sketch him also, or do anything but listen to his mendacious letters. All his letters are modelled on one block. After telling that he would loathe himself if ever he accepted any more help from a man, he writes again begging to be helped. Mr Forster, with characteristic kiudheartedness, offered him LSO to go to America. Pigott, in reply, failed to find words with which to express his gratitude. Ho can get to Cincinnati with that sum, but he will have no peace until he repays the sum in full. Mr Forster then sonds hiin I*so in bank notes to go to Cincinnati. Did you go to Cincinnati ?—Mr Pigott: No.

Mr Pigott writes in July proposing to be helped to start a paper. He wantod just a loan of LIOO. Fie had exhausted all his ingenuity, applied to all his friends, and was in despair. Perhaps Mr Forster would get Macmillan to buy up the old stock of his book at a reduction, and make a good thing out of it. The Judges laughed and we all laughed, and the dull, prosy letter became quite entertaining. Mr Forster refused to be bled again. At this point Mr Pigott suggested that his letters should be read explaining why he did not go to America. His sister was ill. He always had a sister ill. One died, he said, in 1882; another in 1884. Then it turned out one died in 1883; and so utterly demoralised had tho Court become that there was absolutely laughter over tho dead sister.

Then came a more important letter. Pigott had an interview with Mr Forster in London, when he took the precaution of having two gontlomeu present with him. Pigott immediately wrote a long letter to Mr Forster, hinting that he might publish explanations, and was absolved from his confidential undertakings. After this came an anonymous letter, sent in an ' Irishman' office envelope to Mr Forster, signed "Nemo," and stating that a plot was on foot to injure him by intrigues with the late proprietor of the ' Irishman,' to secure the publication of some of Mr Forster's letters. The letter suggested that it would bo well in his own interest to compel the return of his letters. An advertisement in the ' Irish Times' would secure this end. It was in the ' Irish Times' that the mysterious strangers wished the advertisement to be inserted on that other occasion when he wrote to Mr Egan. Of course, Pigott denied ho had ever seen this letter.

It is in vain to try to give any idea of the seciio in the Court when yet another letter was read from the indefatigable Pigott, this time demanding L2OO, or part of it, to enable him to take himself and his family to Sydney ; the old protestations of eternal gratitude mingling so curiously with veiled threats and hints at the irresistiblo pressure to which he was subjected to publish Mr Forster's letters.

Sir Charles caught him very neatly. He swore that ho never had named the Forstcr correspondence to a living soul but Dr Lyons. " How thon do you explain that the anonymous writer knew of them ?" Of course he could not say. The climax was roached when Sir Charles Russell read tho letter in which Pigott hinted that he was being irresistibly tempted to rehabilitate his reputation by expoiing Mr Forstor as bribing nim to write against his country. He would then pose as having fallen a victim to tho British enemy. The Court roarod again at the spectacle of the innocent victim in tho box, and almost immediately afterwards the Judges rose. The importance of the Forster correspondence is that it supplies a complete section as it were of Pigott's career. Wo have it complete from tho first begging letter down to tho complete evolution of tho practised blackmailer. The whole machinery of fraud and trickery stands exposed to our viow—the anonymous letter-writer, the mysterious stranger who tempts the innocent Pigott to use tho material placed in his hands by tho kindness of his friends in order to injure their reputation—the whole art and mystery of the man's stock-in-trado were laid bare before tho wondering gasto of tho Judges. Sir Charles Russell managed tho crossexamination with wonderful skill and power, and tho wrotehed Pigott probably never spoke a truer word in his life than when ho said: "It ia amusing for you, it is decidedly not amusing for me. Neither was it amusing for the unfortunate representatives of ' The Times,' who sat looking moro and more miserahlo as tho day rolled on. In tho end it was hard to say whether they or their witnesses looked least at ease.