, 1889-02-23
DOLLARS WITH HIM.
Pig0tt Before the Parnell Com
mission.
He Could Tell OF Write Lies for
Money.
Completely Ratified by Parnell's
Counsel.

LONDON, Feb. 22.-The court room was
crowded again this morning when the
Parnell commission r~eassembled. The
cross-examination of Richard PIgott was
continued. He admitted writing a letter
to Archbishop Walsh which Sir Charles
Russell produced in court and which con.
tanned a statement that tie documentary
and personal evidence to be produced
before the commission could be rendered
harmless by exposure of the means by
which it had been obtained. At the sug-
gestion of Presiding Justice Hannah Arch
bishop Walsh's letter to Pigott, part Of
which was read yesterday, was read l
extenso. The archbishop referred to the
fact that there had been systematic lying
concerning the Nationalist cause. Wit
ness now admitted receiving this letter.
de said when he wrote to the archbishop
he was in very distressed circumstances
owing to having received no money from
Houston. Witness said his other work
had been neglected and lost and he there
fore wrote to Archbishop Walsh hoping
he would submit the matter 10 the Par
nelllte members OF the house of commons
and induce them to provide witness with
means with which to leave the country
in return Tor information witness should
give.
Witness was startled and surprised
when the letters appeared in the Times
and considered 1t a breach of faith. He
wrote Houston strongly protesting against
their publication. Sir Charles Russell
demanded hat this letter be- produced.
Houston here SAID he had forgotten re-
ceiving it. On being further pressed
Pigott voluntarily exclaimed: Il may
say at once that the statements [ made to
Archbishop Walsh are uniounded.' This
statement produced a sensation. Sir
Charles Russell then said to witness:
You deliberately wrote lies?"
Witness replied: We'll, exaggera-
tons"
Sir Charles Russell: did the exag-
gerations have no TRUTH"
Witness: Very little. Laughter.
| forgot what | meant when | wrote to
Archbishop Walsh that the charges we're
mixtures of what | believed 10 be true
and untrue"
Continuing witness said he knew
criminal proceedings were projected when
hC MIObS nay lux lhdl 1T COulu uullllN
them by exposing the discreditable means
ceedings. He could not say what the
proceedings were to be taken for. He
imagined they were for completely in the
Phoenix park murder, but there was no
foundation for the statement that the
witness again wrote to the archbishop
on May 2, offering to furnish further infor-
nation.
Sir Charles Russell read a letter dated
May 5, to Archbishop Walsh, in which
Pigott offered to make a personal written
statement. Witness admitted making
the statement to Archbishop Walsh re-
Gently, but denied hat he had lone so in
order to again obtain a written statement.
Sir Charles Russell read a letter from
Archbishop Walsh to Pigotts bearing date
of May I, in which the archbishop said
he assumed that Pigott either knew the
author OF the fraud or knew what meas
ures had been taken to procure fraudulent
evidence. The writer said he did not
wish to know the name of the gentleman
who was at the bottom of the mat
ter. Sir Charles Russell pressed witness,
who reluctantly admitted that he had
Houston in mind when he wrote.
Pigott said he had forgotten the letter
but admitted that he must have written
it. He had not the slightest idea as to
what importance the matter referred to
was. On being hard pressed and after
fencing he admitted that he must have
received an answer. Sir Charles Russell
read from a letter from Pigott to Egan
written on Feb. 2S in which it was stated
that he (Pigott) had received al anoDy-
nous letter from two gentlemen who
would call upon and submit to Pigott a
proposal greatly to his advantage. They
came but declined to give their
names. They had an interview
lasting two hours during which
they asked him to publish a statement
which was an outrageous libel about SPEND
ing the league funds and which was to be
so constructed that its publication would
do much harm. He was bafly in want of
$500, but would be satisfied with E4O0 in
addition to G3O0 already sent in consider
alton of his paper. Plgott concluded the
letter by saying: bad as | am. | can
those who trusted me-" Laughter. Wit
ness said Egan did not send the money.
Laughter.
On March 9 Pigott wrote to Eagan
giving an outline of the statement re-
iNiANN W
Sir Charles asked: Who was the fab
ricator?'
Witness replied that he did not know.
Sir Charles asked: Did you believe
there was a fabrication2'
Witness. No"
This caused much laughter. Witness
here produced a letter from Pigott to the
late VIM. +. Foster. then chief secretary
of Ireland, dated June =, 1881, in which
he offered Foster papers, which he said
would break up the league, for el, 800.
Witness said the issue of the freshman
paper printed by Pigott depended upon
his receiving this sum, as creditors were
pressing him. Foster on June 5 refused
to accept the offer.
At presiding Justice Humans sugges-
ton Sir Charles agreed to read selections
from the letters instead of the whole of
them. Witness continued that he had
been in straits since 1881 and a~nxiously
turned to every quarter for money. Sir
Charles Russell produced a batch of let
tiers written by Pigott to Egan, including
one written on Feb. %, 1880, in which