THE COLCHESTER CASE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CVI, Issue 12570, 3 August 1901, Page 3

THE COLCHESTER CASE.

THE QUESTION OF IDENTITY. MR LILLYWHITE LIBERATED. [From Otjk Coeresi'okdknt.] LONDON, June 28. All’ Charles LiUywhite will never Lack a topic of conversation as long as life lasts for him, and that, I hope, will be much longer than some people appeared to think probable when he landed in England labelled “Arthur Blatch,” and escorted by a couple of police officers, a fortnight ago. It has happened' to ' few men to lie for months in prison under suspicion of a crime committed many years ago, to be dragged in custody from the other end of the world without being able to establish their identity, and finally' to prove conclusively that the police had made a big, bad blunder. This has been Charles Lilly white’s experience. The question now is, “ Will the Government compensate the innocent victim of the Colchester police ?” He certainly has a strong moral claim! to a handsome pecuniary solatium for all the degradation and misery he has suffered during the past six months. His experience in New Zealand was distinctly unpleasant, and his voyage Home can scarcely have been enjoyable even if the detenu was buoyed up by consciousness of innocence. For innocent men have ■ danced upon nothing before to-day, thanks to the disastrous blindness of Justice on occasion.

Lilly white’s incarceration at Colchester was made as pleasant as possible for him, and the authorities and the' police of the town showed, by their great consideration for the creature comfort of the prisoner, that they had a “ horrid suspicion " that the man in custody was truly “lily white” so far as the murder of Mr Alfred Welch was concerned. After the remand, he was asked whether he would prefer to be sent to Chelmsford cr Ipswich Gaol, or remain at the police station in Colchester. He elected to remain in Colchester. His cell was comfortable and roomy, and it bad just been specially done up. His bed was new, .and wiiat he fancied in the way of food he had only to ask for. Beer would have been supplied were ho not a teetotaller; and if he desired to smoke, tobacco would not have been denied him. But he neither smokes nor drinks. Usually prisoners in the custody of the Colchester police are not supplied with meat at dinner-time. Lilly" white got as much meat as he required. He went , to bed when he pleased, and he had as much literature as ho cared to ask for. __ HOW LILLYWHITE WAS IDENTIFIED. The police authorities at Colchester must be given credit for the thoroughness of their process of identification. They scoured' tthe country round to obtain men of similar height”and build to their prisoner, and by chance came across one man who to the eye of any casual acquaintance might easily be mistaken for Lilly white himself.. The prisoner was paraded with eighteen otheT-anen, and. the witnesses were in:trcduccch«one by one. . Nearly forty men and women were called upon to take stock of the batcliybut not one of them singled out LiUywhite with any approach to conviction, "■and'the great majority passed him by altogether. Two. or three people who had known Blatch scanned LiUywhite very closely, but their, doubts as to hia identity were, manifest,: and ,the one man upon, whom the«;;police reckoned most not only passed the prisoner without hesitation, but actually singled out as, “ Blatch ” a man who has been working on the Colchester roads for the .past fourteen years. This was a Mr William Gates, with whom Blatch lived, and on many occasions shared the same bed.. A more singular fact still is that Mr Gates, not .at all, satisfied in his mind about his supposed mistake, sent up Mrs Gates, who knew Blatch very well, to try and pick the suspected man from the group the police formed for this special purpose. She, in her trun, quite failed -to identify the prisoner, and passed, on to the selfsame man her husband had selected.' This individual was piles away from the spot at the time the tragedy took place,, and his history, isWell-known to the local authorities of Colchester. In addition to the witnesses who could not identify LiUywhite , as Blatch, there were several who could and did identify the prisoner as Charles LiUywhite. The chief of these was Isaac LiUywhite, of Leeds, who, when; brought into the yard where the prisoner was paraded, at once sin riled out ahd claimed for his brother, the suspect. Isaac LiUywhite had not seen his brother for twenty-three years, so the,fact that he did . not at once recognise his brother Charles, who was then wearing a full beard, was not strange. Isaacs narrative. of the meeting and subsequent identification is interesting and conclusive He said to an inquisitive reporter: It was about half-past twelve when I was railed iii. There were about a dozen men standin win a row. One of them had brown clothes on, and was very much like,, my brother; hub I took noticeof the eyes and the top part of the head, and then I knew that it was not my brother. I passed them all without picking out my brother.” En parenthese it may be .mentioned that on this occasion the prisoner turned to the ■chief constable and said; “If I mistake not, that man is my brother Isaac. The duel constable, with a view to putting him oft the scent for a moment, told him. that the name of the man who had just gone out was Jones. “Then,” continued Mr LiUywhite, in his narrative, “ I had to wait till the accused was shaved, and when I went in again, announced as (Mr ‘Jones!’ the third man in the row looked at me, screwed his eyes and laughed. I immediately_ said That s him!’ and shook hands with him and said, ‘You are my brother!”’ “ And what happened next: _ „ “ Well, we. entered into conversation, replied. Mr LiUywhite, and this is what took Pl lsaa^Lillywhite: “ Have you ever kept a ■ ~ ~ Accused: res. ■ Isaac LiUywhite : “ Where; Accused : “ In Yorkshire. Isaac LiUywhite: “Did your sister keep a dog?” j( Accused: “Yes.’ Isaac LiUywhite: “What was his name??” ; Accused; “Patch. • This seems to have clinched the matter, for it was true, added Mr LiUywhite, that his sister once had a little terrier whose name was Parch, and , the accused. also mentioned an. incident of the tong ago when he cut off the dogs.tail. • “ Of course, then,” queried, the reporter, “ you were perfectly satisfied? Satisfied, yes; no doubt about it, and I .said ’ That’s. Charles LiUywhite !’” Later at an interview in the suspect s cell, in the presence of a police inspector, Isaac took Charles through an examination in early family history, and assurance was made doubly sure by calling in a couple-of ladies who had with Chailcs LiUywhite in his youthful days. Both recognised their old “flame, ivho, tis whispered, still holds a warm, comer io one of the ladies’ hearts, in spite of the passage of years. As Charles- LiUywhite s. mother is still alive, some people want to know why she was not called upon by the police to identify her son. Petha.ps the uuthoTities remembered the. sequence of .disastrous circumstances arising out of the mistake made by the late Dowager Lady Tichborne. , LILLYWHITE RELEASED. Though the authorities made up their minds that they had no legal hold on LillyWhite, • he was not actually released from custody till Wednesday last. The detained man wa s then brought before the Colchester Bench, and in the presence’ of a crowded Court, Mr Campbell, fur the Treasury, intimated that all the evidence they had been able to get together only , proved that there was a “ remarkable resemblance ” between LiUywhite and Blatch, but hailed in any way to connect the prisoner with :he murder. After expressing the authorities’ regret that the defendant should have been placed in such a painful position, Mr Campbell asked that he should be dhcharg-

