a letter from him informing me that his name was signed to the telegram without his knowledge or authority, and during his absence from Dublin. A note which I wrote to Father Peter O'Reilly will complete the narrative of this sinister transaction:—
My dear Father Peter,—I have not the slightest feeling of disappointment with respect to the Meath election. As long as the people have no need of me in Parliament, I have no need whatever of a seat. I consented to accept one as you might consent to undertake a mission in an infected district, because a man must do the duty that belongs to his position of life at whatever cost.Here the matter might rest for ever as far as I am concerned; but I have learned from Mr. William Dillon a series of facts which place the late election in such a new and painful light that I feel bound to state them plainly for the information of my friends in Meath to whom I am bound by so many old ties.
There were four telegrams sent in Mr. William Dillon's name one to Paris, one to Monaco, and two to my club in London, with respect to the Meath election. All these telegrams were forgeries, issued without Mr. Dillon's knowledge or authority. When an answer came from me it was opened before Mr. Dillon heard of its existence, and Mr. Parnell's address immediately issued and a canvass commenced before any letter from Meath had reached me. The persons engaged in this transaction have induced Mr. Dillon to promise to conceal their names, and while he has felt bound to reveal the forgery to me he shelters the forgers from exposure.
You will note of course the effect of employing Mr. Dillon's name. Had some young man unconnected with Meath thought proper to interrogate me on my opinions and intentions respecting that constituency, you may surmise how I would have treated such an attempt had not the writer been the son of John Dillon. I do not blame Mr. Dillon at all, except for having withheld the facts from me till the election was over, instead of communicating them at once, when I might, had I thought fit, have gone to Meath and rendered the success of the conspirators impossible.[1]
And now it is a fact of very great importance for Meath to know who were the forgers? A Latin proverb says that to discover who did a wrong, you must consider whom the wrong benefits.
No doubt it was done either in the interest of Mr. Parnell's candidature, or in the interest of some person in the Home Rule League.
That there are some persons in the League and in Parliament who wish to exclude me is very possible. Of course men might honestly desire to do so who regard me as incompetent or untrustworthy, but men of that sort do not have recourse to forgeries. I know nothing of Mr. Parnell except that he is reputed to be a young man of good character and position, and this device could not emanate from any person entitled to be so described.
It would be very improper of me to make these statements in secret, and
- ↑ Mr. Dillon was finally of the same opinion himself. He wrote to me later warmly defending Mr. Parnell from having any part in the intrigue, but admitting that they had both made one mistake. "He certainly did very wrong in asking me not to explain the circumstances under which the telegram was sent, but I don't think he was more wrong than I was in consenting to that course. The simple and straightforward course would have been to have written or telegraphed the whole matter to you, and I still regret very much that I did not do so."
