OFFICIAL SECRETS

Evening Star, Issue 19408, 17 November 1926, Page 5

OFFICIAL SECRETS

CHARGE AGAINST FORMER PRISON GOVERNOR ECHO OF ILFORD MURDER Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright » LONDON, November 16. (Received November 17, at 10.30 a.m.) .Major Blake, a retired ex-governor of Pontonville Prison, who recently wrote a series of articles in a London newspaper dealing with prominent murderers and the inmates of PentonvilJe, was summoned to the Mansion House under the Official Secrets Act in connection with the publication of a conversation with Bywaters, who was executed on January'9, 1923, in which he alleged that the last thing Bywaters said was that Airs Thompson was innocent, while, in fact, she was executed the same dfiy.

The prosecuting counsel said the Government hoped that the prosecution would help to stop this kind of thing, because scores of people believed that the last words that a man spoke must be true ’Blake also was not entitled to divulge By waters’s' confession—namely, “ I am sorry I murdered Thompson/’ Blake was committed for trial.—Sydney ‘ Sun ’ Cable.

The Illord murder trial, in which a young man named Bywaters and Mrs Thompson were charged with murdering the latter’s husband, created a great sensation in England. The trial was concluded on December 11, 1922, when Air Justice Shearman, summing up, said that the charge was a common one of an adulterous wife and a man murdering the husband. He was sure the jury was filled with disgust at the nonsense in the letters, inferring that her husband’s love was improper, and illicit love was grand and noble. They must get rid of these feelings and deal with facts. Referring to Bywaters’s statement “1 meant to injure, not io kill him,” the judge held up the large knife and said: “If anyone intending to injure another uses a weapon which might reasonably be expected to murder 5 , then the user is responsible for the murder.”

The correspondence, the judge added, showed that, the prisoners had done their utmost to keep Thompson in the dark regarding their relations, though the defence alleged they were urging him to agree to a divorce. The jury should remember that Bywaters stabbed Thompson several times in the neck. They were entitled to think that Bywaters was inflamed by sexual provocation, and to take into consideration his youth and good character. Regarding Mrs Thompson, the emsstion was whether there was any arrangement between the prisoners that the murder should be committed. If the jury thought that the letters meant what they said, they might conclude that Mrs Thompson was inciting Bywaters to assist in poisoning her husband. If the prisoners found that poisoning was no longe- possib'e, they might naturally turn to othe: „ means. The letters formed the strongest case that Mrs Thompson was writing to Bywaters asking him to help to remove her husband. If the letters were accurate, Mrs Thompson had administered poison. It was s?id that that was mere melodrama; but that was for the jury to say.

The jury was absent for two hours, and found both prisoners guilty. They were executed