AFTER EIGHTEEN YEARS.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19156, 12 November 1927, Page 17

AFTER EIGHTEEN YEARS.

RELEASE FROM PRISON. SEQUEL TO FAMOUS MURDER CASE. (BT CABM-TBIUS AMOCUTIOS—COfTRtOaT) AND V.g. CABLE ASSOCIATION.) LONDON, November 10. lu the House of Commons, Captain W. E. Elliott, in answer to a question, said that he felt justified in releasing on license as soon as arrangements coultl be made Oscar Slater, who was convicted of tho murder of Miss Gilchrist at Glasgow, and received a life sentence.. Slater had now served eighteen and a half years. "A POLICE SCANDAL." GREAT NOVELIST'S VIEW. (ACBTBALIAK axd m.z. cable a6Socutiok.) (Received November 11th, 9.20 p.m.) LONDON, November 11. A section of tho Pross here and many prominent men have long sought the release of Oscar Slater. • The German Foreign Office points out that it cannot take up Slater's case till ho applies for repatriation. He forfeited his German citizenship by going to live in Scotland to avoid conscription. "Slater's release is only the beginning of things," says Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, who has fought ceaselessly for Slater's vindication. He adds: "Slater is now an old, broken man, and no effort must be spared to ensure that his sufferings are productive of some good. This is the greatest police scandal of modern times. "It is evident that tho judicial authorities have made -the gravest of mistakes. Anyone who happened to be walking in the Glasgow streets at tho same timo as Slater might have been found guilty." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is now framing a petition to Parliament for a full enquiry into Slater's arrest and trial, urging that he bo compensated. The release is the result of a message which Slater sent to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, writfen on a piece of paper which was wrapped in somo glazed paper and hidden in a hollow tooth of a prisoner discharged from Peterhead gaol in 1920. AN UNSOLVED MYSTERY. THE CASE REVIEWED. Oscar Slater was sentenced to death in the High Court of Justice, Edinburgh, on May 6th, 1909, for a murdter committed in Glasgow the previous December, says "John o' London's Weekly." Owing to certain unsatisfactory features of his trial and the fact that the verdict against him was returned by a majority of nine to six only, he was reprieved. In 1914 the Secretary for Scotland ordered an enquiry into certain new evidence tending to prove Slater's innocence, but the enquiry disclosed no ground for further action. In 1912 Sir Arthur Conan Doyle published a little book pn the case in which he, maintained that Slater was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. There is now another book, "The Truth about Oscar Slater," by a Glasgow journalist, Mr William. Park, for whom Sir Arthur has written a foreword. Mr Park* is ablo to give some new matter, including Slater's own story (which the dtefenco did not see fit to put before the jury), but nothing that adds materially to the facts as stated in the second edition of Mr Roughhead's "Trial of Oscar Slater" (Notable British Trials). ' The trouble about a controversial case is that after a while one can hardly see the wood for the trees. This is particularly true of the Slater case, in which the evidence bristles with discrepancies and contradictions. ft may be useful, therefore, to set out as simply as possible the broad facts. The Victim. Miss Marion Gilchrist was an old lady of eighty-two, who for many years had occupied a first-floor flat in Queen's terrace, West Prince's street, Glasgow. She was in good circumstances, which enabled her to indulge a passion for jewellery. She kept hor jewellery in her flat, most of it concealed in garments stored in a spare bedroom. Her habits wero retired. She had relatives in Glasgow, but went out little, received few visitors, and was suspicious of strangers. She kept one servant, a girl of twenty-two named Helon Lambic. The Murder. At seven o'clock on the evening of Mouday, December 21st, 1908, Miss Gilchrist, according to her custom, sent Lambie out to fetch an evening newspaper. When Lambie returned, about ten or" fifteen minutes later, she found on the landing outside the door a Al r Adams, who occupied the groundfloor house below. Hte said he had heard suspicious noises in Miss Gilchrist's flat. The servant opened the door with her latchkey, and as they . were about to enter a well-dressed man came out of the spare bedroom, walked calmly towards them with a pleasant smile, then suddenly darted past them out of the flat and down the stairs. A few minutes, later Lambie found the body of her mistress in the dining-room -in front of the fireplace. Tho head had been smashed to pulp. Tbo Motive. It was presumed that the murderer's purpose was robbery. In the spare bedroom a box containing private papers had been ransacked, but jewelIcrv of considerable value was left Iviiig on the dressing-table. Lambie. however, alleged that a diamond broocli was missing. Tho Pursuit. On Christmas Day (four days after the murder) the police got information that a man named Oscar Slater, who lived within a few minutes' walk of Miss Gilchrist's house, had been trying to sell a pawn-ticket for a diamond brooch. Detectives went to Slater's house at midnight, but the bird had flown. A low hours earlier he had left Glasgow, bag and baggage. Subseouentlv it was ascertained that he hail travelled to Liverpool and had sailed tor New York by the Lusitania on December 2(>th under the name of Otto Sando. When the Lusitania arrived off Sandy Hook. Siater was arrested by the New York police. The Accused. The accused man was a Silcsian Jew, aged thirty-eight. His real name is believed to' be Leschziner. He appears i to have left Germany to avoid military service about 1888, and thenceforward i to have led a vagrant underworld life on the Continent, in Great Britain, and i" the United States. He first came to Glasgow in 1901, and married there, but soon separated from his wife. He was again in Glasgow in 1900. On both occasions he was known as Oscar Slater. In the late autumn of 1908 he came to Glasgow for the third time. In the

