New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-03-26
WEBSTER SAYS HE ERRED.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL LEFT IN A SORRY
PLIGHT.
MR CHARLES RUSSELL TAKES HIS LEGAL AID
yERsARY TO TASK FOR FALSE STATEMENTS
MADE ABOUT PIGoTr's LETTERS.

MADE ABOUT PIGoTT's LETTERS.
London, March 25.-In the House of Commons
this afternoon, Sir Charles Russell who, upon
rising, was loudly chcercd, said he desired to
make statement regarding 4 speech made by
Attorney General Webster in the House on Fri
day LAST He read litter which he had written
70 Nlr. Webster, in which he said that no did
not believe that Mr. Webster had been correctly
rcported 1t was absolutely incorrect to say
that before Pigott's examination, or before I1gott
hed he lRuSScln had received information direct
or indirect. to the effect that Pgott discrcdited
the value of his own testimony. IL was absO-
lutolv incorrect TO say that he had either called
for or refe rrcd 10 letters conveying such lnforma-
tion
At.ornevt General Websher, in reply to the
spcakcr's letter, had written that he believed he
had handed such letters to him/ but that he would
bavo 70 refer to his shorthand notes for con-
6rmation The AttOrneyGeneral was mistaken III
supposing that he had given him, five days pe1ore
Pjgoit testified letters discrcditing Plgotts evil
dence The letters in which P1gott confessed BIS
fear Of a cross-eXaminatlon had come upon the
speaker and his colleagues as complete surprise.
After Picott's flight they had repeatedly made
open complaint in court regarding the manner IN
which the Attorney-General had conducted the
the Attorney eneral, but he thought that Mr.
Webster had been led away by the political char
acer of the case into course of conduct which, on
re efeoton and in less exciting circumstances, ne
would not have pursued. tCheersD
Continuing Sir Charles Russell said that, even
when Pgott had testified, he did not get tne eI-
ters TO which reference had been made although
Mr. Webster offered to produce the etter OF no
vember s. He asked the Attorney General elther
TO admit that he was mistaken or to point out IN IN
the official report any reference TO the letter Oh
November D.
Mr. Webster admitted that, relying upon me m
ory, he had erred when he wrote TO Sir Charles
Russell. He argued that in any case the ma''cr
unimportant. =. o..
The Attorney General persisted that if Slr
Charles Russell had consented to have the lettcr
from Mr. SoamcS to PgOtt read IN court he
lSIr Charles would have been IN poSiuon 70
demand the correspondence to which 1t relerrei.
Mr. Asquith, who is one OF the f"rnelhle
counsel, followed. He asserted most P0sltlVeH
that neither he nor Sir Charles Russell had the
ghost or glimmering of notion that letter OF
Pigott's existed in which he announced that his
testimony would be diScrcdited.
Sir William Vernon llarcourt contended that
no answer had been givcn to his charge that MT
Webster knowing PicOtt to be ii doubtful witness,
had allowed Tic Times for two months to
re,eat its odious charges, and further, had sat
silent while Houston affirmed that he had com
plete trust in Pigott, which statement Mr. WEBSTER
knew To he false.
Mr. Wchstcr-I have protested that had no
means of knowing that HoustOn's statement was
untrue. -. -
Sir William Harcouyt. resumng, said that an
attorney might weave the cobwehS OF mNcE'nie
professional etiquette about the meter; hut the
common sense of the Nation would revolt agnlnst
the keeping alive to the last moment o. charieS
known to b. false an act of professional cruelty
ard Injustice.
Sir Edward Clarke. Solicitor-General, spoke IN
defence of Mr.. Webster. =,
MIR Laboucherc said that Mr.. Houston, Mr.
Eoamas and Mr.. Webster had all avoided asking
ouestjons concerning Pigott. He attacked the
Gladstonan lawyers who abstained from voting
when the decision was taken on Friday. -.
MIR Morley said ha had not word TO Withdraw
from what he had said in Fridays debate
The subject then dropped.