At length he found that this country was becoming too hot for him, and on the 10th of December he applied, in the dress of a common labourer, to the captain of a sailing vessel called the Lady of the Lake, then lying at Gravesend, bound for South Africa, and eventually engaged a berth in the steerage under an assumed name, and sailed in due course, no doubt fondly imagining that he had at last succeeded in distancing his pursuers.
He was, however, again mistaken, for the Lady of the Lake had only left a short time when Mr Pollaky was again upon his track, and having ascertained that there was no further doubt that the person who had gone as a steerage passenger in the Lady of the Lake was the same individual for whom he had been so long in search, he lost no time in procuring a warrant for his apprehension, which was placed in the hands of serjeant [sic] Spittle, city detective police, for execution. The necessary inquiries to ascertain whether the passenger was the right party, of course, occupied some time, but the officer was despatched by the very first vessel proceeding to Port Natal, which was the Celt, a screw steamer, that left Plymouth direct for South Africa, a few days since. As the Celt is a steamer, and the Lady of the Lake a sailing vessel, it is not at all improbable, notwithstanding that the latter had so much start, that the Celt may arrive first at her place of destination; and should this not prove to be the case, and the culprit should by any means suspect that he is pursued, it is by no means improbable that he will make another bolt, and the journey of sergeant Spittle may be extended to Australia, the most likely place the fugitive will resort to. – Bell’s Weekly Messenger, February 16.
Pollaky’s star was in the ascendent. However, day to day work continued; on 25 May 1861 he placed an advertisement on behalf of Field for information regarding the identification of a victim of a ‘MYSTERIOUS MURDER’ which had taken place the previous March, when ‘the BODY of a FEMALE was discovered under a heap of stones, in a declivity of the Rheinecker Berges, between Brohl and Niederbreisig-on-the-Rhein’. Asking for information to be sent to Field, the advertisement is signed, ‘J. [sic] Pollaky, Superintendent of the Foreign Department.’ He now felt it important that his name appeared everywhere he could possibly get it. (The initial ‘J’ sometimes appears in reports and advertisements before his name instead of I.)
Pollaky and Lord Lytton
During his employment in Field’s office, Pollaky felt somewhat limited in his opportunities, and on occasion tried to strike out on his own: with mixed success at first, but with ever-growing confidence in his abilities. He must have felt the need to test himself to see whether or not there was a future in this new kind of work. Perhaps knowing of Field’s previous connection with Lord Lytton, he decided to try his luck in that direction himself.
Hertfordshire Archives holds within its collection two documents: correspondence between Pollaky and Lord Lytton from 1858. It is evident that he is communicating on his own behalf – the letters have nothing to do with Field. Given Field’s past work it would be strange if he had no knowledge of these letters, and yet he is not mentioned, even in passing.
Edward Bulwer Lytton (Lord Lytton) was a prolific novelist, poet and playwright whose works included the play mentioned on page 21, and also novels: The Last Days of Pompeii and Paul Clifford – whence comes the infamous opening line, ‘It was a dark and stormy night […]’. Lytton was born in 1803, and in 1831 was elected Member of Parliament for St Ives, Cornwall, and remained an MP until 1841. In 1852 he became a member once more, this time for Hertfordshire. In 1858 he became Secretary of State for the Colonies under Prime Minister Lord Derby. It is at this point that Pollaky enters the scene – albeit briefly.
On 29 November 1858, Pollaky wrote the first of his letters to Lord Lytton. Not for the last time, he seems intent on exaggerating his own abilities and importance to a high-ranking political figure. His letters were sent from No. 20 Devonshire Place, Edgware Road, West London, where he may have been living with his first wife, Julia.
He writes to Lord Lytton requesting a private interview as he says he has a confidential communication to make, ‘of the Greatest importance, the delicate nature of which does not permit me to put it in writing’.
On the reverse side of this first letter, Lord Lytton’s secretary has written a copy of the response sent to Pollaky, agreeing to an interview at a quarter to two the following afternoon. We must assume that this meeting took place.
