CHAPTER XIII--THE SUBJECT OF REPORTS.

_The lecture society--“Early Architecture”--The professional

consultation--Its result--“Un verre d’eau”--Its story--Lyrics as

an auxiliary to the lecture--The lecture in print--A well-earned

commendation--The preservation of ancient ruins--The best

preservative--“Stone walls do not a prison make”--The Parnell

Commission--A remarkable visitor--A false prophet--Sir Charles

Russell--A humble suggestion--The bashful young man--Somewhat

changed--“Ireland a Nation”--Some kindly hints--The “Invincibles” in

court--The strange advertisement--How it was answered--Earl Spencer as a

patron--“No kindly act was ever done in vain!”_

A REPORTER is now and again compelled to exercise other powers than

those which are generally supposed to be at the command of the writer

of shorthand and the paragraphist. I knew a very clever youth who in a

crisis showed of what he was capable. There was, in the town where we

lived, a society of very learned men and equally learned women. Once

a fortnight a paper was read, usually on some point of surpassing

dulness--this was in the good old days, when lectures were solemn and

theatres merry. Just at present, I need scarcely say, the position of

the two is reversed: the theatres are solemn (the managers, becoming

pessimistic by reason of their losses, endeavour to impress their

philosophy upon the public), but the lecture-room rings with laughter

as some _savant_ treats of the “Loves of Coleoptera” with limelight

illustrations, or “The Infant Bacillus.” The society which I have

mentioned had engaged as lecturer for a certain evening a local

architect, who had largely augmented his professional standing by a

reputation for conviviality; and the subject with which he was to deal

was “Early Architecture.” A brother professional man, whose sympathies

were said to extend in many directions, had promised to take the chair

upon this occasion. It so happened, however, that, owing to his pressing

but unspecified engagements, the lecturer found himself, on the day for

which the lecture was announced, still in doubt as to the sequence that

his views should assume when committed to paper. About noon on this day

he strolled into the office of the gentleman who was advertised to take

the chair in the evening, and explained that he should like to discuss

with him the various aspects of the question of Early Architecture, so

that his mind might be at ease on appearing before the audience.

They accordingly went down the street, and made an earnest inspection of

the interior of a cave-dwelling in the neighbourhood--it was styled

“The Cool Grot,” and tradition was respected by the presence therein of

shell-fish, oat-cake, and other elementary foods, with various samples

of alcohol in a rudimentary form. In this place the brother architects

discussed the subject of Early Architecture until, as a reporter would

say, “a late hour.” The result was not such as would have a tendency to

cause an unprejudiced person to accept without some reserve the theory

that on a purely æsthetic question, a just conclusion can most readily

be arrived at by a friendly discussion amid congenial surroundings.

A small and very solemn audience had assembled some twenty minutes or so

before the lecturer and chairman put in an appearance, and then no time

was lost in commencing the business of the meeting. The one architect

was moved to the chair, and seconded, and he solemnly took it. Having

explained that he occupied his position with the most pleasurable

feelings, he poured himself out a glass of water with a most

unreasonable amount of steadiness, and laid the carafe exactly on the

spot--he was most scrupulous on this point--it had previously occupied.

He drank a mouthful of the water, and then looked into the tumbler

with the shrewd eye of the naturalist searching for infusoria. Then he

laughed, and told a story that amused himself greatly about a friend of

his who had attended a temperance lecture, and declared that it

would have been a great success if the lecturer had not automatically

attempted to blow the froth off the glass of water with which he

refreshed himself. Then he sat down and fell asleep, before the lecturer

had been awakened by the secretary to the committee, and had opened his

notes upon the desk. For about ten minutes the lecturer made himself

quite as unintelligible as the most erudite of the audience could have

desired; but then he suddenly lapsed into intelligibility--he had

reached that section of his subject which necessitated the recitation of

a poem said to be in a Scotch dialect, every stanza of which terminated

with the words, “A man’s a man for a’ that!” He then bowed, and,

recovering himself by a grasp of the desk, which he shook as though it

were the hand of an old schoolfellow whom he had not met for years, he

retired with an almost supernatural erectness to his chair.

