KITCHENER MYSTERY

Hokitika Guardian, 18 August 1926, Page 2

KITCHENER MYSTERY

RESENTMENT AT HOAX

[Australian & N.Z. Cable Association.]

LONDON, Aug. 16. Interest in the Kitchener incident turned to resentment against the perpetrators of the hoax. The “Daily Express” editorially, says: “It is difficult. to decide wlnt steps can be taken against Power, who perpetrated a stupid imposture in connection with an honoured name. The brazen author of the ugly hoax might have derived considerable profit by exploiting the film rights and other financial possibilities of his masquerade. The exposure of the fraud will serve finally to settle all doubts.”

The “Daily Herald” in an editorial declares: “The whole business appears to have had a commercial: basis. The filming of the funeral procession in Norway supplies a duo, to n hitherto f unexplainable stir made about Ivitch-" oner’s last voyage. Now we know all about it, what a lot the films are responsible for. LONDON, Aug. 16. The “Daily News’ ” special representative at Sthvangcr, telegraphs an amazing revelation of Air Frank Power’s activities in Norway with the representative of a filming company. Without mentioning Lord Kitchener, the correspondent explained that he was preparing a melodramfi in which a tourist was supposed to die and to be transferred to England for burial. Air Power and the cinematographer proceeded to the cemetery and photographed a coffin containing a Stavanger magnate, resting in a chapel, preparatory to interment. A big episode was staged at noon on July 31st, when AM Power hired an empty coffin and hearse, and a number of hotel servants as mourners, the hotel proprietor providing a Union Jack to drape the coffin. After Air Power had persuaded crowds to give a. thorough doleful attitude to the ceremony, as an air of versiniilitude, the cortege moved solemnly to' the quay, where the captain of ,a Norwegian vessel allowed the coffin 'to ho brought aboard, though he declined to halfmast his flag. As soon as the scene had been photographed. Air Power remunerated the supers, and returned the coffin to the undertaker. The Norwegian Government was contempfating an official protest agpinst the body snatching, when it was, to its relief, informed that it was a hoax. LONDON, Aug. 16.

The “Daily Mail” states: “Mr Broome, Lord Kitchener’s nephew, interviewed, said it had been painful for the family, but it was their duty to stand aside until the authorities..had determined the truth or otherwise of the story. Ho now hoped that the whole miserable business would be dismissed from the public mind. If any attempt were made to show the film, they would aim at preventing it.”

\ FILM"MANAGER’S VERSION. LONDON, Aug. 16. Air Foster, manager of a filming company, explains his company’s share in Air Power’s adventure. He says tlialt Air Power stipulated that nothing offending to the public taste should bo attempted. He»ee there was nojilming of the actual remains, but they filmed the grave, the churchyard, and the cemetery, also eighteen hundred feet of typical Norwegian scenery. He pointed out that AH Power could not possibly make much money out of it, because the whole film was only equivalent to an episode in a topical film, and his share was only five per cent of the proceeds. The Home Office has requested, the film company to withhold the exhibition of the film. Air Foster adds: “Mysteries have Always fascinated Air Power.” He last saw him on Saturday evening. He understood that Mr Power left London, taking his wife, in order to spare her the worry of police investigations. It was. not known where they “ad gone.