THE PARNELL COMMISSION.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume II, Issue 266, 28 February 1889, Page 2

THE PARNELL COMMISSION.

PIGGOTT’S EVIDENCE. SEVERELY SHAKEN UNDER CROSSEXAMINATION. A GREAT SENSATION. THE PARNELLITE3 JUBILANT AT THE TURN OF AFFAIRS, London, Feb. 25. i Piggott’s evidence before the Commission was to the effect that ho went to Lauianne in January, 1881, and saw Davis, but his negotiations did not meet with success, and he ■, ported his failure to Houston. He returned . in February, and this time he was more suc- ; ceasful, Davis made a statement which i witness wrote out in his presence, and after* I wards forwarded it to Houston. In an i interview with Mr Parnell the latter asserted that he possessed proofs that he (Piggoti) was f forging letters. Witness stipulated that Mr > Lewis should withdraw the supcora rn order i to avoid him being obliged to give evidence, i To this Mr Parnell did not agree. Mr ; Labouchere demanded that he should enter the witness box and admit that he had forged the lotteisin order secure a oertifisate from 1 the Commission to escape punishment. Hn ’ took witness aside and forbade him mentionr ing money in the presence of Mr Parnell and denounced witness as a forger, accusing him ’ of receiving letteis from Mr Parnell in 1881 and 1882 from which he had copied words ’ and phiases and concocted the letters in the J p >ssession of the Times. He threatened that 1 unless witness acceded to Mr L-rbouohere’s I request he should be prosecu el for forgery and perjury. Mr Lab mohere again took him ) aside and offered him £lOOO to admit that the letters were forgeries. Witness admitted that j possible hd had mentioned they were for* geries, but he required £5OOO to do what he I was asked, and the matter was not settled. In the meantime the Times served him with a suposna.

Under cross-examination Piggott p'eaded the inviolability of the Confessional with regard to the admission made to Archbishop Walsh, and refused to divulge what had passed between them. The witness was staggered, by Sir Charles producing an admittedly authentic letter from Piggott informing Archbishop Wa'sh that an attempt would be made to wreck the Irish nartv upon evidence qui e sufficient for an English jury, but nevertheless be would be able to defeat and prove their innocence on condition that the Archbishop guaranteed secrecv.

Sir Charles Ru-sell quoted sentences from Piggott’s letters seriatim, and Piggott became flustered, hesitated, vacillated in his answers, and at last helplessly confessed he had forgotten the subjects indicated in the letters, and was unaware of his purpose in writing them.

A great sensation was caused in the House of Commons and London generally by the turn affairs have taken.

The Parnellites are jubilant, and consider the collapsing of the Times’ case is assured. Sir Charles Russell compelled Piggott to write several words occurring in the letters including “ hesitancy ” and “likelihood.” Piggott mis-spelt both in the same way that they appear in the letters.