Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

STOLEN CROWN JEWELS.

THEIE CUSTODIAN SUED. By Telecraph-Press Association-Copyright London, November 29. In the Dublin Courts, the Crown is suing Sir Arthur Vicars, who had custody of tho Crown jewels stolen in 1807, to compel him to return his badge as Registrar of tho Order of St. Patrick. A DUBLIN. CASTLE MYSTERY. . The theft of .£50,000 worth of State jewels from Dublin Castle put ordinary jewel robberies in the shade; The loss was first discovered in tho afternoon of July 6- 1907, but was not known to tho public till some days later. A dramatic aspect was given to tho incident by tho ijet that it occurred on the eve of the King's visit to Ireland, and the investiture of Lord Castletown by His Majesty was postponed in conseqnenco of the loss of insigna of the. Knights of St. Patnckj to which order he was to have been installed with the usual ceremonies. Tho jewels were in the custody of Sir Arthur. Vicars, the Ulster King of Arms, who recently had his Qffice moved to tho Bedford Tower.

', Tho report of the Vice-Kegal Commission subsequently appointed "to investigate tho circumstances of tho loss of the Regalia of the Order of St. Patrick, and to inquire whether Sir Arthur- Vicars exercised duo vigilanco and proper care as tho custodian thereof" described tho locks of tho strong-room and jewel-safo —neither of which boro any trace of having been taniperod with—and arrived at tho'conclusion that the pafe could only have been opened by ono of two keys, both ordinarily in the possession of Sir Arthur Vicars; and the commissioners could hot acquit Sir Arthur of want of proper care in the custody of theso keys. After. commenting unfavourably on Sir "Arthur" , . YicaTs's refusal to appear or before the commission; and stating that thcro was no evidence whatever which would support the suggestion that Mr. IV R. Shackleton was the person who stole tho jewels, the commissioners concluded by reporting that in their opinion Sir Arthur Vicars did not exercise duo vigilanco or , proper caro as the .custodian of the jewels.

During the preliminary inquiry, it was disclosed that tho Government bad informed Sir Arthur Vicars that it had decided to reconstitute tho office .of Ulster King of Arms, and to remove him from 'the post. Sir , Arthur withdrew from the commission-room with. his legal. advisers because the inquiry was held privately, and demanded a full "public judicial'inquiry. ...

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19101130.2.53

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 987, 30 November 1910, Page 7

Word count
Tapeke kupu
404

STOLEN CROWN JEWELS. Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 987, 30 November 1910, Page 7

STOLEN CROWN JEWELS. Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 987, 30 November 1910, Page 7

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert