THE EDMUNDS SCANDAL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 1089, 16 June 1865, Page 6

THE EDMUNDS SCANDAL

(Prom ihrScobgianX /•? The secrets of, BecreJ;;c^mnjiitee9, even of the most august b'cdicß, are apt to share the fate of'j?e'cre f j»,pfanyauer sort, and become, at a very early.'stage, no secrets to any of the persons having or taking special interest in" the matter.. Although as yet I little or nothing of ; w^athafl been transacted in the committee of the House of

Lords sitting uppn the Edmunds scandal has obtained anything like publicity, that may at least in great part be accounted for by the fact that almost all the statements made or to be made to the committee -were in existence and form before, and in the hands of all the parties, having the interests to centre, partly indeed in the crossexaminations, but more in the deliberations and decisions of the committee. To the public, however, the charges and replies set forth in ihe official reports made, not issued, at various times within these eight months, arc little more than matter of vague rumour and conjecture; and we are, therefore, glad to be able, without betraying any secret as to the transactions in the committee rooms, to be first in giving some accurate idea of the main facts of the case as formally stated by the parties themselves previous to the matter coming before Parliament, and, jjje may presume, j restated by ihtm in the committee, and there sifted ar.d tested, with what-result we must wait to tee.

The natter first,took chape in a pre* liminary report by Mr Greenwood,, Q.C., and Mr Hindmarcb, Q.C, who had been appointed by the Commissioners of Patents to inquire into "certain irregularities'" in the Patent Office which had been, the subject of frequent complaint. In this report, which was given in about the middle of last July, the investigators stated lhat circumstances induced them to make on interim rtport, instead of waiting till they had terminated the inSuiry —which meant that they had found, ie office, and especially its pecuniary affairs, in such a condition as to necessitate an imint diate change of managers and management. Mr Edmnndß's attendance, at the office had, they eaid, been little more than nominal for a long time previous to 1863. After tliat date, when, it would appear, one of thecloiks had been detected in peculation, Mr Edmunds bad attended •more frequently, but to .worse than no purpose, having made a variety of regulations and orders which had produced in the office " great eonfiißio.i, ill-feeling, and discontent" The investigators also held it as proved that Mr Edmunds bad.been "violent and intemperate" in conducting the busines* of the office, that his orders had been " hasty and ill-considered," and that his demeanour and conduct towards his subordinates had bc<n offensive, harsh, and unnecessarily Revere. On these grounds alone, the investigators eaid, they had been prepared to recommend Mr EtimunoVs removal from his office, when their attention was diawn to "more serious matters." One of those matters was that Mr Edmunds had sanctioned the introduction of a custom by which he and his chief clerk, a Mr Ruscoe, were enabled to appropriate to their private use t'-e discount on stamps allowed to statioii'TH at the Stamp-office—the Finn pockced in this way being between LSOO and 1.000 a year. It is alfo complained that on ihi< point Mr Edmunds nnd his clerk (,'ove ilieir evidence in "a very discreditable manner." There was a further finding by the investigators to the effect tbat Mr Edmunds advanced LSOO for the purchase ot stamps, and afterwards had it repaid, but that lie made the advance out of public moneys, .iikl took the repayment to himself—an occupation, we fee! bound to remark iti parsing, which seems to have been afterwards more or le6e departed from. Tlic practice regarding the stationers' allowance on stamps, the charge regarding which has been adhered to and seems undenied, was declared by the investigators to be " without excuse, dishonefct, nnd disgraceful," an 4 they deduced from the fact of the obstacles thrown in their wny when endeavoring to get at the truth, that Mr Edmunds and his clerk were conscious that they had been engaged in wiongdoing. The preliminary report then «ent minutely into matters of account, with the result of showing tbat between 1852 and 1864, Mr Edmunds had neglected to pay into the Consolidated Fund sums amounting to L2.C81 19a 2d. This statement Mr Edmunds admitted to be correct; nnd the investigators gave aa opinion that, if detection had not been made, the money would have been lost to the public. A sort of minor or supplementary charge was also made in the preliminary report, to the effect that a, clerk having proved a defaulter to the amount of L 740, Mr Edmunds compelled the other clerks to raise that sum, not contributing a ball-penny himself, and then paid only half to the funds of the office, and kept the other halt'in his own pocket. The practical conclusion of the investigators at this stage was, as already known, a recommendation that, on account of the fact then disclosed, Mr Edmunds ought to be " immediately removed" from his office. To this formidable document Mr Hdnr'.nds replied iv a statement addressed *o t:.o Lord Chancellor as head of the •Co!:-.:n!-sioners of Patents. It appears from this statement that, in the meaawbiie, Mr Edmunds had been allowed to resign his conjoined offices of Clerk of Patents and Clerk to the Commissioners of Patents, on undertaking to make good all deficiencies; and that bis defence was now made mainly with a view to dissuade the Lord Chancellor from his announced intention of consulting Lords Cranworth and Kiiij*sdown as to the bearing of Mr Edmunds's ' conduct in the Patent-office upon the question of the retention of his offices in the House of Lords. The charge of "violence, intemperance," &c, in the management of the iqffice Mr Edmunds met by a narrative .of the struggle he had to keep a curtain subordinate iti his' proper place." : ,-As to the appropriation Of the allowance on stamps, he admitted the facf, bqt" pleaded the excuse of "a common custom*".'*";.. To the accusation of having neglected to pay in large sums to the public accounjt^JJ^ answered that he had paid the money into; Coutts's, in an account distinct from his own, called " the Patent-office Account," and that he did so with no fraudulent intention. As to the advance of LSOO, alleged to have been made by Mr Edmunds from public money and repaid to himself, he answered, we believe, that the money was taken; /rpm; and brought back to the ;ame account; Ibut on this point our information is not quite distinct. The de-

! ficiency of the defaulting clerk had been made up, he said, not by a levy on the other clerks, but from property of the defaulter; and, though he had forgotten for a year oi two to pay in half of the recovered money, it was afterwards accounted for. Mr Edmunds also appealed strongly to the clemency or compassion of the Lord Chancellor, stating that the loss of his offices in the House of Lords would reduce him to "absolute destitution," and pray«g that, therefore, no steps might be taken in that matter.

On this statement, dated towards the end of September, Mr Hindmarch, in the beginnine.of September, made "observations." Mr. Hindmarch, who, throughout, appears to have had in this document, the assent, though he had not received the aid of his colleague—denounced as "untrue" Mr Edmunds'sstatement that the appropriation of the discount on stamps is a practice in other-public offices. With regard to the LSOO advanced and repaid, Mr Hindmarch ■was of opinion that the concealment of the transaction even from the clerk Ituscoe is proof that Mr Edmunds "knew that he wasjacting fraudulently," but our information leaves some haziness round the statements on both sides upon this point. The statement about the missing money (first pat at L 2681) having been paid into the Patent office account at Coutts's, Mr Hind- i 1 march met by stating that that account was unknown to the Treasury; that it was drawn upon by Mr Edmunds at pleasure for his private purposes; and that the payments into it did notcorreapond with the payments he received at the office. It was also stated in the "observations" that Mr Edmunds had at the time of his resignation, paid in L 7872 5s 6d, being a much larger sum than the deficiency with which be was charged by the investigators in their preliminary report. It is i nderstood that, a few weeks afterwards, the investigators made a report to the Lords of the Treasury, in which they referred to the preliminary report and observations, and added some facts and opinions.

A few days before the meeting of Parliament, the investigators, having completed the investigation, made a further or final report to the Lord Chancellor and the other Commissioners of Patents. They declared that Mr Edmunds had "never performed in person" the duties of his offices of Clerk of the Patents and Clerk of the Commissioners of Patents; and that he had " never out of his own pocket" paid Mr Ruscoe, who had performed those duties. Mr Ituscoe had made false entries in order to pay himself, and had continued that practice even after, in 1852, he became an officer of the Commissioners of Patents, with a salary of L4OO a-year. The investigators were strongly inclined to think that the practice had the connivance, if not the authority, of Mr Edmundp. Although the investigators held that vastly the largest portion of the money withheld had been taken by Mr Edmunds, and although Mr Ituscoe had discharged his duties diligently, they recommended that the latter personage, like the former, ought not to be allowed to remain longer in the office. As already known, the investigators reported, as a matter of accounting, that, besides the deficiencies already detected and paid up, Mr Edmunds was due L 9617 15s 4d, on which compound interest for a long period was exigible. Here endeth all that was said regarding the Edmunds defalcations, on the one side by the Government investigators, on the other by Mr Edmunds, previous to the meeting of the Lords' Committee.

