LETTERS TO THE - EDITOR.
MR. RHODES'S ALLEGED CONTRIBUTION TO THE LIBERAL PARTY.
[TO TEE EDITOR OF THE ".SPECTATOR."]
SIE,—My attention has been drawn to a letter in your paper of last week signed " C B.," retailing a story regarding a sum of 'money which is there said to have been given by.Mr. Rhodos to the Liberal: party in consideration of the agree- Meat of the Liberal Government to remain Egypt. This story you think if. right to accept and adopt in an editorial paragraph; and you draw' frOrnit an explanation of the action taken by . Sir. William . Harcourt. and .mYself on the South Afridan. Committee. ' I -beg to say, and Sir W. Harcourt authorioes me to state for him also, that, ;the story is from Beginning to encl_ a lie, and that your deductions are therefore [We, of course, accept absolutely and without reserve the statement made by Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman and Sir William Harcourt, in so far as it shows that neither of them knew anything of the alleged subscription of Mr. Rhodes to the Liberal party funds through Mr. Schnadhorst, and that• therefore they were not and could net have been in any way affected by Win regard.to their action on the South Africa Committee. We must: out, however, that -they. do not state that they knew who were the subscribers to the party funds. Of course, if they had said, or were now to say, that they kneW the names of all the persons from whom, Mr. Schnadhorst received money in large sums for the party funds, and that they were positive from that ,linowIedge that Mr.,Rhodes had made no subscription, we should accept their statement as final. But they do not say that to . their personal knowledge Mr. Rhodes did not subscribe, and that they must have known if he had subscribed. In all proba- bility neither of them had any cognisance of, or ever made any inquiry as to; the Subscribers to the party.. funds. The Simplest and easiest plan for setting the matter at rest would of course be for Mr. Rhodes to state,.if 'he is able to do so, that he never made any subscription, through Mr. Sanaa- horst or otherwise; to the funds 'of the Liberal party. We are not, as our' readers • know, admirers Of Mr. Rhodes, but he is an E4lish -gentleman, ' and • such a' statement' would be accepted by us as absolutely, conclusive. If he feels bound to silence, - a statement-- made by Lord Rosebery, or any other .leader of the Liberal party of recognised position, : who would state -.that . he knew the origin of the , party funde, that he -must have known if Mr. Rhodes- had sent the , 'money to Mr. Schnadhorst, and that he knows.. that he did not do so, would also, of- course, • set. the matter : at rest. We must - add -our reasons. for. publishing "C. B.'s" letter. We had spoken strongly against Mr.-Rhodes in our issue of 'the week before. That being the case, we'obeyed our invariable tore to publish,. 4 it is possible on .groundo , of spaee, any letter on the other side protesting against one view as wrong in fact or unfair in argument which • comes -either from the person criticised adversely by us, or from any person who can claim 'to speak for him, or as; in any sense, his representative. We knew that .` C. B." had a claim to write us a defender and supporter Of Mr. Rhodes, and we therefore felt obliged to publish his letter, and to publish it as it stood and without omissions. From what we knew of 'our-correspondent, and of his relatione with Mr. Rhodes, we did not regard his •claim to be cognisant of the contents of letters alleged to have been written- by -Mr. Rhodes to Mr.- Schnadhorst as at all likely to be unfounded. Further, we 'had heard some months ago from an entirely different and.- independent • source of the existence of - the alleged letters. We may-add that the idea of any connection, or of letters passing between Mr.' Rhodes- and Mr. Schnad- horst,- is •not so improbable as it may seem-at first- sight to our readers,- for Mr: SChiadhorst was, we believe; a personal acquaintance of Mr. Rhodes's; and his name appeared- (for a very small-number of shares) in• the original list of share- holders of the Chartered Company. As we have 'said, our supposition• that Mr. Rhodes influenced' the minds- of- Sir Henry Campbell:Bannermank and Sir -William Harcourt -by threatening to make the Liberal piirty ridiculous by telling the . story of his 'subscription cannot, of course, be enter- tained for a moment after Sir Henry'Campbell,Bannerrian's letter to us. But unless and until we - can get Mr. Rhodes's contradiction, or the contradiction-of. -some -person of import since in the party who will say that he knew personally where all -the big subscriptions received by Mr. Schnadhorst came from, and that none came from Mr. Rhodes, we cannot, in face of ," C.' B.'s"; specific statement,, regard the story as disproved. Of course,- it is. just conceivable that • the .whole thing may be an hallucination on the part of " C. B.," ,but, if so, , it is- a' very curious hallucination, .as it .is. shared independently by other persons. We can, only hope- that next week we may be enabled to set the matter finally at'rest. by some direct, and; of course, not anonymous, statement of the kind- which we have described.—ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