In a moment the chairman was on his feet--the sudden silence had

awakened him. In a few well-chosen phrases he thanked the audience for

the very hearty manner in which they had drunk his health. He then told

them a humorous story of his boyhood, and concluded by a reference to

one “Mr. Vice,” whom he trusted frequently to see at the other end

of the table, preparatory to going beneath it. He hoped there was no

objection to his stating that he was a jolly good fellow. No absolute

objection being made, he ventured on the statement--in the key of B

flat; the lecturer joined in most heartily, and the solemn audience

went to their homes, followed by the apologies of the secretary to the

committee.

The chairman and the lecturer were then shaken up by the old man who

came to turn out the lights. He turned them out as well.

Now, the reporter who had been “marked” for that lecture found that he

had some much more important business to attend to. He did not reach

the newspaper office until late, and then he seated himself, and

thoughtfully wrote out the remarks which nine out of every ten chairmen

would have made, attributing them to the gentleman who presided at

the lecture; and then gave a general summary of the lecture on “Early

Architecture” which ninety-nine out of every hundred working architects

would deliver if called on. He concluded by stating that the usual vote

of thanks was conveyed to the lecturer, and suitably acknowledged

by him, and that the audience was “large, representative, and

enthusiastic.”

The secretary called upon the proprietor of the paper the next day,

and expressed his high appreciation of the tact and judgment of the

reporter; and the proprietor, who was more accustomed to hear comments

on the display of very different attainments on the part of his staff,

actually wrote a letter of commendation to the reporter, which I think

was well earned.

The most remarkable point in connection with this occurrence was the

implicit belief placed in the statements of the newspaper, not only

by the public--for the public will believe anything--but also by the

architect-lecturer and the architect-chairman. The professional standing

of the former was certainly increased by the transaction, and till the

day of his death he was accustomed to allude to his lecture on “Early

Architecture.” The secretary to the committee, for his own credit’s

sake, said nothing about the fiasco, and the solemn members of the

audience were so accustomed to listen to incomprehensible lectures in

the same room that they began to think that the performance at which

they had “assisted” was only another of the usual type, so they also

held their peace on the matter.

*****

Having introduced this society, I cannot refrain from telling the story

of another transaction in which it was concerned. The ramifications of

the society extended in many directions, and a more useful organisation

could scarcely be imagined. It was like an elephant’s trunk, which can

uproot a tree--if the elephant is in a good humour--but which does not

disdain to pick up a pin--like the boy who afterwards became Lord Mayor

of London. The society did not shrink from discussing the question “Is a

Monarchy or a Republic the right form of Government?” on the same

night that it dealt with a new stopper for soda-water bottles. The

Carboniferous Future of England was treated of upon the same evening as

the Immortality of the Soul; perhaps there is a closer connection

than at first meets the eye between the two subjects. It took ancient

buildings under its protection, as well as the most recently fabricated

pre-historic axe-head; and it was the discharge of its functions

in regard to ancient buildings that caused the committee to pass a

resolution one day, calling on their secretary to communicate with the

owner of a neighbouring property, in the midst of which a really fine

ruin of an ancient castle, with many interesting associations, was

situated, begging him to order a wall to be built around the ruins, so

as to prevent them from continuing to be the resort of cows with a fine

taste in archaeology, when the summer days were warm and they wanted

their backs scratched.

The property was in Ireland, consequently the landlord lived in England,

and had never so much as seen the ruins. It was news to him that

anything of interest was to be found on his Irish estates; but as his

son was contemplating the possibility of entering Parliament as the

representative of an Irish borough, he at once crossed the Channel,

had an interview with the society’s secretary, and, with the president,

visited the old castle, and was delighted with it. He sent for his

bailiff, and told him that he wanted a wall four feet high to be built

round the field in the centre of which the ruins lay--he even went so

far as to “peg out,” so to speak, the course that he wished the wall to

take.

The Irish bailiff stared at his master, but expressed the delight it

would give him to carry out his wishes.

The owner crossed to England, promising to return in three months to see

how the work had been done.

He kept his word. He returned in three months, and found, sure enough,

that an excellent wall had been built on the exact lines he had

laid down, but every stone of the ruins of the ancient castle had

disappeared.

The bailiff stood by with a beaming face as he explained how the ruins

had gone.

