THE M'MAHON CASE

Evening Star, Issue 22445, 16 September 1936, Page 9

THE M'MAHON CASE

PRESS COMMENT ON TRIAL REFERENCE TO FOREIGN POWER, DOUBTED ■JPres* Association —By Telegraph—Copyright LONDON, September 15. The Press Association states on reliable authority that the name M'Mahon wrote down in court was the German Embassy. When the report was referred to an authoritative quarter the only comment was: “ Does anyone really take this seriously?” Mr Kerstein, who appeared for M'Mahon in the lower court, told the •‘Daily Herald’: “The Power concerned is Germany. I informed the authorities of this plot after hearing about it from M'Mahon while he was in prison. Following my reports, the King’s French holiday was cancelled and he went to Eastern Europe instead.- Secret Service men verified many of M'Mahpn’s statements. Severalofficers were subpoenaed to give evidence, but were not called. Meanwhile the question of the King’s safety is being considered.” ■ In a leader, the ‘ Daily Telegraph ’ says: “ M'Mahon’s story bears every mark of improbability. The notion that any interest of a foreign Power would be furthered by the assassination of the British Monarch could only be born of a diseased mind. The policemen on the scene are worthy of all praise for their promptitude in handling an alarming situation, but it is plain from the trial that a little more official perspicacity would have saved M'Mahon from folly and avoided public alarm.’ f The Times ’ says: “ No Englishman would be inclined to convict a foreign Power of plotting against the King’s life on evidence such as M'Mahon’s. M'Mahon is evidently part of the economic wreckage of the day, an intellectual and moral weakling broken by unemployment, and nursing grievances until they became blind rancour against society.” REASON FOR APPEAL ALLEGED MISDIRECTION BY JUDGE LONDON, September- 15. (Received September 16, at 12.30 p.m.) M'Mabon is appealing, mainly on the 'grounds of the judge’s alleged misdirection in pointing out to the jury that M'Mahon’s story was told at the Old Bailey for the first time, whereas there is unchallenged evidence that he told his story at the War Office months previously.