name of Anderson, and describing, himself as a dentist, ho took a good flat on the fringe of the Westrend, whore he lived with a young French woman with whom ho had for somo timo associated in Paris and London. But Slater was still the name by whioh he was known in the billiard-rooms, gambling olubs, and public-houses that he irequented. He was a professional gambler, a souteneur, and, when occasion offered, a "dealer in precious stones" — iti other words, a receiver of stolen goods—but had always sucooeded m keeping out of the hands of the police. The Evidence. While Slater was still on the Atlantic, the Glasgow police were suddenly checked by discovering that the brooch that had sent them on his track was not the missing article at all, but had. been pawned by Slater long before the murder of Miss Gilohrist. Nevertheless, instead of dropping the case as one would have expected, they decided to proceed on other grounds. At the trial the Crown undertook to prove, first," that Slater was the man who was seen by Adams and Lambie in Miss Gilchrist's house. If Adams and Lambie could swear to Kim beyond all' doubt, the case was proved. Sinter was the murderer. But though- these witnesses did, after a fashion, identify Slater as the man, their evidence was not such as a jury could accept without something, more. The police therefore sought farther to prove Slater's identity with (a) a man who was seen running away from the scene of the murder; (b) a man - who. a little later, entered the Kelvinbridge subway station in great haste; and (c) a man who, from time to time, bad been seen loitering suspiciously near Miss Gilchrist's house. On all these points the evidence of identity was extremely weak; and in regard to one—the man at the subway station— '■ the police had conclusive • information which they did not disclose that that mah was not Slater. , The suspicious circumstances of Slater's departure for New York completed the police case. It will bo noticed that the base involved the supposition that the police, following a wrong scent, had nevertheless found the right man—an improbability so great that only the very strongest evidence could overcome it. Let us turn to the other side. Woak as the Crown case was, the case for the defence was even weaker—indeed', it was damaging. Slater did not go into the box on his own behalf. The witnesses railed to prove an alibi proved nothing. It was truo that he liad for some time announced his intention of going to America—which again proved nothing—but the suddenness of his departure had surprised his associates. No satisfactory explanation was given for his booking his passage under the name of Otto Sando. The Sequel--11l April, 1914, on instructions from the Secretary for Scotland, the Sheriff of Lanarkshire- held a private enquiry upon certain allegations made by De-tectivc-Lieutenaat Trench, of the G asgo,v police. Trench's story was that two days after the murder, in the '. ourso of making enquiries, lie visited Miss Birrell. a niece of Miss Gilchrist. Miss Birrell, he said, told him that on the night of the murder the servant Lambio told her that she had recognised the murderer as a certain A. 8.. who was known to both of them and Miss Gilchrist. He reported this to his i-uperior officers. Subsequently ho saw Lambie, who confirmed Miss Rirrcll's statement. But at the enquiry Miss Birrell, Lambie, and Trench's superiors declared in the most emphatic- terms that Trench's story was absolutely false. On the other hand, a brother-officer said that Trench at the time .told him about Miss Birrell's statement regarding A. B. There was no other corroboration of Trench's itory. Here are a few of the many question? that the discerning render of the foregoing summary trill want to ask: How did the murderer gain access to the flat? Why. if robbery was his object, did ho confine his attention to a box of private papers? I Why. if Helen Lanibie knew that sh« had loft her mistress alone in the flat, did she not challenge the stranger? Why. if Water was guilty, was no object found in his possession to conhim with the murder? Why. if Slater was innocent, did he not an into the witness-box. Why did Slater hnsten his departure to America ? Why did he try to cover up his tracks and travel in the name of Otto Sando" Why did Lieutenant Trench, who had paraded Rlater for identification and gave evidence for tho Crown at the trial, keep silence for five years, knowing all the timo that Slater was innocent? But these questions and many more quite as baffling have never been, arl probably never will be, answered. .......