The following month (actual date is unknown), Pollaky wrote the second of his letters. This is more specific as to the reason for these communications, and, bearing in mind Lord Lytton’s position as Secretary of State for the Colonies and Pollaky’s (self-proclaimed) expertise as an investigator into foreigners, it makes some sense. Pollaky requests Lord Lytton provide him ‘with the means to proceed to the Ionian Islands, and “especially” to Syra’ (Pollaky’s emphasis) so that he may be able to obtain the evidence that he had mentioned in his interview with Lord Lytton of the conspiracy there. He also asks Lord Lytton to ask Lord Derby (the Prime Minister), ‘if I have not many months ago informed him of the existence of such a Conspiracy’. A record of Pollaky’s communication with Lord Derby does not seem to exist, although Lord Lytton had been investigating problems in the Ionian Islands, and Lord Derby had received communications from a ‘confidential agent’ that year. Those communications, though, seem to have been in connection with voting intentions of Irish members, and nothing to do with Pollaky. In the event, it was Gladstone, the future Prime Minister, who was sent to the Ionian Islands to investigate the complicated happenings connected with the British Protectorate there.
Two questions are immediately raised. Firstly, what was the information that Pollaky said that he had, and, secondly, had Pollaky indeed been in communication with Lord Derby? It seems likely that he did have something to communicate – though perhaps of limited importance, since he felt it necessary to justify himself in the second letter. He may very well have written to Lord Derby at some time, but his communication may have been ignored or not deemed to have been of any significance. Pollaky, as mentioned earlier, seems continually to have tried to make himself appear to be impressive in order to raise his status.
Further confirmation that Pollaky was acting independently from Field can be seen by examining the address the letters were sent from. Since they were not sent from Field’s office, it seems likely that he had kept them secret from his employer, and it may be that his later departure from Field may not have been met with much resistance if Field had become aware of incidents of this sort. And yet he continued to work with Field for some time after the letters to Lord Lytton, and later stated on record that he held him in high regard.
There is one other possibility. It may be that at the time of this correspondence Pollaky had not yet started working for Field. There are two gaping holes that have yet to be filled: firstly, what did Pollaky do before he arrived in England, and secondly, what did he do for the first nine years or so after he arrived?
Pollaky’s Mission to Bucharest and Egypt, and Lord Palmerston
In Pollaky’s letter to Sir Richard Mayne of 31 July 1862 (mentioned in the previous chapter) he refers to work undertaken by himself in 1854. Although the letter was written some eight years later, from an historical point of view, it is possible that Pollaky was involved in a mission of some kind that year. If so, it would be the earliest date currently known for his work. The letter is entitled by Pollaky, ‘Memorial to Sir Richard Mayne Chief Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police K.C.B. ect ect [sic]’. It forms part of Pollaky’s long and unsuccessful campaign to achieve British Nationality. (A memorial is a formal letter to a government body.)
Pollaky writes the following on page two:
in the year 1854 I was employed by Lord Palmerston and by the directors of the East India Cy. in a Confidential Mission to Bucharest & Egypt for which services the Sum of nearly Five hundred pounds of public money was paid to me. … That after my return to England Lord Palmerston continued to receive my visits.
&nbs
p; On 4 August 1862 Pollaky wrote to Horatio Waddington, Permanent Under-Secretary of State for the Home Office, with regard to his Naturalisation application:
Lord Palmerston has employed me in Secret Mission and that I for such services received 400 to 500£ of which a Record will be found.
Pollaky states that the money was paid on the direction of Lord Palmerston by Ross D. Mangles, Chairman of the East India Company.
Finally, on 19 March 1863, Inspector Detective Frederick Williamson wrote a brief report to Sir Richard Mayne:
I beg to report that the attached anonymous letter sent to Lord Palmerston, has been compared with the handwriting of I.P. Pollaky, by Mr Hamar an Inspector of Fraud at the Post-office, who is of opinion that they were not written by the same individual. The handwriting of the anonymous letter is not known.
