THE PAENELL COMMISSIONFORM AND SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY. THE FIRST SITTING. London, September 21.

Te Aroha News, Volume VI, Issue 318, 21 November 1888, Page 5

THE PAENELL MISSIONFORM AND SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY. THE FIRST SITTING. London, September 21.

TllK outcome of the firsb sitting of the Pavnell Commission has proved eminently satisfactory to the Irish party, and to the Gladstonians, and eminently unsatisfactory to the "Times." The Parnellites in fact score the first trick, and a very important trick to boot. All along the crucial question has been— with whom will the onus of pi oof lie? Will the Parnellites have to prove the "Times" charges false, or the "Times" have to show that its various allegationsarelrue. The Commissioners have decided that the latter is the proper course, and that the "Times " ought now to lay its full hand on the table. This certainly seems rather a large order, and one can scarcely wonder that the " thunderer's" counsel hesitated to assent bo it. The proceedings throughout the sitting are very interesting, as the following summary (written from a Home Rule standpoint) shows : — Punctually at eleven o'clock Ih juedges took their seats on the bench, Sir James Plannen, President of the Probate and Divorce Division, in the accustomed chair, with Mr Justice Day on right hand and Mr J ustice Smith on his his left". Having returned the salutation of thoso present, the President closely following written notes,- obsorved that it would be convenient it he stated the scope of the inquiry and the principles upon which it was" intended to proceed. As far as the limit ot the inquiry was concerned, it would be restricted to the charges and allegations made in t.he action known as " O'Donnell v. Walter." The Court had before them the plaintiffs and the defendants in that case, and they proposed to conduct the inquiry as if it were the issues raised between those persons, reserving power to call before them any of the " other persons " alluded to in the Act constituting the Commission. The inquiry would be proceeded with in accordance with the practice prevalent in other courts of justice. As a preliminary to establishing that condition of affairs the Presidentaskedfor whom the learned gentlemen before him appeared. SirCharlesßussellsaidheappeared for all the persons composing the Irish Parliamentary party. The President thought that was a convenient way of alluding to his clients, but indicated a desire to have more specific information as to their names, which Sir Charles Russell undertook to furnish. Mr Graham announced that, with the Attorney-General, he appeared on behalf of the defendants in the case of O'Donnell versus Walter and Another. Mr G. Kebbell, solicitor, proposed to appear for Mr Moser, late Director of the Criminal Investigation Department, Scotland-yard. But when the President blandly pointed out that Mr Moser's name did not appear in the charges or allegations, and that it would be time enough for someone to appear for him when it did, the solicitor sub«ided. There next followed a pretty little scene in which Sii Chailes Ru&seil and Mr Graham figured as coy suitors for the ear of the court. Sir James Hannen, always with an eye to business, inquired who was going to begin ? Sir Charles Russell thought that Mr Graham would like to lead off. Mr Giaham was certain that Sir Charles Russell would prefer to take precedence. After some fencing the President disclosed the fact that the Court was prepared for this little difficulty. Having considered the matter, they had, before taking their seats on the bench, decided that it would be for Mr Graham, as representing the defendants in the case of O'Donnell v. Walter to tender evidence in support of the charges and allegations set forth in the speech of the Attorney-General. It was further arranged at this stage that the case should be opened in speeches from counsel in the way usual in Courts of Law. Mr Graham thereupon intimated that he had three applications to make, one for the discovery of documents held by the Irish members, another for leave to issue summonses for the attendance of witnesses out of the jurisdiction, and a third for the discovery of certain books and documents connected with the business arrangement of the Land League and the National League, and alleged to be in the possession of j Mr Justin Martin. Sir Chailes Russell followed with a statement of the various applications. The first was for an order to inspect the letters cited by the AttorneyGeneral in his speech in the case of O'Donnell v. Walter, and for the furnishing of photographic copies of bhe same. Mr Graham said there would be no objection to the furnishing of the two letters of which fae?imiles had been given in the "Times." But Sir Charles Russell insisted that "all the letters must be discovered," and photographic copies supplied. After some conversation it was arranged that this application should be granted. On the next application, for the discovery of all documents in respect of the charges alleged against the Irish members, a long and occasionally animated discussion arose. Sir Charles Russell frankly declared that he and his clients were of the opinion that all theso documents were forgeries. "That," he said, "is the question your lordship, will have to decide." Mr Graham objected that if his clients were compelled to make disclosures of documents and to fui'nish other particulars relating to charges and allegations they would be placed in the position of litigants, and would be substituted for their lordships in the duty of getting at the bottom of the matter. Putting it in another way Mr Graham said, "We shall be letting out exactly how much we know," a deliverance from which predicament the learned counsel undisguisedly shrank. When Mr Graham incidentally alluded to something that had taken place in the House of Commons, the President quickly interposed to disavow any knowledge of anything that had taken place elsewhere. Holding up a well-worn copy of the Act, as being all he or his colleagues had to do with, he said, "I know nothing of what was said in the House of Commons." Mr Graham proceeded further to argue first that the Court had no power under the Act to compel him to make disclosures of documents or particulars, and that i£*xt had, the case was not one in which the power should be exercised. Sir Charles Russell having replied, aud Mr Asquith having ably supported his leader's arguments, the Judges withdrew to consider the point raised. < After an absence of nearly half an hour their lordships returned, and announced that having considered the matter, they were of opinion that the Act did give them power to order discovery of documents — a right which would of i course be exercised with respect to both

sides. Some conversation followed on the point of qualifications and restrictions of this power, Sir Charles Russell incidentally disclaiming any responsibility for " other persons " mentioned in the Act. He appeared solely for Mr Parnell and the oighty-four other Irish members implicated in the charges and allegations. Enlarging on the necessity for the exercise of the power of compelling disclosure claimed by the Court, Sir Charles read a series of the vague general imputations which cumber the pages of the pamphlet entitled " Parnellism and Crime." In an unusually emphatic manner, he said that what his clients wanted was " to have set forth in downright, plain, unsophisticated language " whether it was nob meant by these charges, inter alia, that they (the i Irish members) were privy to the Phoenix Park murders, either before or after, and, if so, which particular members were so privy. Mr Gi'aham, replying, modestly deprecated ability to supply the information sought bv Sir Charles Russell "Honestly," he said, he did not believe it could be done. "Do you," asked the President, "propose to substantiate any charges or allegations ?" Mr Graham answered that it was proposed to lay before the Court all the evidence the counsel for the "Times" possessed in support of the charges. | "What charges?" said the President sharply. But that Mr Graham "could not say," and was proceeding- to make further references to charges and allegations, when the President again interposing, observed that "The matter to be discovered is, What do you know at the present moment ?" Mr Graham still protesting his inability to give any pledge in the matter, the President significantly announced that he was merely asking for the assistance of the counsel for the " Times," and if that were not forthcoming the Court must find out for itself whab were the charges and allegations. " We make no allegations," pleaded MiGraham. "Then," asked the inexorable Judge, "who did? Who made such charges and allegations as are alluded to in the Act under which the Court sits ?" At this knotty point the Court adjourned for luncheon. When, half-an hour later, the judges again took their seats on the bench, the President announced that they had arrived at the conclusion that it was incumbent upon thorn to insist upon discovery in all matters relating to parties appearing at the inquiry of " O'Donnell * versus Walfer." The counsel for the "Times," the President announced, " must be forced to condescend to particularise the charges made. " If they refused, the Court would have the duty cast upon it. But the President besought Mr Graham to save trouble by furnishing particulars of the definite charge's which, after consideration, his clients are prepared to support, A further application by Sir Charles Russell for the issue of a Commission of Inquiry to visit America, with the parfcicularobject of examining Mr Patrick Egan, was held by the judges to be premature. But if Mr Egan were wanted and did not appear, it was understood that the Commission would be authorised.