THE AFTERMATH OF THE WAR

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LI, Issue 315, 5 January 1909, Page 3

THE AFTERMATH OF THE WAR

THE PARI THE JOELS PLAYED THEREIN. MR MAIUUIA.U'S ASTOUNDING AVOWALS. On October 24 Air A. U. Markhani, M.P., uistde a remarkable statement tu liis Alun»ticld constituents in the Nott.iighaiushire village of Kirliy. It will be remembered that liis name was mentioned and that be was subpoenaed but never called as a witness in the JoelSicvicr trial at the Old Bailey. In addressing his constituents he said that he felt it to be his duty to explain to them how lie came to be mixed up with the scandal. "Holding strong views as to the part played by the South African capitalists in bringing about the war, he devoted the greater part of 1001 to going through the files of the South African papers in the British Museum, and in doing so he came across tlto history of Mr Joel. On March 7, 1002, he gave notice of his intention to askin the House of Commons a question, the object of which was to get information on the following points : Was Mr Joel arrested in Kimbcrlcy in 1884 on a charge of illicit diamond buying ? Was he released on bail, and was his bail estreated on his Hying the country ? Was his portrait circulated in the Police Gazette? Was he, or bis brother Solomon, accepted by His Majesty's Government as a guarantor for the new meat con-

tract in South Africa 1 Tlw then War Secretary (Mr Brodrick) replied that he had no information, but he understood that the name of Mr "Jack" Joel was given to the House as one of the guarantors. Two hours before the House met on March 11—the day he put his intcrrogotnries—he (Mr Markham) received the following letter at the Reform Club from Sir George Lewis :

Hear Mr Markham,—Mr Jack Joel has no connection whatever with the contract with the Consolidated Johannesburg Investment Company, which guarantees partially the contract with the Imperial Storage Company. Jlis brother is chairman of that Company, hut Mr Jack Joel has no connection whatever with it. I send these particulars to you to reconsider whether, under the circumstances, you should put the question to-day. I strongly urge you not to do so, but to postpone the t|uestion until you have ascertained what the real facts are. Mr Joel is the bearer of this letter which I give him as an introduction to you, as he is anxious to give you any information you desire

—Toura very sincerely, G. IT. LEWIS. He (Mr Markham) saw Mr Joel, who said he had come to him to beg for mercy, as the asking of these questions in Parliament 'would ruin him socially. He asked Mr Joel if he could point to any untrue statement, and the reply was that he was not a director af the Johannesburg Consolidated Investment Company, and derived no benefit from the meat contract. Mr Markham proceeded to tell the next stage of the narrative as follows :—" I replied that I thought he was lying. He then cried and whined, and appealed to me to spare him for the sake of his wife and little children. I told him that at that time thousands of women and children were dying in the concentration camps; that he and his firm were partly responsible for the war, as they had used their newspapers to spread 'lies broadcast, and that I had no intention to spare him. Mr Joel then said that his Ann were forced into polities by the firm of Wernher and Beit; his firm wanted to be left alone to make money. I believe that is probably true, because the Joels were probably more intent on making; money than in interfering with politics. Joel then said that the charge was eighteen years old. I replied that his company had, through their influence, passed the Illicit Diamond Buying IJaw through the Cape Parliament, and that hundred s of men had served twenty years' penal servitude for this offence of buying a single diamond and that I would lay hold and send him back to his trial. Mr Joel then became a pitiable object; he kept crying and saying : " Spare me, spare me. I will make amends and give you as many free institutions for your electors as you wish.' I replied that I should not for a moment consider such an offer, and he then made a second offer—namely, that he would give me .£IO,OOO to any good cause I liked. V told him to go, and he then said if I would only spare him he would give nvc every assistance-to prove that the late Mr Beit was a thief.

" Now, Joel and the late Mr Beit were partners in the diamond syndicate, and to save his own skin Joel was willing to give mc information to assist nic in an action which I had 'brought against Beit. So far as the lute Mr Beit w;is concerned, I did him a great injustice in 1001, but my motive in that matter was misunderstood, lie was a man who in many ways did great kindnesses to many people, and it has always been a source of great regret to me that! T, made a charge against him in the words 1 did." Mr Markham went on to relate how, after consultation, with Mr Speaker, he put on the Order Paper the questions given above, and afterwards replied to Sir George Lewis's letter, informing him that Joel had suggested bribery.

Producing the report of the Johannesburg Consolidated Company (1002), of which it was stated that Joel was a director—a fact that lie liad denied at the interview in the previous MarchMr Markham declared that "he lied to me" on that occasion. When the Sicvier trial came on Joel, when on the witness stand, was asked by .Mr Rufus Isaac as to his interview with him (Mr. Markka in), and referring to this .phase of the trial the lion, gentleman said : "Joel was on his oath ; Sicvier's liberty was at stake; yet Joel committed wilful and deliberate perjury, as I shall prove to you. a> badly as ever was committed in a court of law :

Mr Rufus Isaacs : Did you not go to see Mr Markham ?—I did.

With reference to the question that was going to be put ?—No. What did you go to see liim about ? —I heard he was going to say something about me. Did Mr Markham ask you to point to any untrue statement in the question he was going to put!—l did not know what question he was going to put". Tic did not ask mc that.

•• The simple facts were that Joel heard that I had placed the question on the notice paper of the House of Commons, which became public property. It was impossible for him to have beard that I was going to say anything anont him, and I could not have said anything in asking a question. But be forgot one thing—tlie letter from Sir George Lewis, which I hold, in which reference is made to the question, and proposes that Joel should 'explain bis position fully in connection (herewith. In ISB4 Joel, who came from Petticoat Lane, in the East End of London, was a Jew in Kiinberley in partnership with his uncle, Barny Barnalo.

"He was charged with receiving stolen ( property, and the case was heard in the Kimberley Police Court, when a more serious charge was laid against him. Hail for £4,000 was taken, and with th" aid of Barney Barnato he fled to Delagoa liny, was afterwards in hiding in Spain for a considerable time. Now, why is Joel to-day able to be in England, and, as he had been for years, one of the principal men in the City of London 1 An arrangement was made by which tho warrant was withdrawn, so far as this country is concerned, but it has not been withdrawn in South Africa. . . . I did my duty by allowing the facts to become 'known. If Joel hud got his deserts he would have been in prison. Rut no man can continue to do wrong without sooner or later meeting with retribution. I have no doubt that through my asking that question his life, wealthy as hv is, has been 'a hell on earth.' J. '. . There is not a shadow of doubt that Joel did lay a trap for the purpose of catching Mr.' Siovicr."—Daily Chronicle.