The anonymous letter referred to has not been identified, nevertheless, the fact that it was deemed necessary to compare the handwriting with that of Pollaky is suggestive. Was there some communication in 1854 between Pollaky and the office of Lord Palmerston who at the time was Home Secretary? (He became Prime Minister the following year.) March 1854 saw the start of the Crimean War. In July Bucharest was in danger of being captured by the Turkish Army. Egypt was at that time part of the Turkish/Ottoman Empire. So dates begin to match with Pollaky’s assertions. What is just as interesting is his claim that Lord Palmerston continued to receive his visits, implying that he had visited him both before and after on a number of occasions. If Pollaky indeed mixed in these circles his desire to work on his own behalf becomes easy to understand, as does his later frustration at his treatment by the Home Office with regard to the refusal to grant him British Nationality.
The Palmerston Papers are held in the archives of Southampton University. A search of these quickly revealed that in 1859 Pollaky indeed wrote two letters to Lord Palmerston. The first was written ten days before Palmerston became Prime Minister, and the second five months later. Pollaky’s chatty letter of November 1859 does imply a familiarity with Palmerston and it may be that the latter felt it necessary to drop this informal relationship after he became Prime Minister in June that year; Pollaky certainly hints of the likelihood of Palmerston not wishing to continue corresponding with him near the end of the letter. This second letter in particular refers to matters appertaining to the Unification of Italy. Pollaky, it would seem, had been engaged by the Morning Post to act as Special Correspondent in Zurich during some important negotiations there. The editor, Algernon Borthwick, certainly had a special correspondent in Zurich at that time. Of course, since these correspondents were usually anonymous, it is impossible to confirm that Pollaky was their man in Zurich, but there seems little reason to doubt that he was. Furthermore, in October that year, Pollaky was described on his first wife’s death certificate as a ‘Newspaper Correspondent’.
Pollaky’s Letters to Lord Palmerston
Hartley Library, University of Southampton – Palmerston Papers MS 62 Broadlands Archive PP/MPC/1575–6 – I. Pollaky to Palmerston 1859
PP/MPC/1575
Berne, 2th June 859
Private & Confidentielle!
Your Lordship –
In ten or twelve days I will be able to give You the exact contents of the so called written engagements between Russia and France – Your Lordship can see ‘on the seal of the Enclosed letter’ dtto [sic] Warschaw [sic] 20th last, that the Source is first class and admits of no doubt, should your Lordship however not recognise it – I will aquaint [sic] Your [sic] personally from whom it comes –
The letters A & S. means [sic] Austria & Siebenburgen, (Transilvany) –
Here also England looses [sic] every day more an[d] more ground – what a change – 3 years ago Mr Gordon was generally loved here – and the French Ambassador a mere puppy – now quite the reverse[,] Mr Harris nobody likes, and Jurgot is everything[.] Harris’s appointment for Berne is a great mistake, and will not be without consequence in the Present Crisis
I have the honnour [sic] to remain Your Lordships
Most Ob Servant
I.P.
The enclosed letter Your Lordship will Kindly return when I come to London
PP/MPC/1576
London 14th November. 59.
Private !
My Lord!
I once related to You the fact of my entering Giberaltar [sic] at 10 o’clock at night, in spite of the strictest ordres [sic] of the Comandant [sic] de Place – I will now tell You; what you Know to be true; that I went to Zurich as the special Correspondent of the Morning Post and that ‘I prevailed’ on Mr BorthwicK to Keep the whole matter from You until the reception of my first letter from Zurich – when according to our prearranged plan he (B) would go ‘to Your Lordship’ saying ‘that he received information by a Gentleman who was introduced to him by a friend’ naming to You at the same time my name, and see what effect it would have upon Your Lordship, when asKed if he Could place reliance upon information derived from me – This was our plans [sic]. Your Lordship will best Know if Mr B. acted accordingly, as related above –
I said to Mr. B at our 1th interview that ‘Your Lordship Knew me well’ but that I have reasons to believe if asKed Your opinion, You would certainly object to my going, and that it would be far better to Keep it from You until my first letter from Zurich has reached the M.P. [Morning Post]
Now, My Lord which of the 2 exploits as related above was the more difficult? both were equally successfull [sic].
To bring Mr B. (who to say the truth) looked upon Your Lordship as a Demi-God, and upon eache [sic] word from You, as an oracle – to bring Mr. B., I say to act with me in concert this piece of inocent [sic] intrigue with me a perfect stranger whom he Knew than only since two hours – You [sic] Lordship will allow that this is a feat not inferior to my entering Giberaltar [sic] in spite of the utmost vigilance exercised at that place.
Now to the facts, which if desired, I can evidence by – proofs
Private!
on the 18th July I wrote a letter to Mr B. – demanding a private interview – on the 19th I received his answer, asKing me to see him on the 20th at 5 o’clock in the afternoon – I was of course punctual he begun by saying – “that he could only give me a few minutes hearing, which did not prevent me to set heartily at worK – to explain to him the important benefits for the M.P. in sending me to Zurich as its Special Corr. saying that I have the honnour [sic] to be Known by Y.L. [Your Lordship]
The first sKirmishes were anything but success on my part – and I thought allready [sic] of covering my retreat when all of a sudden I found out his weaK point, I ralied [sic] – opened fire from all my batteries, and after one hour and 50 minutes hard fighting, I saw myself accepted as ‘our Special Correspondent’ of a paper considered by the whole world as Your L[iberal] organ. The next day 21th the final arrangements were all settled during my taKing tea with Mr. B. who gave me a Cheque upon Messrs Twining & Co. for £60. I left on the 22th for Zurich
It remains only for me now the 2 reasons to explain for adressing [sic] You this –
Eight days after the 1th Conference I wrote to Mr. BorthwicK as follows ‘The reinstalation [sic] of the Italian fugitif [sic] Prince has been agreed and determined upon by the 2 Emperors, and that a private written agreemente [sic] exists between them, to that effect – etc –’ – of course th[is] was in contradiction to every line written in the M. Post and Mr. B. ‘went on to write his leaders’ exactly in the opposite direction – of course he has taken Y. Lds. opinion on this my letter as he told me, that he does so every day upon every important subject.
Now, My Lord, am I right in my informations[?] There is no denying facts the Emperors letter admits no other interpretation.
I served Mr. BorthwicK well but he is not a very great politician and is perhaps bound by other ties, but he did not treat me handsomely; and if I did not bring an action against him it was for fear of having Your Lordships name mixed in this Affair either direct or indirectly –�
��
Mr B. looked upon my information which was most positive as a canard, as there was no other paper, even the “Times” who did not write to the contrary to what I said – as to the payment to Austria Your Lordship will remember that I was the first who told You so –
Your Lordship Knows what I said about the next summer – You will see in time if I am right as I was right about last Mai [sic] – You may smile But only then Your Lordship will Know to appreciate my services and until then I will not trouble Your Lordship again.
Please to read the first leader of the “Times” of this day, and say if I did not word for word specify the position of Austria after the Zurich Treaty, as it now stands –
Your most Obd
Servant
IP
Monday
(On a separate piece of paper is written: ‘Mr Pollaky about his going to Zurich for the Morning Post.’)
The Times of that day had a long leader about this matter as Pollaky indicated. The Morning Post was, in fact a Tory paper, but it did seem to favour the Liberal Palmerston in the 1850s, and the fact that Pollaky knew this shows how aware he was of political matters.
It seemed vital to make a trip to Southampton University to look at the Palmerston Papers in the Hartley Library, and see if there were any other references to Pollaky. There were none with his name, but two other items were most suggestive.
Pollaky may have remembered the year incorrectly, as there seems to be no trace of communication with Palmerston or Ross Mangles from 1854. However, on 10 October 1857, Mangles wrote a letter to Palmerston (catalogued as PP/GC/SM/47 enc 1), detailing some dealings with ‘our friend’ who he had seen the previous evening. ‘Our friend’ had evidently brought him some information, but Mangles was not certain that it was accurate. ‘Our friend’ had been in communication with an agent in Jassy, Romania, and gave information that the Berbers had bought many rifles to arm the ‘Faqueers’. Mangles, hedging his bets, doubted this intelligence, but stated that it might at the same time be quite true. He concluded his letter with a request that Palmerston should advise how much ‘our friend ought to be paid for his services’, feeling that Palmerston would know better what the amount should be.
Paddington' Pollaky, Private Detective Page 4