LILLYWHITE OR BLATCH?

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1510, 7 February 1901, Page 30

LILLYWHITE OR BLATCH?

SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS. In the Supreme Court cn the Ist, before the Chief Justice and Mr Justiee Edwards, argument was heard,! in the matter of Charles^Lillywhite,; who is ix t present under committal to England on a. charge that, being Arthur Blatch, he murdered Alfred -Welch at Colchester, England. -•• • t t Mr Hi D. Bell, appeared 1 for the Crown, 1 to show cause, and Mr Skerrett for Lilly white, to move absolute a rule nisi winch, had been granted Tot a writ of habeas corpus. .

’ Argument took place as to the admissibility of‘ the records of the Coroner’s. inquest , qt Colchester.

Mr Bed said it must be conceded on the part' of the'- Crown that if further evidence could be taken, there! was further eyideji.ee, of considerable;: weight available to support—he did not say ttf prove—the accused’s statement :tkat he was Lillywhite. \ The Chief .Justice': And to show that he was not in ■ Colchester in January, 1894 ? •' ' ’ s

Mr . Skerrett: Yes. , Mr. Bell said there was another point, li further evidence Was taken as to identity, there would be further, evidence .to- elucidate: the point. a.s to whether the accused was or was not the man wKo on Good Friday night was at Otaki with Margaret Archer. It was -beyond all question that if the accused was at Otaki on the night of Good Friday, he had told a falsehood, except on one assumption.

The Chief Justice : Do you admit that the statements made in the letters from. Tacoma—from tlie man Clark, and fr nn the police there—are true?

Mr Bell: We are a little in the dark., The police authorities at Tacoma speak highly of Clark. A photograph of ,& group of men has been received from Ta- ; coma. The accused has given replies as to most of the men in the group when; questioned about them. Mr Skerrett: This man Lillywhite was in Sydney in August, 1894. If the accused is not Lillywhite he had only nine months in which to acquire Lfflywhite’s papers.

The Chief Justice said the documents received from Tacoma were not strictly legal evidence. Mr Skerrett submitted that they were, to some extent. The Chief Justice : Do you admit, Mr Bell, that the . statements in these’letters are correct? Mr Bell: That is different.

Mr Justiee Edwards: Are you willing that the letters should be treated as if the statements contained ip them were made upon oath? Mr Bell : Your Honor is asking a, question which I have never considered, and which I would like time to consider.

On the question of identity, Mr Skerr.ett submitted that the evidence of documents and photographs alone would be sufficient to satisfy the Court that the accused was not Blatcb. In reply Mr Bell sa-id : the Magistrate had no alter-, native but to commit the accused to England, seeing that three witnesses identified him as Blateh. ~ Judgment was reserved* : .y