MARSHALL HALL K.C.

Greymouth Evening Star, 6 December 1929, Page 10

MARSHALL HALL K.C.

CRIMINAL LAWYER’S .CLIENTS. , LONDON, October 3. Mr Majoribanks’s biography of Sir Edward Marshall Hall is certain of wide popular* success. It is admirably written, and is of intense .human interest. and-real importance in ci’innpologicaf vliteraiurc. No advocate th,at we can remeniber was briefed in so . many fainous .-cases, and on all these fresh .light is- thrown from Sir Edward Marshall Hadi's .papers, which have been’ unreservedly placed dt the dis-..posal-of •SXarshall ;IJall, as Lord Birkenhead •writes in diis‘introduction: ” was a man of remarkable appearance. Very greatly above the aver, age height, .admirably proportioned, exceptionally Aandsome, he radiated vigour, courage and personality And” behind this magnificent facade lay qualities of character hardly less admirable. His one defect was a certain recklessness of speech which brought him more than once into conflict with the Bench, and twice almost ruined his practice. As a man he was.peculiarly unhappy in his first marriage, -which was one of love on his part. While. they were still in the carriage that drove them away from the . church, his bride told him that She had . never cared, and could not care fori him .as, he cared for her.

Finally they separated, and she .came to .a tragic end, dying as the result of an operation. Marshall Hall felt her de.ath so bitterly that there was fearlhe might lose his reason.

Early in.his career he. defended “one of the most .famous. criminals of modern times, ‘Dr’ Neil Cream,” against a charge of bigamy. .Cream escaped .with a “perfect alibi.” It appeared that he had beeriau prison at Sydney in Australia at the time .he was ,s.up-„ posed to have committed his offepces in England. Marshall Hall afterwards had cause to doubt his innocence, and formed a startling theoryThat Neil Cream -.had a “double’’ .in tjie underworld and they went-py the same name and ijsed each other's terms .of imprisonment ,as alibis for each other. There’was a rumour current when Cream t was .executed that vengeance had at last overtaken Jack the Ripper,, the celebrated murderer of women,in.the ’eighties. This arose from the,faqt that the.hangman, about to send Creqm into eternity thought he heard him say, “I am Jack But Marshall did not regard this as very conclusive evidence. As a matter of fact, .Cream at,the time of the Ripper murders was in the Illinois State penitentiary, serving a long sentence of imprisonment for murder.

Marshall Hall appeared in the famous divorce case which wrecked Sir Charles Dilke’s.career. Dilke, before lie died, by his cour,agQP,us apd'dignified attitude through the long years, convinced many of his innocence, but Marshall never needed persuasion. Wherever the truth may lie, Marshall’s opinion was definite. Many.years afterwards he said to . a friend, “Of course, Dilke was innocent! .1 have read papers which prove it.” The catastrophe to Dilke, in his opinion, was due to .the fact that Dilke’s counsel did not .put him in the witness-box. .■Marshall always made it a rule

never to take on himself spell a responsibility. So important did he think this that .... he always wrote out a form: “I wish to give evidence in this case.” “I do not wish to give evidence in this cage,” apd made his client strike out thp one.or the other and sign .his decision. Marshall Hall was convinced that Dr Crippen, the murderer, was innocent, but refused to accape a brief in his beliplf. His .reason .was .that: A line of defence had been adopted at : the- Police Court on Crippen’s specific instructions, which would have niade it quite hopeless for Marshall to put forward the theory of defence which he was convinced was the truth.

This .theory yas that Crippen had killed his wife accidentally by an overdose of hyoscin.

Crippen, .in order to spend a night with his paramour (Miss le Neve), drugged his wife with a new and rare drug of which he . knew little, and of .which he had (lately purchased five grains. But a little learning is a dangerous thing. To be on the safe side he gave her a .large dose, which turned out to be an overdose. In the morning he found his wife, dead, and in : a panic .he . . . .cut up her body.

. . . Then he proceeded .to write to .a number of his friends a transparent tissue, of lies.

t He defended that .great criminal Seddon, .poisoner of Miss Barrow. In Seddon, Marshall considered that he ;h.ad : plumbed the .depths of human wickedness He .continued to think ,that Seddon was. as wicked as a sane man .can be “This is the blackest case I’ve ever been in,” he observed at the first.consultation. He added that Seddon was “the ablest man ,1 ever .defended on the capital charge.” Marshall Hall secured the acquittal.oLSeddon’s wife,as to whose innocence there was no doubt, but Seddon himself was convicted and duly/hanged. A portrait of the man shows something .extraordinarily sinister in the expression of thq : .face; a.nd, as is well :known, gfter his. execution, Mrs Seddon made a long statement to the “.Sunday Dispatch” : which .placed his guilt beyond dispute. The rmpst .repulsive criminal that Marshall Hall defended wa,s George Joseph Smith, 4he /murderer of the : .brides in .their baths. He went through the „form of marriage with three women in .succession, and each 3 of .the three .was limmediately after marriage fo.upd r drowned in. her bath in jnqst circumstances. When Marshall ,-ahd Shearman went

tp _see Smith- at Brixton, they were, shown.dpto.a room where he was sit-, tjng, apd ijis eyes were quite terrible. “He had,” said the latter, “a horrible r way .of .looking at one. Itgave .jne „k most -.unpleasant feeling,and we certainly -formed -the opinion, that? he h,ad a;curious -way of .influencing . pep.ple.” -So, .repelled was Mar-‘ shall-by Tiis looks .that/he broke , off the 1 consultation, z conyin,ced -that the manwas frying tp -hypnotise rhim. It was .Xiall’s belief that Smith w as dk.skne, ..and that he.drown-, ed-his victims? by hypnotic suggestion.