TRIAL OF MR PARKE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6788, 27 February 1890, Page 2

TRIAL OF MR PARKE.

♦ Libel on Lord Euston. fFnoar Our London Corusrfondent.J (Concluded.) London, Jan. 17. The Judge summed up dead against the defendant, exposing clearly enough the extraordinary weakness of the lucklesß young journalist's case. Dealing with the plea 'of justification, his Lordship said there was not a particle of evidence to prove that Lord Euston left this country tearing arrest in connection with the Cleveland street case. No evidence had been adduced to attempt to substantiate this allegation, and he was sorry it had been introduced. Five persons were called to state that they saw Lord Euoton go in and out of the house in Cleveland street. ! In cases of identity it was necessary that a I witness should not only be honest, but in- | telligently observant. The first witness could not recognise Lord Euston by his features, but picked him out by the prosecutor walking two or three yards along the court. The second witness, Smith, Eaid the man they saw go into the house was dressed in a dark frock coat, while O'Loughlin, who was with Smith at the time, said ho wore a light grey suit. The photographs afterwards shown O'Louglin depicted Lord Euston in a grey suit, and it was subsequent to seeing that that the witness svrore he recognised the prosecutor at Hyde Park corner as the man seen in Cleveland street. Smith knew Lord Euston by his trousers, which he said were baggy, but yesterday he wore a frockcoat, and from where the witness stood the extraordinary trousers— if existing — could not be seen. Then again Lord Eueton was Gft 4in, and the witnesses had spoken of sft Bin, a vaat difference in the height oi' a man. The two pot-boys, or barmen out of work, swore ' positively to seeing Lord Euston in Cleveland street, and yet when the inquiry agent called upon them they were shown the photograph and asked "Is that the man you mean ? " la all cases it was better to give witnesses an opportunity of relying upon their own knowledge rather than that the identification should be refreshed by the sight of the portrait of the person sought to be identified. No doubt Mrs Morgnn had an opportunity of learning the character of the house in Cleveland street, but although she had seen fifty or sixty persons enter the house the witness 8 wote that the only person she would be able ! to recognise was Lord Euston. No doubt the | Jury would have liked to see the "man with a big stick," who took O'Loughlin to identify Lord Euston; " the little black man" who did the came with Mrs Morgan; and Cautain Webb, whose name had been "mentioned. Turning to the evidence of " that creature Saul," the learned judge said a more melancholy spectacle he had never witnessed. He hoped for the honour of the police of this city that it was not true that they had dealt kindly with him. Lord Button had suid that Saul's evidence was as foul a perjury as a man could commit. The Jury would have to ask themselves whether they preferred the oath oi a man who had committed crimes confessedly for which he might be sent 'to penal servitude (and he marvelled much that no one had suggested that the man should be prosecuted), or that of Lord Euston. The man Saul had stated that he was now under the care of someone, that he was living on the fat of the land, and that he— the vilest of vile creatures — was allowed to walk abroad. The man had sworn that in August he gave his statement with regard to Lord Euston to Inspector Abberline, and if coufiriDation of it could be obtained he (the learned Judge), as one of the public, had a right to know why a warrant was not at once issued against Lord Euston. Failing corrob'oration of this creature's tale it would have been gross cruelty to Lord Euaton to act upon it. The wretch's story had not been spoken to by any other witness. Saul had coupled the names of Hewitt and Newlove with that of Lord Euaton. Hewitt had left the country, whether for good or bad, bat Newlovo although not within the sound of his (the Judge's) voice, was within the reach of the cab. Why had not the diligent inquiry oflice suggested that Newlove should have the photograph shown him ? Besides that, not one single individual who had ever been connected with the house in Cleveland street had been called to speak to seeing Lord Euston in the house. Some of the boys were in the country, and could have been called. Whether ni^h or low, rich or poor, every mau was entitled to justice., and to say, " If you make a charge against me, prove it." Another striking fact to bo remembered was that since a certain date in ISB7, although Saul had stated that he often saw Lord JSustou in Piccadilly, he never had any communication with him; nor, being pinched with poverty, did he appeal for any money to the man who, if his story waa true, was in his power. It was conceded that it was to the public interest that certain things should be made known, bub it was to the last degree inexpedient, unjust, and cruel that matters reflecting seriously upon the character of an individual should be made public unless there was solid foundation for it. The whole question was whether Lord Euston had been proved a miscreant or was he entitled to the verdict that the case had not been proved ? The Jury retired at 3.5, and returned into Court at 1.45, with a verdict of " Guilty," and that the justification was not proved. Mr Mathewa called attention to the fact that the prisoner had stated in his newspaper that if the libel was not proved he had no desire to escape the natural consequences. He wished the Judge to further notice that on Nov. 30 the prisoner published a portrait of Lord Euston, although he had been returned for trial on Nov. 26. The Judge : Well, no one would recognise Lord Euston's picture. Mr Matthews said that did not affect his intention. Up to Nov. 16 not one single i fact was in the possession of the prisoner upon which he could rely. Mr Eoskill (now appearing for Mr As'juith) said they had had no notice of this. The Judge : Then I will postpone the case until to-morrow if you wish. Mr Eoskill did not think the statement made would justify him taking ihe responsibility of a postponement. Mr Parko having obtained permission to speak, said throughout the whole case he had acted in perfect good faith, and had published what be conceived to be to the public interest. He did not print the libel without having evidence to support it; but what that evidence was he could not say. The Judge : The libel is an exceedingly bad one; but if you would like to have until to-morrow to give me any information which you think would alter my view I of the matter you shall do so, but at present as the evidence stands I see none that was in your possession at the time the libel was published. Mr Parke : I can only state that I had evidence in my possession. The Judge : Yes, but it is a very serious thing to publish in a paper having a circulation of 4000 or 5000 copies, imputations of a horrible character. Mr Parke said that with regard to the first point raised by Mr Mathews, he would have to abide by the result, but the portrait of Lord Euston was published for precisely the same reasons as it appeared in many other papers. Among other evidence at the time of publication he had Saul's statement. The Judge : At the present moment I fail to see any evidence which would justify, morally, the publication of the libel upon which the Jury have returned a verdict of " Guilty." It was for that reason I desired to give you an opportunity of putting before me any matter which would in any way palliate or mitigate your guilt. I do not think I could allow you to remain under the impression for a moment that anything in your statement shows you honestly believed the libel true when you published it. As a matter of course, I could not be satisfied with your bare statement. At present it standß in my mind as a very atrocious libel without •

