DEATH OF ADOLF BECK

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14703, 10 December 1909, Page 5

DEATH OF ADOLF BECK

END OF A CHEQUERED CAREER. Press Association—Hy Telegraph-Copyright. LONDON, December 8. Ado!f Beck, the famous victim of niisliilon identity, who in 1904 was given £2000 by the Imperial Government as compensation fcr his wrongful arrest and imprisonment, is dead. He died in London in a. state of destitution.

The Bed; caw excited a tremendous amount of interest in 1904. Tin- facts were iis follow, as found by the Beck Committee of Inquiry:—

In 187/ a man who called himself John Smith was convicted at the Old Bailey for frauds on women of | OKO character, whereby ha had obtained from them articles of jewellery or money. His methods were to introduce himself as a nobleman of wealth, with an establishment in St. John's Wood, and oner the position of mistress to bis victim. Ho would then suggest that she would requnc a new outfit, write out an order on some well-known tradesmen at whose shops she was to purchase what was required, and give her a cheque on a non-existent bank. Il« wojlil then on some pretext borrow some article of jewellery or money, with which he decamped. The name under which he perpetrated these frauds was Lord Willoughhy. John Smith was sentenced lo live years' penal servitude; lie continued in prison till April, 1881, when he was released on license.

Towards the end of 1894 the police began to receiv-j complaints from women, mostly of loose character, that they hud been doframie' by a man who gavc'himself out r.-s Lord Wilton or Lord Winlon do Willoughby. with an establishment in St. John's >\ cod. His methods were precisely similar to tliosa which ! :d boon danosod to in the Smith case. Tho efforts of the police to find the culprit were unsuccessful. On December 16, 1895, Otlilie JHcis-sonier, a woman who bad been dcfrai'cied in the previous month, happened to meet Mr Beck in Victoria street, unci charged him with having robbed her. Ho indignantly protested that he had never scan her before. She followed him alomr the street till they met; a noliceman, to whom they both appealed, and as the woman persisted in her charge! I hey were both taken hv the noliceman to Ihe station, where a charge 'was entered against Mr Beck. This was the first inter-u-nbon of Ihc police in the Beck ease. A large number of the women who had complained to the polios worn then in the ordinary way given opportunities of seeing Mr Beck, with a view to ascertaining whether tne-y could identify him as the man who had defi'iimk'il them. Of these, several with varying degree,- of confidence affirmed that he was ibe man, and gave evidence to that. elect before Mr Sine! al; Ihe Westminster Police Court After publicity had been iyiven to tho ca.;e by the reports of the proeecdings, a gentleman who had been interpslod in the Smith case, and was en-ti'-ely unconnected with the police, informed them that Mr Beck was no doubt the exconvict Smith. Upon that, information Spurred, jnex-polico constable, who had arrested Smith ;ii :■ 3V7. was found. He swore positively that Mr Ik-ck was Smith, and was continued in lus opinion by another officer who hail be-n concerned in (he Smith case. M>- Beek was finally committed for trial <-u all tin- charges brought against him. His eas-s came on Tor trial before Sir For-i-c.il. Fulton. 1 ben Common Pergeant, at the Old Bailey, in March, 1G26. when he was convif-i.-id and sc-nt.enced to seven Years' penal servitude He was tried on an indictment, for misdemeanour only; the™ were •'', " ! ". :u ' Won.v indictments oil the file, in winch it. was charged that ho had been convicted in '77 in the mime of Smith; but these wcro postponed lill the next sessions, when a nolle prosequi was entered. His det?nee was that (ho real culprit was the man who bad been convicted in '77, and that ho was not that man. He was sent n'vl" , ov 'l Pr i son > «"d ultimately to Portland, and in boll, prisons was classed and treated as a prisoner who had been previously convicted, and wore a dress bearill? marks indicative of that fact. Immediately after Ids conviction he petitioned the Home Office on the ground that the case was one of mistaken identity, and that there had been a mistrial. Ho presented Severn 1 subsequent, petitions on tile same ground., to all of which he. received a. reply refusing ic-lief, until in May, 1893, ins solicitor addressed another demand to Ihe Home Oliicc ior a. reopening of the case. Inquiries instituted for Ihelirsl. lime by Ihc Home Office, in consequence of this teller, elicited the fact that in '79 Smith had; under special eirsumsf.auccs, been examined at Portland by the Prison doctor, who had rsported in writing to the Governor thai be had undergone the rile of circumcision. Orders were accordingly given to have Beckexamined; to ascertain whether he was circumcised. It was found that be was not, On this new fcotjhe llonia Office, for the lirsr time, conculted the Common Sergeant 011 the ease, and cr.me to the conclusion that they ought not. lo interfere in the ease, exce.it by ordering thai Mr Beck should be allotted n new number and letter not inilicatini; a previous conviction. The fact that Smith had been circumcised, though knniin to the prison authorities in '79 and Huts communicated by thorn to tho Home Office in '98, never became known to the Public Prosecutor or to the police until July, 1904.

_In July, 1901. Mr Beck, having served his lime, was released on license. In April, 1901—nearly three years aflcr he had'been re'~v"v!—Mr |,, Pl .|. v .. ls a „ a j n ulT< , s p, ( | on a charge similar to tho-e on which he had been previously convicted. He was tried before Mr Justice Grantham, and again couvictel; and, as he could not, deny that he bad been convicted in '96, was treated as having pleadad guilty lo a charge, aver-

rinjr a nrovious conviction. The lo.ar.nod jiulsc, however, felt misgivings as lo his ease, and |y.slpon.'<] c onionoo I ill llio next

cession; jiiid tlionsrli. after ninkmjr inquiries of llio police and tlio m:diral officer ot the gaol where ilr Beck was incarcerated, lis could liml no solid ground' for further withholding sentence, none was. in fact, pronounced, us in ihc meantime Ilia arrest of the ox-convict Smith on similar charges, based on acts committed while Mr Beck was in eu«tody, led to further inquiries, and (he consequent Tolau.sc and pardon of Mv Book in respect of both the '96 and 1004 convictions. Smith was subsequently cciivicted mid sentenced.

Tii- the meantime a p'aut of £2000 had be-eu olferal to JJr Beck by Hie Treasury and refused. Mr Brck demanding an inquiry. A committee of inquiry wa.s oppointtxl by the Home Office, coirsietinp; of the Master of the llolls, Sir SpGiicer Valpo'c, and Sir John Eilgc. This committee ex'oii?rat"d the police from blame, and considered there was no evidence of mala fides or conspiracy on the part of anyone. Their principal findings were:—

1. That the Itecovder of London had been wrong: at the first trial in refusim; to admit tvidenoe that Beck was not Smith, and (hat they recommended as a remedy for such an error in future, thai all criminal judges should be compellable (as police magistrates ire) to state a ea.se on a point of law for tlio opinion of the Court (the Court of Crown Cases reserved wa.s recommended);

(2) That the non-correction of the error was duo to want c! co-ordination Irefwrnu i-ho Homo Ottoo. the office of the Pubic T'rnp-Tiitor and the police; and rccomtended, amonp'b ollisr tliinsK, flint all the officials ir. (ho IJointi Office by whom in-i----soiiors' petitions were considered should be man who have lis*! a legal training.