The Times and Crimes.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 4985, 18 April 1889, Page 3

The Times and Crimes.

PIGOTT’S CONFESSION AND FLIGHT

The Dunedin Star's special reporter of the doings of the Parnell Commission writes under date March 1: I went to the Commission Court on Monday, expecting to spend an exciting day, but by no means prepared for the startling news of Pigott’s escape. “ The Times' learned Pig-olt got such a roasting on Thursday and Friday that it’s melted away,” said one of the j unior Bar, but we were all too much taken aback to laugh. The dismay in the Home Rule camp was unmistakeablo and complete. i?ir Charles Eussod jumped to his feet white with passion, and his voice shook as he demanded a warrant for the witness’s arrest. Sir Richard Webster was equally flurried and annoyed, but from somewhat different causes. The President alone remained aggravatingly placid and conventional. Sir Charles Russell, it soon became evident, was burning to communicate to the Court a piece of all-important intelligence. “ Why not affidavits ?” asked Sir James Hannen,quietly. “The news won’t keep,” Sir diaries urged imperatively; “ the Court must know it at once.” But still the President murmured gently “Affidavits.” “Oh, affidavits be growled counsel sotto voce , and the President gravely reproved him, but nevertheless gave in. Then Sir Charles told the story you all know. The miserable Pigott had of his own free will called on Mr Labouchero on Saturday morning, and in the presence of our mutual friend George Augustus Sala, who was hurriedly sent for, made plenary confession of the forgeries. He told Labouehera he forged all the letters, but subsequently, in a communication to Mr Soames'and in conversation with Soames’s clerk, he protested that the first and third batch of letters were genuine, but admitted that, in conjunction with a man named Casey, he forged the second lot, including Parnell’s famoi s r »>simile letti p. In the multitude of “ shadowers” there is safety apparently. Pigott was nominally watched by four or five people, yet gave them all the slip. “ Did you expect him to be here after Saturday’s confession ?” asked Judge Day, shrewdly. “ Why, certainly," replied Sir Charles; “we believed he was securely watched by The Times people and couldn’t stir.

Mr Parnell returned Pigott’s confession on Sunday, with an intimation that ho could have nothing to say to him. Yesterday morning, had the wretched man appeared in the witness box, it was Sir C. Bussell's in* tention to make him repeat his confession in open Court and then give him into custody for forgery and perjury. Pigott no doubt realised this and prepared to bolt. He was in low spirits on Sunday and said things to Soamos and Shannon (another Times solicitor) which should have aroused the two gentlemen’s suspicions, but somehow (so they solemnly swore) did’nt. It seems that Pigott was not exactly “ shadowed ” by the Times. Two constables lived with him at Anderton’s Hotel, for the sake of protection ; but when on Saturday he complained of their supervision being irksome they relaxed it. Three private detectives employed by parties interested in the case, had also been “ shadowing ” Pigott all the week, but on Sunday and Monday they, too, were strangely enough “ off colour.” i Wednesday’s proceedings were brief but conclusive. On unopened letter from Paris, addressed in Pigott’s hand to Shannon was handed to the President, and proved to contain the missing witness’s confession to “ Labby,” together with Lewis and Lewis’s letter returning it, and refusing in Mr Parnell’s name ts have any dealings with the miserable man. These were read aloud by the Clerk of the Court with much unction, I need not repeat either, as you will have heard most of the main points by cable. Then Sir Richard Webster, blushing and hesitating, painfully made a sort of half apology on behalf of his principals, who could, he said, no longer affect to consider the letters genuine. It was an ungracious speech ungraciously spoken, and another great blunder on the Times' part. Sir Richard wound up by pooh-poohing Sir Charles’ reference the previous day to there being a conspiracy behind Pigott. His clients, he implied, might be fools, but were certainly not rogues.

One point in Pigott’s confession deserves special note viz, the statement that when he was chaffering with Labby at the famous interview two months ago, that worthy offered him £I,OOO not to say the letters were forgeries, but in exchange for any documents of Parnell’s or Egan’s ho might have in his possession. Now, as this correction was made in Labby’s own presence, we may, I think, take it to be true. Even Pigott would scarcely venture to lie about Labby to Labby’s face. Well, accepting the allegation as correct, it chimes in nicely with a theory of mine about Mr Parnell. I have always believed, and still believe, that Mr Parnell did at one time write one or more indiscreet letters, and that ho feared they had got in amongst The Times forgeries. The fao-similo letter he had at once recognised as forged, but ho feared to proceed to law lest it should only be a decoy, and when he went to court ho should find himself faced with indubitable indiscretions of his own which could be sheeted homo to him, and would to a great extent stultify'the forgeries. This would account for his hanging back and ( and for the intense anxiety he has displayed ( to find out what The Times had behind, aud 1 also for Lab by’s offer to Pigott.