111111..111L1.1. I»M»I— I»MM 111 in in.. | .! any justification, in fact, all the witnesses Lad their evidence taken after the hearing before the magistrate. You shall have until to-morrow morning if you like to think it over or have any communication with your counsel. Mr Iloslrill thought it better for all par ties that the matter should be decided. The Judge said that that being the casehe would say that there was never a more atrocious libei. The prisoner had before him nothing more than rumour that Lord Euston had been guilty of an abominable crime, for which he would have been, liable to bo sent into penal servitude for life, a. sentence which would have been hardly sufficiently expressive of the horrorfelt at a gentleman in his posiuon being guilty of so wicked and grave a crime. The prisoner suggested he had other evidence. He could hardly credit thestatement, und at least it was shown that the prisoner could place no reliance upon, it. A plea which said that others advised the publication he would never tolerate* He had expressed himself as strongly as a man could o'o, and he felt compelled to say that he absolutely and entirely ngreed with the verdict of the Jury. He did not believe it would have been possible to find in Englaiid twelve men who, conscientiously, honestly, find carefully looking at the evidence, could have come to any other conclusion than that this was a. ■wicked libel, published without any justification, and endeavoured to be supported, by testimony ab-olutely unworthy of credence. He. would pass a sentence which, ho hoped, besides being a punishment, would be a warning to others not to publish such libels. The sentence would be one of twelve months' imprisonment. The prisoner, who received his scntenc© with composure, was then removed to the cells. A WOIID FOR THE DEFENDANT. It is only i>iir to Mr Parko's intelligence, and to the common sense of his legal advisers, to explain that when he embarked on the plea of justification he fully expected to be able to produce a number oS witnesses who were non est on Wednesday. Where they disappeared to, and who provided then with lunds to go, the luckleEO young journalist has not baen able to ascertain. He soon touud, indeed, that a much longer purge than his would be necessary Jo muke any sort of a fight against the prosecution. The private enquiry agenta ho employed wera noland of msitch for Mr George Lewis. As a last btraw, too, police assistance suddenly diiod up, and peor Parke had to choose between going to prison and violating thn eonJi-Jeneo of the detective who originally supplied him with the story. Had he dono this he might have got off with six months le.ss, but the detective would certainly have been turned out o£ the force. Th-j Judge, who was quite shrewd enough to see that there was more in the affair than met the tye, offered, to adjourn the ca-e in order to give Parke an opportunity of shewing- on what evidence he had really anted. The defendant ought undoubtedly to buvo taken advantage of this, but hid nerves were completely demoralise by the long strain* " I would rather," he said, " know my fate at once."