DUBLIN MYSTERY

Hokitika Guardian, 14 September 1931, Page 7

DUBLIN MYSTERY

ROBBERY OF CROWN JEWELS. STORY OF THE THEFT. FINDINGS OF ROYAL COMMISSION Following closely upon the th'ei't of the Ascot Gold Cup, the discovery, in July, 1907, that the Irish Crown Jewels were missing created a great sensation not only in Dublin, but throughout the world. The theft occurred just prior to a visit of King Edward VII to Ireland.

The jewels were taken from the Office of Arms, the most-guarded site in Dublin, and one of the most closelywatched places in the United Kingdom. Among the stolen jewels were the badge and star of the Order of St. Patrick belonging to the Grand Master of 'the Order, the King, and wrought in diamonds, brilliants (Brazilian stones), emeralds, and rubies, and 'five of the golden collars of the order, one of them having the badge of the order attached to it, with the design set in rubies and rose diamonds. In addition was “a dark maroon mor. rocco jewel-Lox, locked, wrapped in brown paper, and tied with string, containing diamonds and personal effects.” The full list of the ‘“personal effects” was never published,, but it was estimated at The time of the theft that the value of the missing jewels was about £50.000. '

The whole of the detective force ol Dublin was put on to the case, and a reward of £IOOO was offered for information leading to the recovery of the jewels, or the detection of the thief or thieves, but without result. After six months of futile work, a commission was set up. Almost as sensational as the robbery itself were the findings which the commission embodied in its report. The first surprise was the refusal of Sir Arthur Vicars, the Ulster King at Arms, and the custodian of the jewels and regalia, to give evidence. Commission’s Findings. The commission’s report stated that the jewels were last exhibited publicly on June 11, 1907, and there was no evidence that up until July 6, when the theft was discovered, that the safe containing them was opened by anyone in the office. On July 3, Mrs Farrell, the office cleaner, arrived between 7 and 8 a.m. and found the outer door of the office unlocked. This she reported to the messenger, Stivey, who, in turn, reported to Sir Arthur Vicars, who replied, “Did she,” or “Is that sop” and, it was alleged, never* troubled further.

Three da\s later, on the clay of the dispp.very.,, fjir . , Vicars,,,, gayg Stivey a collar of a deceased Knight of the order, which had been returned, to put in the safe. This was the first time that Stivey had had the key of the safe in his hand. He found the safe unlocked. He then returned to Sir Arthur Vicars, without opening the safe, and told him of the discovery. For the first time the Ulster King at Anns bestirred himself. He came down and opened the safe himself. The jewels, collars and badges had gone, but their cases remained. He then called the police, but did not tell them that the strong rooms had been found open that morning. Superintendent Lowe asked him about the strong room, and he replied, “It is a modern safe, and could not be opened but by its own key.” Nor was any mention made of the door having been lound open on July 3. Experts took the locks to pieces two days after the discovery, and found that “there was no picking at the locks or attempts at picking; that the locks were opened by their own keys, or keys identical with them, in every respect in make and finish, and tin. I such keys could not be .fabricated from a wax impression.”

The conclusion of the commissioners was that “Sir Arthur Vicars' did not exercise due vigilance or proper care as the custodian of the regaiia,” and within' a lew days of the report being completed, he was superseded/