LILLYWHITE OR BLATCH?

Manawatu Standard, Volume XL, Issue 6916, 26 January 1901, Page 4

LILLYWHITE OR BLATCH?

N^ EVIDENGE FAVOURABLE & r. TO PRISONER.

A TACOMA RESIDENT DURING • 1893.

(Post). Messrs Skerrett and Wylie, solicitors for*'Chas. Lillywhite, alleged to be Blatch (who is wanted in connection wiffl" the Colchester murder), yesterday received some striking testimony from T'lcoma, Washington, U.S.A., bearing on'tije question of whether accused was an ■ American citizen in 1893, or an employee of Alfred Walsh, the man murdered in that year at Colchester. Tacoma citizens identify the photograph of the prisoner now awaiting trial as that of Ohas. Lillywhite, and their affidavits affirm that Obas. Lillywhite was a Tacoma resident from 1889 to some time in 1894.

THE LETTER OP ENQUIRY. The facts are that on 4th December la6t, Messrs Skerrett and Wylie, noting as solicitors for Chas. Lillywhite, wrote the following' letter to the Chief of Police, Taooma, Washington, United States of America:—

"Dear Sir,—We are acting as solicitors for a man named Charles Lillywhite, whe has been arrested by the police here as being identical with a man named Arthur Blatch, who is wanted by the police in England for the murder of a man named Wsloh, at Colchester, England, on the night of the Bth December, 1893. He has in hh possession letters addressed to him as Charles Lillywhite from several people, and amongst them many from F; C. Clark, of your town, ■who, Lillywhite states, was his partner. Lillywhite has in his possession a certificate of register of land at Seattle, which is dated 20th December, 1692, and was registered on the 18th December, 1893, (nine days after the murder). He has also a certificate of citizenship, issued to him by the Superior Court of America, dated 15th April, 1890; and also membership cards showing that he belonged to the Society of Painters and Decorators of America from 1890 to 1893. One of these is dated Tacoma, 15th April 1893. Lillywhite tells us that he wentio Tacoma in 1889. He wont there from Los Angelos, California, and had previously been for about two years in Chicago, where he stayed with his aunt, Mrs Caroline Cook, 85 to 88, Lake-avenue. He Btayed in Tacoma from 1889 until Ist July, 1894, when he left for Victoria 8.C., and came over here via Sydney by the Warrimoo. We enclose a copy of- a photograph of Lillywhite, which was taken in London some 20 years ago. This is a good likeness of him still, and he says is more like what he was when he was in Tacoma. Proceedings are now being taken to have Blaich or Lillywhite taken to England, and we understand officers are on their way out with the necessary papers and evidence. Meanwhile;'ljillywhite is detained here by the local police, and is in close confinement. We 'tub unable to give any satisfactory evidence to show that he is what he states 'himself to be, other than the papers. We shall be extremely obliged if you could at once have enquiries made, particularly of the man Clark and others whom he could refer you to, who could, if our client's story is true, recognise the photograph ajjd state whether Lillywhite was in Tacdma all the time he states. He was engaged in Tacoma as a journeyman painter, and is apparently a firstclass hand. He was greatly mixed up i here with the painters' and decorators' union, and was, we believe, very well known in your city. We do not know whether any statement forwarded by you to us would reach us in time, but (here is every probability of its doing go, and we should ba extremely obliged if you would let us have a reply as soon as possible. We will of course remit to you whatever expense you have been put to in the matter.—Yours truly, Sherbet and Wylib."

