Face of Winifred May Davies
Latest topics
» Why Jesus Is Not God
Mon 17 Apr 2017 - 0:09 by Karen

» The Fourth Reich
Fri 14 Apr 2017 - 14:14 by Karen

» Allah, The Real Serpent of the Garden
Tue 7 Mar 2017 - 11:45 by Karen

Sat 4 Mar 2017 - 12:06 by Karen

» Hillary Clinton (Hillroy Was Here)
Fri 28 Oct 2016 - 17:38 by Karen

» Alien on the Moon
Thu 20 Oct 2016 - 21:57 by Karen

» Martian Nonsense Repeats Itself
Thu 20 Oct 2016 - 18:43 by Karen

» Enlil and Enki
Fri 7 Oct 2016 - 17:11 by Karen

» Israel Shoots Down Drone - Peter Kucznir's Threat
Wed 24 Aug 2016 - 22:55 by Karen

» Rome is Babylon
Sun 24 Jul 2016 - 21:27 by Karen



Parnell Commission Inquiry

Go down

Parnell Commission Inquiry

Post by Karen on Thu 7 Mar 2013 - 0:11

One hundred and twenty-second Day of Proceedings - Wednesday, November 13, 1889


When the Court met this morning the Attorney-General directed the attention of the Commissioners to a question arising out of the accounts, and asked the Court to order an official of the National Bank to attend before Mr. Cunynghame tomorrow and explain certain matters that they thought demanded explanation.
The Court having made the necessary order, Sir Henry James resumed his speech, continuing with his propositions concerning evictions and the action taken by the tenants and the landlords. This only occupied a few moments, and then Sir Henry submitted that he had answered the arguments of Sir Charles Russell, which attributed the outrages in Ireland to current distress, secret societies, and evictions. He would now take up the threads of the occurrences in Ireland where he had broken off to deal with these three points, viz., in 1881.


Here Sir Henry referred to the quotation from Romeo and Juliet made use of in the course of his speech by Sir Charles Russell. He said Sir Charles commenced at that point where Romeo declared, speaking of a starved man, "Famine is in thy cheeks," and left off at the sentence, "The world is not thy friend nor the world's laws." The words that his friend left out were just the pith of the matter, which had been recognised by the previous speakers to whom he had referred. After a colon came the declaration: -
"The world affords no law to make it rich,
Then be not poor but break it."
That, said Sir Henry, was the marrow of the quotation. That command, "Be not poor but break it," was just what leaders of the Land League had been giving all through the land in the speeches he had quoted, and that was the sole object of their agitation.


At considerable length Sir Henry dwelt upon the Lyden murder, and especially upon the conduct of Mrs. Walsh, one of whose sons, it is alleged, though guiltless of the crime, was executed for complicity in it, while another is now undergoing penal servitude. He pointed out that Mr. Davitt and others had endorsed the action of the widow, whom they considered to have acted nobly. If the leaders upheld this doctrine - that it was better that an innocent man should die than that a guilty one should perish - was there any wonder that crimes were committed? He declared that there was a conspiracy at work among the leaders of the movement to work up the people, and to direct them in the commission of crime. Here again Sir Henry digressed. He returned to events in America occurring almost concurrently with those in Ireland, to which he had been referring. Here again he sought to show the association between the revolutionary party on the other side of the water and the Land League here, and he was on this point when the Court rose for luncheon.


After luncheon Sir Henry went on to deal very exhaustively with the evidence of Le Caron. In the first place he spoke of the evidence Le Caron had given of his interview with Mr. Parnell in the House of Commons, and contended that if Mr. Parnell could not remember the interview, he could not remember the subject matter of the conversation which Le Caron said took place between them in the Lobby of the House. In this connection he mentioned the evidence of Le Caron as to Patrick Egan, and asked why the evidence of that gentleman was not before the Court. He described the evidence against Egan as very important, and even momentous, and asked why he had not given his evidence on Commission. Whilst the evidence had been massed against him right from the day he arrived in America, they saw no effort made to produce any evidence from Mr. Egan. Where was the reason that the application of Sir Charles Russell, that the evidence of Egan should be taken on Commission, was abandoned?
Mr. Davitt pointed out that directly the facsimile and other letters were proved forgeries that portion of the case was abandoned.
Sir Henry James contended that Sir C. Russell's application had a more far-reaching result, and was not alone applicable to the forged letters. Yet they had never had one word from Egan. Sir Henry paid little attention to the evidence of Dr. Kenny as to Le Caron directing attention to the testimony of the doctor that Le Caron "might" have called upon him at some period. Counsel critically examined the movements of Le Caron in America after his return, and contended that by these facts his credibility was established.
(The report will be continued.)

Source: The Echo, Wednesday November 13, 1889, Page 3

Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"

Posts : 4907

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum