THE WEST END SCANDALS.

Evening Star, Issue 8118, 18 January 1890, Page 1 (Supplement)

THE WEST END SCANDALS.

PROCEEDINGS AT THE POLICE COURT. LORD EUSTON EXAMINED. [From Oub Special Correspondent.] London, November 29. Mr Ernest Parke, the editor of the North London 'Press,'and sub-editor of the 'Star,' appeared at Bow street on Monday last, to justify having publicly charged the Earl of Euston with an unspeakable offence. Lord Euston, who is a tall, militarylooking man, with a fine blonde moustache, was represented by the famous Mr George Lewis, and various other solicitors "watched the case" in the interests of pereons whose names did not transpire. A Treasury solitor's appearance on behalf, it was understood, of the exalted and illustrious young man referred to in the ' Press' article as involved in the scandals naturally excited special attention.

Mr Parke was represented by Mr Lockwood, Q.C., M.P., and Mr Asquith.M.P. In appearance the defendant is a young man of middle height, with curly brindled hair, blue eyes, a keen, intelligent expression, and a particularly pleasant, kindly smile, which lights up a usually rather grave face. Mr Parke, though nominally only the subeditor of the 'Star,' has practically from the first been its backbone. His average hours of work ate from 5.30 in the morning to 6 30 in the evening, and what induced him to add to these sufficiently heavy ordinary avocations the supervision of a small Radical weekly like the 'N.L. Press' no one can imagine. Parke's excellent judgment in PreßS matters is notorious. During the Whitchapel murder scares the 'Star' was the one evening paper in London never led astray. The sub-editor seemed intuitively to grasp which statements to accept and which to reject. When verification was possible he always insisted on: it, even though the ' Star' might be anticipated an edition. This policy laid the foundation of the paper's immense circulation in the poorer districts of London, whero coppers are coppers, and folks cannot afford to be " done " even in the matter of a halfpenny paper. Now when the newspaper boys are calling out "Auother great murder!" or " Capture of Jack the Ripper!" your Eastender refuses the ' Echo' and «Evening News' with " Nay, lad, we'll wait and see what the ' Star' bill says." Parke's reputation being what it was, you can easily, imagine the sensation his publication of the names of Lord Euston and Lord H. A. Somerset in connection with the Cleveland street scandals caused amongst Pressmen. Nore of us for the moment doubted the accuracy of the facts, nor was it till the prima facie statement anent Lord Euston's having left the country was discovered to bo ridiculously incorrect that the possibility of any gross error crossed our minds.

As a matter of fact, I believe the Earl has been in town most of October, and, moreover, walking about telling everyone he only wished some paper would publish what the man in the street was saying, and enable him to silence and punish his libellers. The proceedings on Monday were purely formal, and resulted in a remand till Tuesday afternoon, when Mr Gsorge Lewis promised to put the Earl of Eustou in the witness box.

On Tuesday this pledge was kept, and the noble Earl (judiciously led by Mr George Lewis) told a most extraordinary story. He first of all denied having been out of the country since he returned from Australia in ISSI. Counsel then asked :

Will you state to the Court, Lord Euston, what you know of the house in Cleveland street ?—All I know is that one night I was in Piccadilly Mr Vaughan : When?—At the end of May or the beginning of June, Mr Lewis : Yes.

Lord Euston : When a card was put into my hand which, on reading afterwards, was headed " Poses Plastiques. Hammond, 19 Cleveland street."

Mr Lewis: You do not remember whether Tottenham court road was on ? —No. Mr Lewis : About a week afterwards did you go there ?—Yes ; about a week afterwards, about half-past ten or eleven. A man let me in and asked for a sovereign. I gave him the sovereign. I then asked him where these " poses plastiques " were to take place. He said "There is nothing of that sort."

_ Mr Lockwood objected to this conversation. It was not alleged that it took place in Mr Parke's presence. Mr Lewis: The allegation was that he had been mixed up with crime. Mr Loikwood did not object to hi 3 lordship saying what he did. Lord Euston : He said something. Mr Lewis: Did it give rise to great anger on your part ? Mr Lockwood objected. Mr Lewis (to Lord Euston): Did you leave the house ?—Yes ; I was not there more than a few minutes.

Considerably under three ?—Yes ; I have never beeu there before or since.

Mr Lockwood said he might at once say that he did not propose to go into the crossexamination to any extent here. His client recognised that he would be sent for trial, and he was anxious to appear before another tribunal. With permission he would put one or two questions to the witness. Mr Lockwood (to witness): Were you in the army ?—Yea. What regiment ?—The Rifle Brigade. You are not in it now ?—No. When were you gazetted out ?—ln July, 1871,1 think.