_He had caused the wall to be built out of the stones of the ancient

castle, to save expense._

*****

If reporters were only afforded a little leisure, any one of them who

has lived in a large town could compile an interesting volume of his

experiences. I have often regretted that I could never master the art

of shorthand. I worked at it for months when a boy, and made sufficient

progress to be able to write it pretty fairly; but writing is not

everything. The capacity for transcribing one’s notes is something to be

taken into account; and it was at this point that I broke down, and was

forced to become a novelist--a sort of novelist. The first time that I

went up country in Africa, my stock of paper being limited, I carried

only two pocket-books, and economised my space by taking my notes in

shorthand. I had no occasion to refer to these notes until I was writing

my novel “Daireen,” and then I found myself face to face with a hundred

pages of hieroglyphs which were utterly unintelligible to me. In despair

I brought them to a reporter, and he read them off for me much more

rapidly than he or anyone else could read my ordinary handwriting

to-day. In fact, he read just a little too fast,--I was forced to beg

him to stop. There are some occurrences of which one takes a note in

shorthand in one’s youth in a strange country, but which one does not

wish particularly to offer to the perusal of strangers years afterwards.

But although I could never be a reporter, I now and again availed myself

of a reporter’s privileges, when I wished to be present at a trial that

promised some interesting features to a student of good and evil. It

seemed to me that the Parnell Commission was an epitome of the world’s

history from the earliest date. No writer has yet done justice to that

extraordinary incident. I have asked some reporters, who were

present day after day, if they intended writing a real history of the

Commission; not the foolish political history of the thing, but the

story of all that was laid bare to their eyes hour after hour,--the

passions of patriotism, of power, of hate, of revenge; the devotion to

duty, the dogged heroism, the religious fervour; every day brought to

light such examples of these varied attributes of the Irish nature as

the world had never previously known.

The reporters said they had no time to devote to such thankless work;

and, besides, every one was sick of the Commission.

Often as I went into the court and faced the scene, it never lost its

glamour for me. Every day I seemed to be wandering through a world of

romance. I could not sleep at night, so deeply impressed was I with the

way certain witnesses returned the scrutiny of Sir Charles Russell; with

the way Mr. Parnell hypnotised others; with the stories of the awful

struggle of which Ireland was the centre.

Going out of the courts one evening, I came upon an old man standing

with his hat off and with one arm uplifted in an attitude of

denunciation that was tragic beyond description. He was a handsome old

man, very tall, but slightly stooped, and he clearly occupied a good

position in the world.

We were alone just outside the courts. I pretended that I had suddenly

missed something. I stood thrusting my hands into my pockets and feeling

between the buttons of my coat, for I meant to watch him. At last I

pulled out my cigarette-case and strolled on.

“You were in that court?” the old man said, in a tone that assured me I

had not underestimated his social position.

He did not wait for me to reply.

“You saw that man sitting with his cold impassive face while the tears

were on the cheeks of every one else? Listen to me, sir! I called upon

the Most High to strike him down--to strike him down--and my prayer was

heard. I saw him lying, disgraced, deserted, dead, before my eyes; and

so I shall see him before a year has passed. ‘Mene, mene, tekel,

upharsin.’”

Again he raised his arm in the direction of the court, and when I saw

the light in his eyes I knew that I was looking at a prophet.

Suddenly he seemed to recover himself. He put on his hat and turned

round upon me with something like angry surprise. I raised my hat. He

did the same. He went in one direction and I went in the opposite.

He was a false prophet. Mr. Parnell was not dead within the year. In

fact, he was not dead until two years and two months had passed. In

accordance with the thoughtful provisions of the Mosaic code, that old

gentleman deserved to be stoned for prophesying falsely. But his manner

would almost have deceived a reporter.

*****

Having introduced the subject of the Parnell Commission, I may perhaps

be permitted to express the hope that Sir Charles Russell will one day

find sufficient leisure to give us a few chapters of his early history.

I happen to know something of it. I am fully acquainted with the nature

of some of its incidents, which certainly would be found by the public

to possess many interesting and romantic elements; though, unlike the

romantic episodes in the career of most persons, those associated with

the early life of Sir Charles Russell reflect only credit upon himself.

Every one should know by this time that the question of what is

Patriotism and what is not is altogether dependent upon the nature of

the Government of the country. In order to prolong its own existence for

six months, a Ministry will take pains to alter the definition of the

word Patriotism, and to prosecute every one who does not accept the

new definition. Forty years ago the political lexicon was being daily

revised. I need say no more on this point; only, if Sir Charles Russell

means to give us some of the earlier chapters of his life he should

lose no time in setting about the task. A Lord Chief Justice of England

cannot reasonably be expected to deal with any romantic episodes in his

own career, however important may be the part which he feels himself

called on now and again to take in the delimitation of the romantic

elements (of a different type) in the careers of others of Her Majesty’s

subjects.

*****

It may surprise some of those persons who have been unfortunate enough

to find themselves witnesses for the prosecution in cases where Sir

Charles Russell has appeared for the defence, to learn that in his

young days he was exceedingly shy. He has lost a good deal of his early

diffidence, or, at any rate, he manages to prevent its betraying itself

in such a way as might tend to embarrass a hostile witness. As a

rule, the witnesses do not find that bashfulness is the most prominent

characteristic of his cross-examination. But I learned from an early

associate of Sir Charles’s, that when his name appeared on the list to

propose or to respond to a toast at one of the dinners of a patriotic

society of which my informant as well as Sir Charles was a member, he

would spend the day nervously walking about the streets, and apparently

quite unable to collect his thoughts. Upon one occasion the proud duty

devolved upon him of responding to the toast, “Ireland a Nation!”

Late in the afternoon my informant, who at that time was a small

shopkeeper--he is nothing very considerable to-day--found him in a

condition of disorderly perturbation, and declaring that he had no

single idea of what he should say, and he felt certain that unless

he got the help of the man who afterwards became my informant he must

inevitably break down.

“I laughed at him,” said the gentleman who had the courage to tell the

story which I have the courage to repeat, “and did my best to give him

confidence. ‘Sure any fool could respond to “Ireland a Nation!”’ said I;

‘and you’ll do it as well as any other.’ But even this didn’t give him

courage,” continued my informant, “and I had to sit down and give him

the chief points to touch on in his speech. He wrung my hand, and in the

evening he made a fine speech, sir. Man, but it was a pity that there

weren’t more of the party sober enough to appreciate it!”

I tell this tale as it was told to me, by a respectable tradesman whose

integrity has never been questioned.

It occurred to me that that quality in which, according to his

interesting reminiscence of forty years ago, his friend Russell was

deficient, is not one that could with any likelihood of success be

attributed to the narrator.

*****

If any student of good and evil--the two fruits, alas! grow upon the

same tree--would wish for a more startling example of the effect of a

strong emotion upon certain temperaments than was afforded the people

present in the Dublin Police Court on the day that Carey left the dock

and the men he was about to betray to the gallows, that student would

indeed be exacting.

I had been told by a constabulary officer what was coming, so that,

unlike most persons in the court, I was not too startled to be able

to observe every detail of the scene. Carey was talking to a brother

ruffian named Brady quite unconcernedly, and Brady was actually smiling,

when an officer of constabulary raised his finger and the informer

stepped out of the dock, and two policemen in plain clothes moved to his

side. Carey glanced back at his doomed accomplices, and muttered some

words to Brady. I did not quite catch them, but I thought the words

were, “It’s half an hour ahead of you that I am, Joe.”

Brady simply looked at his betrayer, whom it seems he had been anxious

to betray. There was absolutely no expression upon his face. Some of the

others of the same murderous gang seemed equally unaffected. One of them

turned and spat on the floor. But upon the faces of at least two of the

men there was a look of malignity that transformed them into fiends. It

was the look that accompanies the stab of the assassin. Another of them

gave a laugh, and said something to the man nearest to him; but the

laugh was not responded to.

The youngest of the gang stared at one of the windows of the court-house

in a way that showed me he had not been able to grasp the meaning of

Carey’s removal from the dock.

In half-an-hour every expression worn by the faces of the men had

changed. They all had a look that might almost have been regarded as

jocular. There can be no doubt that when a man realises that he has been

sentenced to death, his first feeling is one of relief. His suspense is

over--so much is certain. He feels that--and that only--for an hour or

so. I could see no change on the faces of these poor wretches whom the

Mephistophelian fun of Fate had induced to call themselves Invincible,

in order that no devilish element might be wanting in the tragedy of the

Phoenix Park.

