THE COLCHESTER MURDER.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CV, Issue 12537, 26 June 1901, Page 3

THE COLCHESTER MURDER.

LILLYWHITE TO BE RELEASED. United Press Association-—By Elactrio Telegraph—Copyrigh t. LONDON, June 24. Lillywhite is to be released on Wednesday. The newspapers condemn the police for having made a blunder in arresting him, and suggest that he should receive compensation. A QUESTION OF IDENTITY. SUMMARY OF AN INTERESTING CASE. a For the past five or six years, says the Wellington “ Post,” Lillywhite had been living in Wellington, gaining his living as a painter, and taking at prominent part in matters affecting his trade, and -his arrest as the supposed murderer Blatch came as quite a shock to many of his friends and acquaintances, among whom he was held in iiig-h esteem. The question of his identity was argued before the Court on very many -occasions, and the full reports published in the newspapers enabled the public to gain a very good idea of what the evidence, was on both- sides. THE CASE FOR THE CROWN., The person to whom the arrest of Lillywhite was primarily due was a woman named Margaret Archer, who was an old acquaintance of Blatch at Colchester, and subsequently emigrated to New Zealand. Some time ago this woman informed the police that Blatch, whoso presence in New Zealand had -been suspected for years, was in Wellington, and she promised to 'point him out to them. This, however, she failed to do, and then, at.the end' of May,: 1899, she returned to,England. V- .There she--again communicated/ withe the police, and informed, .them, so it. is understood, that when she left New Zealand, Blatch was in the Wellington Hospital suffering from nijuries to both Lis ankles caused in an accident at the Parliament Buildings, where he had been working as a painter. . Singular to relate, at that moment the only man in the Wellington Hospital suffering from such injuries caused in that manner was the man Charles Lillywhite, and the inference, of course, was that he and Blatch were one and the same person. A watch was kept upon him by the Wellington police, and after he had been to Rotorua for the benefit of his -health, he was arrested in November last as 'Arthur Blaitch, the suspected murderer of Alfred Welch at Colchester on Deo. 8, 1893. He made very little fuss about it at the time, and when brought before the Court took more trouble to- complain of his quarters and fond at the- gaol than to insist that a wrong had been done him in supposing that he was Blatch. . The Crown, however, set to work to prdvd'.thatl'he. was'. Blatch, and called a former resident of- Colchester, named George Drawbridge, who swore that he was the man—thaj. he knew him and met him on many occasions when he was caretaker of the recreation ground at Colchester. Other witnesses were called to prove the same thing, but all were not so certain as Mr Drawbridge, who never swerved from his original statement. An attempt was also made to prove that Lillywhite knew Margaret Archer while she was in New Zealand, and a Mrs Bailey, of Ota-ki, was called, and stated that during the Easter holidays in 1899, just prior to Archer leaving for England, ha stayed with Archer at Mrs Bailey’s house. Further, a man named Hopkins gave evidence that he was a patient at the Wellington Hospital while Lillywhite was there, and that he had several conversations with him, vrhidh went to show that Lillywhite was In London at or about the time of the murder, and that ho gave an account of himself which did not tally with the life history which Lillywhite subsequently gave to the Court. At length Sergeant Frost, and John Marsh, Town Hall keeper at Colchester, arrived from England, and it was felt that the question of accused’s identity would soon be answered one way or another. But the answer was not *o direct as was anticipated. Sergeant Frost’s first impression was that Lillywhite was not: the man, but as his opportunities of scrutinising his anpearance and manner increased, he became more and more, certain that the man was Ela/tch, and at length he went so far as to ray that he thought he was Blatch, hut he would not swear to him positively. Later in his' examination he said, “ the more I see of him the moi-e I think he is Blatch.” Mr John Marsh also failed to identify Li!lvwhito at first, but when examined in Court-said he had “arrived at the conclusion” that lie was. Blatch. During the time that Lillywhite had been in custody ho hadi grown a beard, and it was felt that that.might in some measure have prevented the English witnesses recognising 'him so readily n.s t-bev might otherwise have clone, as Blatch when at- Home was clean shaven. The Crown, apparently, has no power in such cases to compel a prisoner to -he shaved, but Lillywhite volunteered to have his beard taken off, and after an interval he appeared in Court without it. Sergeant Frost was then recalled', and at once stated positively that he was Blatch. He would not swear absolutely, he said, but to the best of his belief tbs man in the dock was Blatch. Marsh was also of the same opinion. He was sure —aimosfc positive, THE CASE FOR THE ACCUSED. And now -will he stated what there is to be sold in favour of Lillvwhite being really Lillvwhito. and not Blatch. To begin with. Tilly white wan generally known- in Wellinitcn as a sober, respectable man, a- fairly good painter and —a non-smoker. seldom, if ever, taking any liquor, and not by any means " y, * H' v-"« al-'O stated to. be a good player on the ac-CJi'd-'-on, K.lU'.cualUhe was "not called upon to vroVe- h ! « abibrv in tbit direction. B’a'-'h, '" 1 'he oi-pc-r hat'd, was, as far as the witnesses knew, never seen with a paint brush in bis hand, and none of them appear to have suspected- him of anv knowledge of .the pa Lit tor’s trade. He was also an" inveterate -smoker, always had a- pipe in hi.< -tuouth, and l-.rul worn a groove in his tooth where Use. pipe was wont- to rest. Nor did anyone know that he play-e-d the aecordeoni Then, ’again, the man who stayed at Mrs Bailey’s house at Otulci with t.;e woman Archer was not at all a respectable individual like Lillywhite. He drank ton much and used such bad lancrumre ibah AJVu Tln-Uav bad- torn

Mm out of the house. Further, evidence was called to prove that at the time Lillywhite was said to have been staying with Archer at Otaki he was spending the day quietly at his home with a mate, and the affair was, in its last stages, still further complicated by a man named. Charles Nicholson stating that he himself spent the Easter holidays of 1899 at Otatd with Margaret Archer, and! that they, singularly enough, stayed at the house of a Mrs Bailey. He added that since Archer had reached England l she had written him a letter, which he had lost. The letter, however, was picked up in the street by some person, and witness swore that it was his. Another singular feature about this Otaki affair was that M’Mahon was taken there and shown the Mrs Bailey who had sworn that Lillywhite and Archer stayed at her house during Easter, 1899. That was not the Mrs Bailey that he and Archer stayed with, h© declared, it was another Mrs Bailey. There was, it imv be mentioned, another Mrs Bailey in Otaki, but she had no on© staying with her at the time mentioned, so it looked as if someone was making a mistake. Finally, accused) gave evidence in his own behalf, and, it must be admitted, made out a very good case that he was really Lillywhite and not Blatch. He went fully into the details of his life, from his birth in London to 1859 or 1860 to the moment of his arrest. He described his wanderings in England in search of work as a painter, produced two discharges, showing that he had been at sea, where ho worked 1 at his trade, and stated that he left the Old Country for America in 1885. He visited many places in America, always working as a painter, and ho gave details of his life at Los Angelos and at Tacoma, He produced a Government grant of land to Kinsett County, dated Dec. 18, 1893 (just after the murder), and stated that he had had to live . sixteen months on the land before he was entitled to the grant. He also produced papers, showing that he was a naturalised citizen' of the United States. He left Tacoma in July, 1894, and came to New Zealand, via Sydney, in company with a man named Selkirk. This man Selkirk know Lillywbite’s great friend Clark in Tacoma, .and while Lillywhite was in gaol in Wellington he wrote to him (not knowing he was nnder arrest), giving details of Clark’s family, and referring to his section of land in Kinsett ! County. Lillywhite also produced very [ many'letters addressed to him in various j places as Charles Lillywhite, from friends and relations in various parts of England I and America, and gave an account of who I, the writers were. Further, he denied all ■ knowledge of Margaret Archer, saids he j had never stayed at Otaki with her tit Mrs Bailey’s, and characterised Hopkins’s evidence as to the conversation _in the hospital as “ the finest piece of lying ever I heard.”