BBPIiY FROM THE'CHIEF OF POLICE,

To-day Messrs Skerrett and Wylie received a letter from the Chief of Police, Tacoma, dated 28th December, 1900 :— "la reply So yours of 4th December in regard to Chas. Lillywhite, who is under arrest on a charge of murder committed at Colchester, England, on Bth December, 1893, I will Bay that he was well known in the city. I enclose the photograph of him sent to me by you, which has been identified by a number o£ citizens of this city as being the picture of Chas. Lillywhite, whom they knew as a painter and decorator, having resided here from 1889 to some time in about 1894. I also enclose a statement from Mr P. C. Clarke, who is well known to Detective D. 0. Gmith, who is connected with this Department, and whe has looked up this information. Mr Smith knows Mr Clarke to be a manof sterling character, and his enclosed statement can betaken as absolutely reliable. I also enclose a card of monthly payment of dees in the Brotherhood of Painters and Decorators of America, also the names on a separate sheet of well known oitizens and their addresses who were personally acquainted with Chas. Lillywhite during his residence in Tacoma, and should it be found necessary it will be a very easy matter to get the affidavits of quite a number of reputable citizens of the city of Taeoma to prove that he was a resident of this city from 1889 to some time in 1894.—Respeotfully, William Hackler, Chief of Police."

IDENTIFYING STATEMENTS,

In the above letter is an enclosed Btateinent by F. C. Clark, Lillywhite's former partner in Tacoma; which reads as follows : —"This is a statement by F. C. Clarke, well-known in Ta«oma, Washington, U.S.A.—Charles Lillywhite came to Tacoma in 1889, the year of the Seattle fire, and just about the same time —June; 1889. I certify that he never was a week away from me. I either Baw him or had some communication with him. He dined with my family every Christmas that he was in this State. In 1893, he dined with my family on Christmas Day. I forward his'card of Painters' Union. The local union was dissolved in January, 1893, which proves that he was in Tacoma on Ist August, 1893. --I suppose the register of land you refer to is proving up title to 160 acres by paying.2oodols and expenses to Land Department. Frank Lloyd, Surveyor of Eitsap County, was one of the necessary witnesses. Julus Duke is dsad. I do not exactly remember the date, but it was winter time.. I know thty went to Colby to get the boat to Seattle. In ■ 1890, 1891, 1892,, and 1893 we occupied the safne apartments when in Tacoma, my family being on the ranch, 160 acres under homestead laws. He never was anywhere out of my ranch from 1889 to 18th July, 1894, when I saw him go away to New Zealand at the wharf. So it is impossible that he can be the man.

I can also refer you to Mr. Calvert, Post Office, Tacoma; L. B. Stone, Clifford Oregon, Charles Sirnpkins, 1816, S.'7 St., Tacoraa; Dr Dodge, 9th and 1 St. —Sadler, 87 and Jl."

LETTER FBOM MR. CLARK,

By the same mail Messrs Skerrett and Wylie received a letter from F. C. Clark as follows: —" Sir—You willbj thesaine mail know what I have done in regard to the letter that you sent to the police o( Taooma. I have also sent some more evidence to Mr Haaelden, the S.M., consisting of a group of painters taken on Labour Day, 1892, with full partiou lars, so thfSt Lillywhite can prove that ho is tho said Ch&rlos Lillywhite that he is. Likewise I have sent a pioture to Inspector Pender which will also prove him to be Charles Lillywhite.—Yours, etc.,F. C.CLARK."

Mr Skerrett maintains that tho result of these communications appoars to demonstrate clearly that the man now being doUined as Arthur Blatch is Charles Lillywhite, and that he was in America from the year 1899 to July, 1894.

"It has been oonoeded," adds Mr Skerrett, " that if ths documents found in ths possession of prisoner were the property of the man charged, then he could not possibly be Blatoh. This question is set at rest-by the following proofs: —(1) Ths identification of the prisoner as Charles Lillywhite from an admitted photo of the prisoner found in hia possession at the time of his arrest; (2) by the photographs of Chas. Lillywhite sent to Mr Hsselden, S.M., and to |he Inspector of Police, Wellington, which clearly show, by a comparison of the photo with the features of the prisoner, that the priaener is Charles Lillywhite; (3) in addition- to new proofs, ther j are also the existing grounds urged by counsel for the prisoner, derived from the papers themselves, that the prisoner is Charles Lillywhite, not Arthur Blatch."