The Portland daily press., 1891-01-05

The attack upon Col. S. ii. Allen, the
warden Of the Maine state Prison, contained
In some alleged correspondence from
Thomaston which was published in the Bos-
ton Herald OF Saturday, was entirely I'M
worthy OF journal like the Herald which is
continually prating about fairness and decen-
cy. Col. Allen was represented as nobody,
entirely incompetent to properly perform
the duties of lis Office, and under the thumb
OF one Of the prison convicts. The author
ity for the charges made were certain people
OF Thomast0n whose names were not given
and discharged convict whose name also
was omitted. No opportunity was given the
warden to reply to them. and they were not
even brought to his attention until they were
given to the public. While it is proper
enough to criticise the conduct of public
Officers in public journals very moderate
regard for decency suggests that when a
man of good character and good standing is
assaulted in public print he should at
least be given an opportunity to present his
defence, especially when the attack is made
on the strength of assertions of anonymous
persons and persons whose characters and
careers have been such that the state has
had to confne them for many years for the
public good. Col Allen has been known to
the people of Maine for many years as an
upright and capable man, and this attempt
to injure him in their regard. inspired at it
evidently was by malice, on ght not to have a
feathers weight with right minded people.
Now that the rear-guard question is to be
dropped for time the London papers
move further back into the past and reopen
the question of the blame for the death in
Zululand of Prince Napoleon, only son of
Napoleon, Ill. This event occurred in June,
1879. and after this lapse of time the young
mans memoirs have been published
written by Count d'Herisson. This
gentleman charges the death of the Prince
to French Republicans who, he says, bribed
Lieut.. Carey of the English army to lead him
into ambush and then desert him. The Lon
don Times is inclined to believe this, but
the other papers repel the insinuation
against the British officers honor and there
the battle RACES. Archibald Forbes, the
famous war correspondent, settled this mat
ter once and will doubtless come forward
again If therei is any danger of the quarrel
leading to bloCdshed. He was on the ground
when the Prince was killed and helped to
carry him back to camp. Mr.. Forbes made |
short work of the French theory. He said |
that the Prince asked permission to ride |
ahead of the army to select spot for a
camp. He took small escort, and Lient. |
Carey, along for the purpose of finding out |
how the land lay. Carey was an engineer |
officer and was in no way the commander of |
the party. They had reached a river and |
dismounted, stopped to rest and eat dinner. |
A party of Zulus surprised them. Five of |
the escort, including Lieut. Carey, mounted |
and fed at top speed. Lieut.. Carey told the |
court that afterwards tried him for coward
ice, that he saw the Prince running beside /
his horse preparing to mount and supposed /
he did. He did not, however, for the rein /
to which he was holding broke and his horse
ran away from him. He was soon sur
rounded by Zulus, and scOrning to fly was
and fell covered with spear
wounds. Lieut.. Carey did act towards
part in the attack. but he was in no way re-
sponsible for leading the Prince into dan.
GER That gentleman proposed the expedi-
ton himself, he was its commander, and
brought on whatever disasters came to 1t by
pegIecting to post sentinels when he stopped
for dinner. The memoirs of the Prince as
written by Count d'Herisson form
/ thinIy disguised campaign docu-
nent of the French imperialists, but there
s no good reason why the English or Ameri-
IAN papers should spend much strength dis
,ussing them.