*****

I do not suppose that many persons are acquainted with the secret

history of the detection of the “Invincibles.” I think I am right in

stating that it has never yet been made public. I am not at liberty

to mention the source whence I derived my knowledge of some of the

circumstances that led to the arrest of Carey, but there is no doubt in

my mind as to the accuracy of my “information received” on this matter.

It may, perhaps, be remembered that, some months after the date of the

murders, a strange advertisement appeared in almost every newspaper in

Great Britain. It stated that if the man who had told another, on the

afternoon of May 6th, 1882, that he had once enjoyed a day’s skating on

the pond at the Viceregal Lodge, would communicate with the Chief of the

Detective Department at Dublin Castle, he would be thanked. Now beyond

the fact that May 6th was the date of the murders, and that they had

taken place in the Phoenix Park, there was nothing in this advertisement

to suggest that it had any bearing upon the shocking incident; still

there was a general feeling that it had a very intimate connection with

the efforts that the police were making to unravel the mystery of the

outrage; and this impression was well founded.

I learned that the strangely-worded advertisement had been inserted in

the newspapers at the instigation of a constabulary officer, who had, in

many disguises, been endeavouring to find some clue to the assassins

in Dublin. One evening he slouched into a public-house bespattered as

a bricklayer, and took a seat in a box, facing a pint of stout. He had

been in public-house after public-house every Saturday night for several

weeks without obtaining the slightest suggestion as to the identity of

the murderers, and he was becoming discouraged; but on this particular

evening he had his reward, for he overheard a man in the next box

telling some others, who were drinking with him, that Lord Spencer was

not such a bad sort of man as might be supposed from the mere fact of

his being Lord-Lieutenant. He (the narrator) had been told by a man in

the Phoenix Park on the very evening of the murders that he (the man)

had not been ashamed to cheer Lord Spencer on his arrival at Dublin that

day, for when he had last been in Dublin he had allowed him to skate

upon the pond in the Viceregal grounds.

The officer dared not stir from his place: he knew that if he were at

all suspected of being a detective, his life would not be worth five

minutes’ purchase. He could only hope to catch a glimpse of some of the

party when they were leaving the place. He failed to do so, for some

cause--I cannot remember what it was--nor could the barmaid give any

satisfactory reply to his cautiously casual enquiries as to the names of

any of the men who had occupied the box.

It was then that the advertisement was inserted in the various

newspapers; and, after the lapse of some weeks, a man presented himself

to the Chief of the Criminal Investigation Department, saying that he

believed the advertisement referred to him. The man seemed a respectable

artisan, and his story was that one day during the last winter that Earl

Spencer had been in Ireland, he (the man) had left his work in order

to have a few hours’ skating on the ponds attached to the Zoological

Gardens in the Phoenix Park, but on arriving at the ponds he found that

the ice had been broken. “I was just going away,” the man said, “when

a gentleman with a long beard spoke to me, and enquired if I had had a

good skate. I told him that I was greatly disappointed, as the ice had

all been broken, and I would lose my day’s pay. He took a card out of

his pocket, and wrote something on it,” continued the man, “and then

handed it to me, saying, ‘Give that to the porter at the Viceregal

Lodge, and you’ll have the best day’s skating you have had in all your

life.’ He said what was true: I handed in the card and told the porter

that a tall gentleman with a beard had given it to me. ‘That was His

Excellency himself,’ said the porter, as he brought me down to the pond,

where, sure enough, I had such a day’s skating as I’ve never had before

or since.”

“And you were in the Phoenix Park on the evening of the murders?” said

the Chief of the Department.

“I must have been there within half-an-hour of the time they were

committed,” replied the man. “But I know nothing of them.”

“I’m convinced of it,” said the officer. “But I should like to hear if

you met any one you knew in the Park as you were coming away.”

“I only met one man whose name I knew,” said the other, “and that was a

builder that I have done some jobs for: James Carey is his name.”

This was precisely the one bit of evidence that was required for the

committal of Carey.

An hour afterwards he offered to turn Queen’s Evidence.

A Journalist's Note-Book · 第 13 / 21 章