TOPICS OF THE DAY.

Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 467, 30 April 1890, Page 4

TOPICS OF THE DAY.

London, March 7. The Scandals.—Lord Salisbury’s Explanations. Lord Salisbury’s extreme cleverness is apt, at times, to get him into difficulties. If, instead of assuming the role of virtuous indignation when charged with winking at Lord Arthur Somerset’s escape, the Premier had frankly admitted the fact and justified it to Parliament as he did to the Cabinet, bis Lordship would have had a large section of public opinion on his side. What Lord Salisbury is credited with saying to his brother Ministers is this : “ Apart from the fact that we owe some consideration to the wretched man’s honourable and respected family, members of whom have served the Crown and the State faithfully for generations, is it not true that if we tacitly permit him to fly we shall save the country from being flooded with the horrible details of a filthy, nauseous, and most revolting scandal ?” The Cabinet thought there was a good deal in this, and, as we know, remained inert. Mr W. H. Smith would have taken his stand on the Premier’s view of the question, and (conscious of a safe majority and an honest purpose) have closured Radical protest. But Lord Salisbury (as I have said) was too clever. He knew nothing of the communications between the Prince of Wales and Mr Labouchere, and he fancied it would be easy to ignore certain unfortunate coincidences in theaffair. Friday evening’s debato partially and “ Labby’s ” letter in Monday’s “Daily News'’ completely undeceived his Lordship. The name cf the member for Northampton’s informant anent the real circumstances of Somerset’s escape was not (as the House surmised when “ Labby ” wrote it down and tendered it to Sir R. Webster to read out if he felt inclined) that of the Prince of Wales, but of his secretary, Sir Francis Knollys. The Home Secretary must have known this, for when Mr Attorney showed an indiscreet inclination to avail himself of his tormentor’s challenge, Mr Matthews visibly plucked at his coat tails.

The fact Beems to be that the Prince of Wales, wroth and grieved beyond measure at the manner in which gossip and the foreign papers were mixing up his son’s name with the scandals, insisted on probing them to the bottom; and, to show that he and his had nothing to hide, sent Sir F. Knollys to Labouchere with all the information in his possession. The whole story indeed as told in Friday’s debate and Monday’s “Daily News,” came from H.R.H., who obtained the facts from Inspector Munro, Sir Dighton Probyn and others.

The more closely one investigates the Government’s case, the weaker it seems. M r Attorney tells us the police considered there were ample prima facie grounds for arresting Lord A. Somerset in September, but he and the Lord Chancellor disagreed with them on the point. In November, however, though not a tittle of Jresh evidence had come forward, Sir Richard resolved, on his own responsibility, to issue a warrant. It would be a Irutum fulmen , of course, for Somerset was by that time safe in Constantinople, but it might pacify the public. The Lord Chancellor did not countenance this step. He was consistent, and consequently still of opinion there was insufficient evidence to justify it. I can quite believe this was really the case, indeed the more one hears of the evidence the more certain one becomes that Somerset was a fool and a coward to bolt. Misdemeanour simply was charged against him, and this rested Bolely on the tainted evidence of the young scoundrels examined in the Newton case. Moreover,even they were not unanimous on the subject of identification. Had Somerset Btood his ground he would probably have been acquitted as triumphantly as the Earl of Euston. The position of the Attorney-General last Friday evening, had he accepted “Labby’s” challenge and read out the name of the member for Northampton’s informant anent the Salisbury-Probyn interview, might, I am reminded, have been not unlike Mr Poland’s on a famous occasion at the Old Bailey. If was during the trial of the Detectives Meiklejohn, Druscovitch, and Palmer for conniving at the Great Turf Frauds, and the convict Benzon was under examination. Poland wished to know how Benzon became aware of a remarkable flaw in French law which had enabled him and hi* confederates to rob Madame de Goncourt in certain ways without fear of punishment. The Crown counsel suspected Druscovitch of providing this useful bit of advice, and wished to bring his treachery home to the unhappy officer. “ Who told you these facts ?” he asked. “ I decline to say,” replied Benzon, firmly. “ But you must say,” went on Poland, angrily. “ I repeat I decline,” reiterated Benzon. There was some further fencing, and, at last, counsel appealed to the judge. “ You 'must answer the question,” quoth that functionary. “ Very well,” said Benzon ; “my informant iuas Mr Poland !”

“ Wh-a-at?” screamed the eminent Q.C., “ Yes, sir ; you told me,” went on Benzon, amiably. “Perhaps,” turning to the judge, “I had better narrate the circumstances.”

“I think you had,” said his lordship, grimly. Benson then explained that a few years previously he had made a good thing out of the Turkish floods, by collecting funds for “ deserving sufferers.” He obtained large sums from numerous city philanthropists, amongst others from the then Lord Mayor, , who was much interested in “ the cause,” : and asked the clever rogue to three Mansion House dinners. “At one of these banquets,” said Benzon, “I had the honour of sitting next Mr Poland. He does nob recognise me now any more than, I suspect, I should recognise him if he were cropped, shaven, and garbed thus becomingly (indicating his convict attire). We were, however, I can assure your lordship, very friendly then, and talked a good deal about the ingenious methods of swindlers, a subject which had, naturally, considerable interest for me. Amongst other unconscious tips, Mr Poland provided me with the strange facts re French law, which we subsequently utilised with such effect. He aske , may add, me nob to give him as my informant when conversing on the subject, and I call your lordship to witness I have done my best to oblige him.” “It’s all true,” groaned poor old Poland; “ I remember the occasion perfectly now.” Subsequently the Crown counsel told his friends Benzon was one of/the most entertaining dinner companions he ever sat next, and that he remembered perfectly their exchanging cards, and Benzon’s drawing him £5 for the “deserving sufferers, etc.”

Poor Benzon! Had he lived a few years later, in the golden days of company promoting, he would have waxed rich, respectable, and respected. Few men ever displayed such remarkable and facile genius for living on wits pure and simple. He had, moreover, plenty of good points ; his best trait, perhaps, being loyalty to friends. The three detectives’ misdemeanours only came to light when Benzon discovered their treachery. Then, indeed, he ehowed no mercy. Take him for all in 'all, we shall not see bis like again in the present generation.