ed. The Mayor having formally told the man in the dock that he was free to go where he pleased, the Court was prepared to see Lillywhite skip nimbly from his confined quarters; but, instead, Lillywhite stood his ground, drew himself up, beamed triumphantly on the audience, and commenced to speak. In a. nutshell*. he desired, before taking advantage of the Mayoral permission to quit, to put a few questions to some of the witnesses. Three persons had, he was sorry to say, gwom that he -was Blatch-, and it would not be fair to him to let that statement go unchallenged. It would be unfair to the people of this country, and also to the people of America, where he was well-known. One of these witnesses was Margaret Archer, in regard to her testimony that led to his arrest.

Mr Campbell, for the Treasury, said there was no longer any issue before the Court, and whatever was said would be of no avail. During a long consultation, Lillywhite stood erect, ■ with arms folded, and smiled. Mr Campbell said if the question was, “Am I, or am I not, Arthur Blatch?” he would have no objection. Lillywhite: “That is the question j but I have many more questions to put. The public have a right to know what hag-been done. There are persons present who have sworn in another Court that I am Arthur Blatch. I should like those persons questioned. In connection with the tragedy I have been connected most shamefully with other matters than the Colchester mystery.” Mr Campbell: Ido not know what he is referring to, but it is obvious that this cannot be gone into, as there is no issue. Lillywhite; If those witnesses are produced, your Worship, it may turn out that I am Arthur Blatch after all.

After further consultation, it was decided to call Sergeant Robert Frost, who, however, was not sworn. •

Lillywhite : Where did you first see me? Frost: In November, in Wellington, New Zealand. '

Lillywhite: Did you see me in Colchester before that?

Frost: To the best of my belief I had at that time.

Frost, replying to further questions by Lillywhite, .said that when he saw liiiri (Lillywhite) w.ith a beard, he thought lie was- more than ever like Blaich. ; ,

Lillywhite: Did'you tell Mr Skerrett (Lillywhite’s counsel in New Zealand) that I was a fuller and bigger : man than Blatch?

Frost; No ; I said 1 I thought you were bigger. Lillywhite' then said he wanted, to question the woman Archer (the woman who laid the information against him). H© said that lady had been the cause of all the trouble;

Mr Campbell, pointed .out that this woman was under no compulsion to come and answer, any questions.

The Mayor asked" the Chief Constable to go and speak to Mrs Archer. He did so, and in’retiming, he said that the woman, refused to enter the Court or state anything. . The Mayor then repeated his statement that the accused was discharged, and Lillywhite left the dock and passed into the Police Station premises,? but was prevailed upon by the police not to leave by the public entrance, as a crowd of about a thousand persons had gathered, and there was every indication of a demonstration taking place.