Five Mile Beach weekly journal., 1915-02-12

tainly waited. They were trying to
find out my antecedents, but they did
not succeed.
A letter from the Lord Provost in
formed me that all material for my
defense should be in his hands a day
before the trial. / had no defense. l
neither denied nor admitted anything.
l replied to his Lordship that as l was
unaware of any offense there was no
need of any defense. My attitude was
a profound puzzle-which was as /
wanted.
s%cotIand's "Most Sensational Court
Procedure"
If you care to look over the back
files of the English and Scottish news
papers of the time, you will read that
my trial was the most sensational
court procedure ever held in a Scottish
court of Justice"
Now I shall reveal every circum-
stance Of 1t. For the first time l shall
explain how, why and by whom l was
secretly released. Until I revealed my
self in the United States, even the
German foreign office thought me in
Jail.
Against me the crown had sum-
moned As witnesses. They included
admirals, colonies, captains, military
and naval experts, post Office. officials
Il cannot recall all. The pressfrom all
parts Of Europe-for all Europe was
vitality concerned in this trial-was
represented.
Presiding was the Lord Justice of
Scotland, himself no mean expert in
military matters. The Solicitor Gen
eral of Scotland, A. M. Anderson, who
prosecuted for the crow was sup
ported by G. Morton, Advocate Depu.
ty. The government had indeed an
imposing array of bewigged, black
gowned, legal notables marshaled
against me.
Those familiar with English court
procedure know the impressive man.
ner with which justice is dispensed.
Punctually at ten on the morning Of
July 23, 1912, my trial opened.
Expressing establishment a my re-
fusal to accept counsel-which was
subsequently forced on me-his Lord
ship promised to guard my interest
Oh legal points; and guard it he did.
Repeatedly he ruled against the solicit
tor general and challenged him on
more than one point. am frank in
my admiration of British justice. Ny
trial was a model of fairness.
A Word to an Admiral.
On the first day I waived examina-
tion ON all witnesses except the naval
ard military experts. l directed my
fire against Rear Admiral T. B. STRAIT
ton Adair, who superintendent the ord
nance factories of the Beardmore Gun
works in Glasgow.
The admiral was called in on testi.
mony concerning the new 14-inch gun.
The point they were trying to estab-
fish vas that it was impossible for
a man to have my knowledge of these
guns unless he had obtained it first
hand from. the works In Glasgow. OF
course, that brought the testimony
into t~echnicalities. / managed to in
volve the admiral in a heated alterca-
ton IN the trajectory and penetrating
power of the so-much disputed 14-inch
gun.
l maintained that my knowledge of
guns al such that l did not need to
spy at Beardmore to obtain the things
l knew.
The upshot of 1t was that the first
day Of the trial ended with every
body positive that | would not be
found guilty on the charge of obtain
ing secret information about their
guns. OF course, all this information
l had obtained.
The second day Of the trial brought
the Chemical company letter into the
testimony-the letter that had been
refused me and had in turn gone back
to the Chemical company. Very grave
ly Sir A. M. Anderson, Crown Prosecu-
tor, read the contents of this letter
aloud. AS / recall the exact wording
it was:
I'VE are pleased to learn your uc-
cessful negotiations of the business at
hand. Be pleased to send us an early
sample. AS regards the other matter
In hand l do not know how useful it
will be to us. In any case my firm is
not willing to pay you more than 100
in this case"
It was unsigned.
What the Letter Really Meant.
While reading, the prosecutor held
the five ten-pound notes in his hand.
Upon finishing he began a vigorous in
dictment which in substance he de-
claimed in this way:
"On the face of it, the letter does
not seem suspicious. But If you gen.
tlemen will recall the times of Prince
Charles Instructions. periods when
ever intrigues were going on. you will
remember that in communications of
this sort a government was always re-
ferred to as a 'irm.' If this was an
honest business letter why was it en-
closed in the envelope stationery of a
company that knew nothing about it?
Why was this letter unsigned? Why