Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

HANGED FOR THEFT

TUB “SPOTTED” SEiLL

At the beginning of the last century the punishment tor stealing letters and parcels was death by hanging. In the “thirties” a banker’s parcel containing notes to the amount of several hundreds of pounds was posted at the Bath Post Office to a London address (says a writer in “The Birmingham Weekly Post”). The parcel never arrived. It was found that one of the notes, for a large amount, had been changed at a jeweller’s shop in London on the day when the letter should have been delivered. The character of Mr. Stanniore, the jeweller, stood too high to allow of suspicion resting on him. He declared that he had served the man who changed the note; that he had supplied certain articles of jewellery, to any of which he could swear; and that he thought he’ could make a declaration upon oath as to the identity of the purchaser, whom he described’ as u farmer. Mr. Stanniore, conveyed by coach to Bath, was shown all the persons engaged in the Post Office, but he could not identify any of them; all were of good character. Mr. Lamb, the postmaster, was one of the prominent citizens of Bath and was highly esteemed. The keenest scrutiny of Townsend, the chief of the Bow Street runners and famous detective of his time and other noted “Robin Redbreasts” —as the police officers were calletl, on account of red waistcoats being one of their articles of attire—failed to discover where or by whom the letter was stolen.

Mr. Stanniore returned to London, but not before having contracted a strong friendship with the postmaster of Bath, based on the fact that both were ardent anglers. Mr. Stanniore announced his intention of returning to Bath when autumn days should promise sport with rod and line. Seven or eight months afterwards he went to Bath, us arranged, and look up his quarters at. Mr. Lamb’s house. The morning after his arrival, in company

with the postmaster, he set forth to a noted waler within a few miles of the city, and fished for several hours. Afterwards the hospitable Mr. Lamb led his London guest to a neighbouring inn, where dinner had been ordered, and the landlord honoured the hungry fishermen by carrying in the first, dish. When the host had retired, Mr. Stanniore rose, hurriedly trom his chair, locked the door to the room, and, rushing to the astonished postmaster, exclaimed; “That is the

! man who changed the stolen note; I thought 1 recognised his face, but If am convinced of his identity as I saw I hanging on his watch chain a seal! which 1 sold him!" After a brief consultation, they rang the bell, and a servant girl entered the room. They

told her that they wanted to consult the landlord about some wine. A few minutes afterwards the landlord entered and the postmaster and jeweller noticed that the seal was missing from his watch chain. “Time’s nearly up, and I’ve get to pack my clothes," said Mr. Lamb, finishing ids wine, and the pair of friends left the inn for home.

The landlord of the inn wan eventually arrested on the evidence furnished, ami the seal was found in a dust heap at. the back of his house. The man was proved to have, called at Hie post office cn the day of the (heft, n*d to have bcci admitted into the sorting room while he conversed with one of the clerks, intimately he. confessed that ho had stolen the par-1 cel our of a. pigeon-hole in a desk, had journeyed to London, as he often did, by the night mail, and had changed

one of the notes when purchasing the seal at Mr. Stanmore’s shop. The- innkeeper was hanged; but so great, a commotion was raised about the severity of the punishment that the hanging law was altered.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GEST19390207.2.72

Bibliographic details

Greymouth Evening Star, 7 February 1939, Page 10

Word Count
651

HANGED FOR THEFT Greymouth Evening Star, 7 February 1939, Page 10

HANGED FOR THEFT Greymouth Evening Star, 7 February 1939, Page 10

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert