The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1889-02-23
lie Is Forced to Admit that He Told Untruths
and there Is Reason to Believe that He Is
the Forger Of the Parnell Letters.
A Display of Depravity Rarely Equaled
in the History of Legal Proceedings.
Belief that the Defeat of the 'TimeS" Will Ma.
terially Assist the Home-Rule Cause
Serious Disasters in the Far East.
THE RASCALLY PIGGOTT.
He Breaks Completely Down and Confesscs
HimSelf liar

uau startling enect upon puDllc OPINION,
and the matter is almost the sole topic of
conversation in all circles in and out of the
lObbies of the House of Commons. The
conviction is rapidly becoming general that
Piggott himself is the forger of the so-called
Parnell letters, and Tories vie with Par
nellites In the depth of their condemnation
of the wretch who is convicted out Oh his
mouth of acts scarcely less heinous than
those of Judas Iscariot. The Pail Mall
Gazette publishes long leader, triumphant
IN tone, this afternoon, IN, which 1t
declares that the collapse of
the tn tbs Illness te.Gns oase brought Mopansa aoGat
Houston and Pigott. has made home rule for
Ireland fOregOne conclusion. 1t is as.
serted that Mr.. Walter, who was mainly re-
sponsible for the Times crusade against MI.
Parnell. will personally bear all of the ex-
penses and costs incurred by the paper in
conducting the case before the commission,
even if he has to sell his estates to raise the
money. This resolve is believed to be the
result of a stormy interview between Mr..
Walter and his cOpartners in the prOprle-
torship, in which the matter of the papers
inability to pay it's usual dividend was the
foremost topic, and Mr.. Walters sudden an
nouncement of his intention to go to NICE
10 recuperate is undoubtedly another result
of that heated meeting.
The courtroom was crowded again tins
morning when the Parnen commission re-
assembled. The cross-eXamination of Pig
gOtt was continued. He admitted writing
letter to Archbishop Walsh, which Sir
Charles Russell produced in court, and
which contained statement that the dOcu-
mentary and personal evidence to be pro-
duced before the commission could be rem
dered harmless by an exposure of the means
by which it had been obtained.
At the suggestion of Presiding Justice
Hannen, Archbishop Walsh's letter to Pig
gott, part OF which was read yesterday, was
read in extenso. The Archbishop referred
to the fact that there had been systematic
lying concerning the Nationalist cause.
The witness now admitted receiv-
ing this letter. He said that when
he wrote to the Archbishop cilOp he
owing to having received no money from
Mr.. Houston. The witness's other work
had been neglected and lost, He therefore
wrote to Archbishop Walsh, hoping that he
members of the House of Commons and in
duce them to provide the witness with
means with which to leave the country IN
return for the information the witness
would give, The witness was startled AID
Times, and considered it a breach of faith.
He wrote to Houston. strongly protesting
against their publication.
Sir Charles Russell demanded that this
Houston here said he had forgotten re-
On being further pressed, Piggott volun-
tarily exclaimed: II may say at once that
the statements bsnMatsd %adeto Archbishop Walsh
This statement produced sensation.
Sir Charles Russell then said to the wit
ness: "YOu deliberately wrote lies?"
The. witness replied, "Well, exaggera-
| tions."
Sir Charles Russell-Did the exaggera-
| tiOns have no truthl
Witness-Very little. [Laughter.l for
| get what / meant when wrote to Arch
bishop Walsh that the charges were mix
| ture Of what believed to be true and un-
| true.
Continuing the witness said he knew
| that criminal proceedings were projected
when he wrote, saying that he could nulll-
means ny 1n'" by y which, i WA was Sought to
| institute the proceedings. He could not
| say what the proceedings were to be
| taken for. He imagined that they were
for completely in the Phoenix Park muir
| ders but there was no foundation for the
| statement. The witness again wrote Arch
| bishop Walsh on May I. offering to furnish
| further information. In reply, to this let
ter the Archbishop said: 81 understand you
the victims of fraud and slander by expos
| ing the fraud and slander. l cannot refuse
| to accept such a statement fully. / accept
| your assurance that you took no part in the
publication" The witness said he forgot
| writing the statement
| Sir Charles Russell read a letter, dated
| May 5, to Archbishop Walsh, in which Pig
| gOtt offered to make personal written
| statement.
| ment to Archbishop Walsh between May 5
| and MAY z. He had written to Archbishop
| Walsh recently, but denied that he had
| done SO in order to again obtain the writ
| ten statement.
Sir Charles Russell read a letter from
| Archbishop Walsh to Piggott, bearing date
| of MAY z, in which the Archbishop said he
assumed that Piggott either knew the au-
| thor of the fraud or knew what measures
| had been taken to procure fraudulent evil
| dence. The writer said he did not wish to
| know the name of the gentleman who was
at the bottom of the matter.
Sir Charles Russell pressed the witness,
| who reluctantly admitted that he had
Houston in his mind when he wrote.
In reply to question by Presiding Justice
| Hannen, the witness said he was not sure
| that he received the letter.
| Sir Charles Russell quoted from letter
written by Piggott to Archbishop Walsh
The witness said he could not say what
the latest proposition mentioned in the let
ter meant. He only remembered making
one proposition, namely. that he had been
shown Compromising letters. His opinion
having been asked as to the genuineness OF
the letters, he had stated that the letters
| credited to Mr.. Parnell were rather doubt.
| full. This statement created a sensation in
the courtroom. The witness further testi
fed that he would not swear that he had
not told Archbishop Walsh that the letters
were forgeries. [Laughter.l He doubted
the authenticity of the letters because he
did not know the handwriting of the bodies
of them. He believed he told Archbishop
Walsh that he thought the Egan letters
were genuine, but would not swear that he
did. He was not sure whether Mr.. Hous
ton ever expressed doubts as to the gen
uineness of the letters. It was not OWNS
to Mr.. Houstons doubts that the witness
offered to re-obtain the money.
Sir Charles Russell read from letter IL
Archbishop Walsh, from Piggot. in which
he said: Il trust your Grace will do me thu
Justice to believe that am not the fabrica
tor Of the letters, as is falsely alleged
Sir Charles asked: WHO was the fabri
cators"
The witness replied that he did not know
Sir Charles-Did you believe there was
fabricationi
| Witness-No.
This answer caused laughter.
Mr.. Reid produced letter from PCgot
TO the late Vim. T.. Forster then Chief Sec
retary for Ireland, dated June 2. 1881. il
which he offered Mr.. Forster papers which
he said. would break up the League, fo
81. 500 or f1 600.
| The witness said that the issue Of tn