You were afterwards, I think, in a yeo> manry regiment ? —Yes; in the volun teers.

Are you in that now ?—I am; the Ist Volunteer Battalion of the Northamptonshire Yeomanry. You told my learned friend that you atonce gave instructions for the prosecution for libel?—l did.

When was the newspaper paragraph brought to your attention ?—Last Monday morning. No, you don't mean yesterday ?—No, I beg pardon, yesterday week. ' _ And you, at once, you say, gave instructions for the prosecution ?—I drove at once to Mr Lewis's' office and placed the matter in his hands.

This statement you have made to-day ; when did you, Sfisi make this statement?—l njade it some time ago to some friends,

When first is ™y question ?—About the middle of October; I cannot say the exact date.

The middle of October, 18S9»—Yes. This thing happened in March or June, as I understand % —Yes.

And the first statement with regard to it was in the month of October ?—Yes. Did you make the statement to the Home Office about it ?—No.

The Treasury ?—No, You made n.q. ?— I made no statement,

U.UD.B a moment until you hear the question, You made no statement to any official or to the Home Office ?—I have had no communication with any official, either at the Treasury or the Home Office. That you swear ?—That I swear. I made a statement privately to a friend. Is Lord Arthur Somerset a friend of yours«—l know him.

When did you see him last ? Last summer some time. During the season, in society, I kept meeting him constantly. You have not seen him since ?—No Do you know where he is ? (To some one who had interrupted, Do you object ?) It was understood that no formal objection was raised, and the question was repeated Do you know where he is?—l do not know where he is.

When this card was given to you, was the man giving them promiscuously, or were you specially favored ?-I can't say. It was put into my hand. I 6 s Wl |4 g a , sharply, as is my custom, an d put the card in my pocket. J did not stop to read it nndfr a hmp post. It was a week after 1 veeeived it that I first read it. I, of course, had kept the card all that time. Did you go to the house alone S^-Yes. lake the card with you S—Xes. And bring it bao& with you?-I took it home. - ".

, do with it?—l destroyed i it. I. was disgusted at having ipojid such a place. - -*■ " ■'- - *■ •• i

You had no doubt in your own mind what the character of "this house was?— Not the slightest. * -• " '" >' ,» From what passed you had no <ftmbt what the charaeter-of the house was?— Not the smallest.

It is a house, as I understand you to say of your own knowledge, whe r e offences such as those alluded to in the libel were probably committed ?—I should think they might be, and probably were, from what was said to me.

In answer to Mr Lewis, the witness then repeated explicitly the statement made to him on entering the house in Cleveland street.

Up to the moment the statement was made to you had you any kuowledge of the character of the house beyoud what appeared on the cird ?—None whatever.

Mr Vaughan: Or suspicion ? -None whatever.

Mr Lewis: Had you ever been there before ?—No; nor heard of the house from anybody. You have said you first made a statement about this house in October. Was that after rumor had got about? Mr Lockwood objected. Mr Vaughan (to the witness): How camo you to make that statement in October ? Because I had heard a rumor which affected myself. Re-examined, the witness said: The man who opened the door to me was alone. I saw no one else. I showed him the card and told him that was what brought me there. _ Did it ever occur to you to give information to the police ?—No ; I was disgusted with having entered such a place, and, ia fact, thought nothing more would, come of it. I have not seen the mm since. I heard of the prosecution at the Old Bailey; but it never occurred to me to ascertain whether the man being prosecuted was the man I mean. I didn't want to be mixed up with anything of the sort. Mr Lewis: Would you have taken any steps whatever but for the publication of the libel ?—None whatever.

Had anyone made any accusation against you ?—No.

Until the publication of the libel ?—None. You were asked if you had made any statement to the Home Office, Treasury, or police. Mr Vaughan : He has denied that. Mr Lewis: Yes; but (to witness) if you were asked for iuformatiou you would have given it?

Mr Lockwood : 1 object. (To Lord Euston :) Don't answer.

Mr Vaughan: Don't you think it is sufficient after the evidence given ? Mr Lewis thought it was a thoroughly competent question. Mr Vaughan : I don't think you should press the question. Mr Lewis : Then that is the case for the prosecution.

The evidence of the witness being read over, the defendant, who reserved his defence, was committed for trial, bail being accepted in two sureties of L 250 each.