Los Angeles daily herald., 1889-03-26
THE PIGOTT AFFAIR.
AttOrney-General Webster in
Trouble Over 1t.
" THE LIE CONSTRUCTIVE" GIVEN
Awkward FlOundering to Explain a
Clumsy FalsehOOd Told in
the Commons.
[Associated Press Dispatches to the HERALD

NA7SNNNS@NN ~
LONDON, March 25.-In the Commons
this afternoon Sir Charles Russell made
statement regarding the speech made
by Attorney General Webster in the
House on Friday last. He read letter
which he had written to Webster, in
which he said he did not believe Web
ster had been correctly reported. 1t was
absolutely incorrect to say that before
Pigott's examination or before Pigott
fed, he (RusselD had received informa-
ton direct or indirect to the effect that
Pigott discredited the value of his own
testimony. 1t was absolutely incorrect
to say that he had either called for or re-
ferred to letters conveying such informa-
ton. The Attorney General was mis-
taken in supposing that he had given
him, five days before Pigott testified, let
ters discrediting Pigott's evidence.
The letters in which Pigott had con-
fessed his fear of cross-examination had
come upon the speaker and his colleagues
as complete surprise. He did not inn
pute dishonorable motives to the Attor-
ney-General, but thought that Webster
had been led away by the political char
acter of the case into course of conduct
which, on reflection, and in less exciting
circumstances, he would not have pur-
sued. [Cheers.1 Continuing, Sir Char
les said that, even when Pigott mad tes-
tilted, he did not get the letters to which
reference had been made. Webster ad-
mitted that, relying upon his memory,
he had erred when he wrote to Sir Char
les Russell, but argued that in any case
the matter was unimportant.
The Attorney. General persisted that if
Sir Charles Russell had consented to
have the letter from Soames to Pigott
read in court, he (RusselL would have
been in position to demand the corres-
pondence to which it referred.
Auquits, who is one of the Parnellite
counsel, asserted:positively that neither
he nor Sir Charles Russell had a ghost of
glimmering of notion that letter of
Pigott's existed in which he announced
that his testimony would be discredited.
Harcourt contended that no answer
had been given to his charge that Web
ster, knowing Pigott to be doubtful
witness, had allowed the Times. for two
months TO repeat it's odious charges, and,
further, he sat silent while Houston af-
frmed that he had complete trust in
Pigott, which statement Webster knew
to be false.
Webster replied: 81 have protested
that I had no means of knowing that
Houston's statement was untrue"
Harcourt, resuming, said that the at
torney might weave cobwebs of misera-
BILE professional etiquette about the
matter, but the common sense of the
nation would revolt against the keeping
alive to the last moment OF charges
known to be false, as an act of profess
sional cruelty and injustice. Sir Edward
Clarke, Solicitor. General, spoke in
defense of Webster. Labouchere
said that Houston, soanes and
Webster had all avoided asking
questions concerning Pigott. He attacked
the Gladstonian lawyers, who abstained
from voting when division was taken
on Friday. Morley said he had not a |
word to withdraw from what he had said
in Fridays debate. The subject was
then dropped.