The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1893-07-16
whom he had repeatedly declared by name
that she alone could give I'll

curately informed OF my movements and
whereabouts is Indicated. as have said. by
repeated references in her curious diary,
never submitted to me. only seen by my load
Ing counsel tv o days before the hearing OF the
case began. and put effectually beyond my
reach and beyond the reach OF the public pros
ecutor by you and By MI. Justice Cave For
the public prosecutor takes pains to say. as l
shaii hereafter snow. that ne never saw this
dlary. nbsolntoly vital ana essential TO the Tor
nation OF any honest OPINION not only upon
the merits OF tho case, but upon the question
OF the authorship OF the letters falsely and I'm
pudently attributed TO me- ana thnt he was In
complete Ignorance oil This diary when ne TOOK
In November 1871. certain proceedings against
me- Oh Which shan nave moro 10 say!
r,,u
| in"' III. 'i"in,ii' mus. nave Roe her inior-
NATION wnon sne po' any as 10 my move
u.en.e anu Mno,e"oou,s rom some person
| o.hei '""n h,'o,i 40 S"own 10 .he point o,
"ooo'u1 . uon ho' oniy w eeneia'
oohpar,soh y. nor ,e,erehees win ascertain
ao'e iao.'' put w =. ieaS. ono very singular
.n, v, iooo,ucu III 'h's
:. n, p,s'n'ii e"oie' VI 'he s.renstn
a. .n,s D.a ~ having hrse sworn 'na.
'ne mno,e nihry was a genuine record
pe INV on '''e io'n' i1'nt anu
.o.' VI na,' ,oo'' sue nao repeated interviews
VIII me ana reeeived repe",eo promises OF
i' .i'"so u oun nv IL iafis ~ mess inter
80 ,,' on .ne'e ."ieo .ou'1 1
90 e' e"oie. i'iteu Fian'0
.. 1000 80 viz ,piins anu 'uuiu ..
"v b'Sper,ns '1e oooA on '"e
si.o 'ss.Vnu VI ~h,en hnNe s1eAuy
~. en .',, "n'. us n"Ve A,IeAuy s.".eu'
,oon p W,.s ~ nns,anu eafy IN .he
.,a III -. wa, anN ~, ,ne. 'nOu.u
~ I'm uansia.e in.o Ife ,aaa. , Dur-
aas.,a -, .s,. -, w ensas'u III 'he p.ep-
an.. ~ +. ..s ooos, came 70 mo i,eauenuS
" aa.., ~ ie W." 'n'ol m", ,i,
"N' no HA's"' my
~, ~ ~ ,,'use'' ,noi e'o,e' 40 We"
.n.o, nn s a. ne .ouiu u. .na' ume VI m. move
nons' w. "'"",s ',i"usn hssei'' ou' w IN
49, u. NY 90. ,nht' on felercnce 70 her
WV piN"'e 'ouins,' a'.er the nearing Oh 'nis
ease anu III" verdict IN my favor. my WHO
ten) that 1t had been my intention for
some days before the 18th of May.
1881. to leave London for Paris on that
day. At the last moment as 1t seems from her
journal was unexpectedly detained and did
not, in fact go to Paris until the 10th of May.
1889 As was still In London. the same jour
nal shows that on the 18th OF May dined with
my wife at the house OF military officer Of
great distinction In Bruton street and that for |
$3.50 ~
1852 went out nightly in London with my |
vile! Here. then. you must admit. is an abso- |
lutte demonstration OF two things. The first. |
that the plaintiff. being then in Paris, must |
have received Information from some ono in |
London OF my Intention to be in Paris |
either on the evening Of the 18th or
on tho morning OF the 18th May. 1880.
The second. that the plaintiff. suppos-
ing me. when she constructed this Diary
inh tv fla,
been In Paris on the 18th. 14th and 18th OF
May. 1883. deliberately invented. wrote out
and swore to a series OF absolutely impossible
interviews. conversations and relations as
had by her with me In Paris on the 18th. 14th.
ana 10Th OF May. 1883. during the whole OF
which time was In London with my wife!
BY whom can this plaintiff have been in
formed OF my intention to DO in Paris on the
18th OF May. 1882
she could hardly have ventured to swear that
she was actually in my company in Paris on
inc 1'th 18TH. ana 10Th OF May 1883. during
the whole OF which time. as 1t happens. was
with my wife in London! Certainly by some
one who had more or less accurate means OF
informing himself about my movements Will
fred Murray under his alias Of ROLAND. was
known to my servants as person who
SSNeo'oAAS Soiho ~ o0S iiO ou ousiuc5s, huu |
was received by me- 1t was easily possible
ior MIN therefore from time to time to call
Mt my house and there obtain Information
about me. either with or without my knowl-
edge. Certainly also the plaintiff must have
been informed OF my intention to 60 to Paris
on the 18th OF May. 1889. BY some one who
had an interest in giving her this informa-
lion. and who being in London. was in COM
munication with her in Paris VIII you deny
that all these conditions coexisted In the per-
son OF Wilfred Murray9 II there is now. and
then was. no such person as Wilfred Muir
ray. and II this imaginary person" OF
the plaintiffs counsel was not very real per-
son having very real relations with the plain
til. and having reasons Of his own and OF her
own for Keeping her moro or less accurately
whenever he could. OF my move
ments. who was this person by whom she was
led to believe that should be in Paris on the
18th OF May 1888?
~