It will be observed that in all this noallusion has been made to any connexion of any member of the family of Brougham with the sins and misfortunes of Air Edmunds. Nor did any such connexion exist—the truth or untruth of the charges subsequently made by Mr Edmunds against Mr William Brougham having no bearing upmi the question of Mr Edmunds's guilt or innocence, and having apparently been made only in revenge. Mr Edmunda's statement regarding Mr William Brougham, we believe, was in substance that he had been appointed to his first office of Clerk of Patents on the condition (secret between himself and Messrs William and James Brougham) that he was to pay out of the salary a sum of L2OO or L3OO a year (it is not clear which) to the family of the late Mr John Brougham ; that that money had been retained by Mr William Brougham, nnd ought to be repaid to Mr Edmunds; that Lord Brougham was due Mr Edmunds or his family LSOOO secured upon an estate belonging to bis lordship; and that Mr William Brougham was further indebted in the sum of LI2OO, which Mr Edmuuds had lent him on his personal security. The pecuniary part of these statements was submitted to the arbitration of Lord Cranworth, whose award was iv substance as follows:—lst. Lord Brougham (who does not appear to have disputed the claim, but to have forgotten all about the transaction, which took place more than 30 years ago), was found liable for repayment of the LSOOO borrowed on his estate, though Lord Cranworth was of opinion that his Lordship had never received the money, but had only interposed his security for his brother James, who died immediately afterwards. Before his death, however (we are paraphrasing what is said to be Lord Cranworth's award), Mr James Brougham (in 1833) made arrangements with. Mr Edmunds under which Mr Edmunds was thenceforth to pay the interest on the mortgage (L2OO a year), for the ■payment of which Mr James Breugham had become liable. And the interest had accordingly been paid by Mr Edmunds, which was the same as if it had been paid by Mr 0 ames Brougham. 2. Mr William Brougham was due, Mr Edmunds LI2OO lent oti note of hand. S. Lord Cranworth found that Mr Edmunds had no claim to the repayment of L 9300, aa the amoiint he alleged he had paid to Mr William Brougham in trust for the family of Mr John Brougham, but which (Mr Edmunds alleged) Mr William Brougham bad appropriated to hi 3 own uses. Mr William Brougham had admitted the receipt of LIOO per annum, but denied that he received it in trust, and showed that he expended it in the premiums on an insurance oa the life of .Mr-Edmunds, as towards the paying off of the mortgage of LSOOO at Mx Edmunds's death.

Itf will be seen that Lord Cranworth dealt only with matters of accounting or debt, and not with matters of morality. It will be seen, also, that there is something unsatisfactory or unexplained as to the conditions on which Mr Edmunds wes appointed to his fir"st office; 'but "on thatpoint all judgment should be reserved till

we know the defence of Mr • William Brougham. Meanwhile, two points seem! 'dear—that the pecuniary > transactions rbetween Mr Edmunds and Messrs William and James Brougham, of which we,have not yet full explanation, had reference to a debt of Mr James Brougham; and that, beyond; having signed a document: as security for his brother more than 30 years ago, Lord Brougham knew nothing of all these complicated matters, and has derived nothing from them but a vast amount of annoyance and the liability to pay another man's debt. ,

Power op the Son's Rats.—A distinguished" chemist, in a recent lecture, wbiie , showing-, that all fpc-cics of moving power have their origin in the rays of the gun, stated that while the iron tabular railway bridge over the Menai Straits, in England, 400 feet long, bent but'half an inch under the heaviest train, it will bend up an inch and a half from its usual hotizon'ttl line when the sun shines on it for some hoars. He stated that the Bunker Hill monument is higher in the evening than in the morning of a sunny day. The little sunbeams enter the pores of the stone, like so many wedges, lifting it up.

RETBintmoN Ton Bkeach of Pbomise.— About two years ago a young man" named Bi'rroughffnvas appointed to the Treasury Department at Washington. He left behind him at Chicago a young lady named Harris, to whom he was under an engagement of marriage. A few mouths since he married another lac\v, and Miss Harris becoming desperate under her wrongs, came to Washington, and a vretk or two ago called him out of his office, and shot him twice, one ball taking effect in hi» face and the other. in his abdomen, f.-om the effects of which he died in a few minutes. Miss Harris is in custody.

Ebjski>y for Diptiibria.—The following is a recipe for the cure of diptheria, from one who has assured us that out of a thousand cues in which It has been used, not even a single patient has ever been lost. The treatment consitti in thoroughly swabbing the back of the mouth and threat with a wash made thus :—Table aalt, two drachms ; black pepper, golden seal, nitrate of potash, alum, one drachm each. Mix and pulverise, put ioto a teacup, which half fill with boiling water, and then fill up with good vinegar. Use every half hour, one, two, or four hours, as recovery; progresses. The patient may swallow a little each time. Apply one ounce each of spirits of turpentine, sweet oil, and nqua ammonia, mixed, every four hours to the whole of the throat and to the breast bones, keeping flannel to the part.—"New York Daily News."

Sterne's Legacy.—Soon after Sterne had been presented to the valuable living of Coxwould, in Yorkshire, on the presentation of the Earl of Fauconberg, a poor widow of most unblemished character, being at the point of death, expressed a wish to receive the holy Bacrament in her last moments. The sentimental pastor wag immediately sent for; Sterne obeyed the summons, and, the ceremony being over, he said, with a most benignant smile, " What do you intend to leave me in your will for this trouble ?" " Alas 1 sir," replied the dying woman, "I am too poor to give the smallest legacy, even to my nearest relations." " Tbat excuse," cried Sterne, "shall not serve me ; I must insist on inheriting yonr two children ; and in return for this bequest, I will take such care of them tbat they shall feel as little as possible the loss of an affectionate and worthy mother." She expired, blessing the hencvolent deed, and Sterne most religeously kept his promise.