THE COLCHESTER MYSTERY.

Wanganui Chronicle, 30 July 1901, Page 2

THE COLCHESTER MYSTERY.

THE ORDEAL OF IDENTIFICATION.

PRISONER'S STATEMENT TO THE

MAGISTRATES

Tho preliminary inquiry in a problem, of identification, which promises to develap ;i sensationalism similar to that of the Tichbome case took place yesterday [says i&e "Daily Mail" of June 19) at Colchester. In that famous old borouuh the police have in custody a middle-aged man wiiom they have brought home from New Zealand on the charge that he murdered Mr, Welch in Colchester in December, 1893. The person who committed that deed is in all human probability the nnin Arthur Blatch, who was porter to Mr. Welch and who was missing wiuh the contents of his master's cash-box when the crime was discovered. The great problem which was first tested yesterday is whether the prisoner is Arthur Blatch, or whether he is, as he declares, Charles Lillywhite, who left England for America in 1885, and who was in Kensett, county Tacoma, ai the time of the tragedy, leaving there for New Zealand in 1894. There are hundreds of people in Colchester who knew Blatch. The prisoner was j yesterday iphiced among other men, wu.ie some of those who knew Blatch were invited to see whether they could pick Blatch out from the group. At the prisoner's own suggestion w.e test was made in ilwo different ways. He wast first submitted in his unshaven state to the ordeal; on the second occasion he had all the hair on his face removed, excepting his moustache, before ha confronted the potential witnesses. Whatever the result of these vitally important tests was, it has been kept secret. Even the local solicitor who is representing the Treasury for the prosecution stated when he appeared in court later on in the day ((hat he had not been informed. * But some facts have come out which, in tho interests of the accused, should be published without delay. It has already gone forjh to the world that the police officers who brought the man home, who knew Blatch before the murder, identify their man as Blatch. It has already gone forth to the world that the woman who

used to be known in Colchester as Mar

garet Archer, but who married a Chinaman at the Antipodes, has recognised the. accused as Blatch; that, indeed, she gave the information to the New Zealand police which led to the arrest of the man. who was known in Wellington as Charles Lillywhite, painter and decorator. FAILED TO IDENTIFY. This being so, it is only fair to publish i speedily the news that, whoever identified the accused as Blatch at yesterday's ordeals, there were some striking instances also of non-identificafiion. Mr. Page, far- ] mer. of Fingringhoe, knew Blatch well, and could not see him in the group among whom the accused was placed. Mr. Sizzey, who was manager at Mr. Welch's tailoring shop where Blatch was porter, failed to make any identification. Even still more remarkable—lsaac Lillywhite, of Leeds, declares that the accused in his brother, Charles Lillywhite. Certainly at Illie first attempt Isaac Lillywhite picked out as his brother the wrong man from the group, but he afterwards selected the accused, and if his evidence is to be accepted the Crown would seem to be driven to one of two alternatives—either they would have to drop Ilhe charge, or else maintain that Charles Lillywhite is the same man who came to Colchester in tho name of Arthur Blatch and remained under that name in Mr. Welch's employment.

The accused was before the magistrates—publicly this time—yesterday afternoon, but no evidence was tendered against him. There was simply an application for a remand.

The Mayor asked the accused if he hat anything to say.

The accused, speaking with a, strong American accent, said: I have not the slightest objection. It is necessary tihat it should be so, and a few weeks or so more or less won't hurt. I am somewhat seasoned.

After a brief conference between the Bench and the police the accused said, "Your worship, if it would be in order, may I speak? My name is not Arthur Batch. I understand the position fully, bu'i my point is this. In the British nation or any part of the world a man is not supposed to be guilty until he is found guilty. I have not been found to be Ai--tbur Blatch, and you have got a mighty lot of work on hand to show that I am anyone else than Charles Lillywhite. That ia 'my name, and I think I should be allowed to wear it.

The Magistrate: As far as this court is concerned you stand here charged in the name of Arthur Blatch, and we do not know you by another surname . The accused: I have to prove my innocence, but iilie court cannot prove my guilt.

A remand was then formally ordered