The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1895-02-10
OFFICIAL LYING.
In Answering Questions in ParIia-
mcnt Truth Is often Evaded.

IN Answering Questions in ParIfa-
mcnt Truth Is often Evaded.
| Ex-Attache. in New York Tribune.
Mr.. Labouchere's sarcastic suggestion in
a recent issue of London Truth that
royal commission should be appointed to
consider the question of official lying in
the House Of Commons serves to draw
attention to a serious and growing evil
/ inherent and it is to be feared indispen-
siole, to the social system Of the present
era. In England. as in all the constitu-
/ tional countries in Europe where the
cabinet officers occupy seats in Parlia-
ment' the legislators enjoy the right of
interrogating the government with re-
/ gard 10 its policy and its administration
I Oh the auairs of the nation. Frequently
1 THESE inquiries are of an extremely indis-
/ crete ana awkward chacter; and If ad-
1 dressed by the opposition. are either in
I tthded 10 embarraSs the ministers or to
( lnNeisle them into making statements
I or compromising and boomerang nature.
me result is that these representatives
/ of the government who constitute lis
/ mouthpieces in parliament devote a con-
1 SIDERABLE amount of labor as well as in
sehulty to answering these questions in
Such a manner as TO mislead those by
/ wnom they are made and to misrepre-
sent what is the truth Indeed the promO-
/ ton of parliamentary under-secretaries.
junior lords and OF other budding states
men depends in great measure upon the
cleVerness displayed by them in IAN
swerinng question" in the House; and
thus an official premium is set by the
highest authorities of the land upon equiv
! ocation and lying.
=. II cannot be denied that this is contrib
uting, in large degree, to the decline Of
that lofty regard. for truth which, in the
good old times, constituted one of the
finest qualities of the MISUNDERSTANDING
| race True. the franlness was often bru-
tai sometimes even cruel; yet it formed
! so TO speak, the backbone of the people
Its principal sources of strength: and al
togelher foreigners might sheer at our
ooFlshness, they respected our veracitv
Like the Chinese, we were reputed dis
agreeable-what the French so pictures
auely describe as 'mauvais coucheurs"
(angelic, unpleasant bed-fellows)-but as
in the case of the Chinese our word was
| accepted as being as good as our bond
ANA The distinction between American
and English statesmen on the one side and
those OF foreign countries on the other
was that II YVES possible TO credit implic-
lilly the assurances Of the former, while
in the case of the latter it was usually adj
Vlsable TO believe just the contrary of
what they asserted. No one realized this
to a greater extent or took ADVANTAGE
| thereof In a more amusing manner than
! the founder of the German empire Prince
Bismarck. Unlike the MacchiavelH of old.
he made a point of invariably hurting out
the truth, even when he might have re-
NAMED silent, thereby successfully mis-
leading diplomats reputed the shrewdest
| Of their day. For they could not realize
that he really meant what he said, and
persisted in acting on the mistaken theory
that, like themselves, he used the gift Of
| speech merely to conceal his thoughts and
plans, and usually placed an interpreta-
ton upon his utterances directly opposite
to their meaning.
Prince Bismarck, however, like Ben
| jamin Franklin, who pursued an identi-
cal policy of straightforwardness at the
court of Versailles nearly 100 years pre-
viously with similar consequences, belongs
to bygOne age, and so, alas! speaking
broadly, does the school of British states
men that placed veracity in political and
official life on the same basis as personal
! honor.
It is certainly not in the days of Robert
Peel, of Canning and of William Pitt that
ministers of the crown would have been
permitted to pledge in parliament their
word to things which they knew to be un-
true, without loss of consideration pres
tige and respect Different ideas now pre-
vail, and lying has to such degree be-
come part and parcel of our social system
that positive chaos would result were the
reign of truth 10 be suddenly re-estab-
| nshed. This is to be deplored; for with all
due respect TO Engilsh-speaking people,
they do not make successful liars. In the
first place, they lack Imagination, inven-
tive power and a sense of the picturesque
Neither are they as a rule sufficiently
quick in repartee and fertile In resource.
| They are devoid of the gift Of artistic
ornamentation, indispensable to the real
| ly accomplished liar, and finally, they are
handicapped by remnants of those scruples
for truth which they may be said to i'm
bloc with their mothers milk in tender
est infancy-and the slightest scruple for
truth, it must be borne in mind, is fatal
to the perfect lie. However, these impede
ments are bound TO disappear within the
space of the next generation or two. But
it will take considerably longer before we
can ever hope to rival in the art of lying
Orlentals such as the Persians, the Turks,
the Indians and the japanese. All these
may be described as born liars instead Of
being merely educated to untruth, as in
our case. The Persians, for instance, lie
even when the truth would serve their
purpose equally well-Q have sometimes,
however, been tempted TO believe that
there is a Persian strain in the blood Of
the domestic servant class in this country
but they do It so glibly so artistically
and so agreeably that they actually COM
mand your admiration and esteem. ORR
entail lying presents a striking analogy to
Oriental embroidery.
In each case the foundation Is Of the
very hlmsiest character; but so profuse
is the application and so intricate the de-
sign thereof that one loses sight alto
eether Of the unsubstantial character Of
the original fabric. Orentais exemDlfy
above all the others the very highest
type of liar. and when they tel hb
they are prepared for all that Its creta-
ton entails, namely, the necessity Of