REVIEW OF THE SLATER CASE.

Shannon News, 20 December 1927, Page 4

REVIEW OF THE SLATER CASE.

BILL AT PRESENT BEFORE COMMONS

Oscar Slater was sentenced to death

in the High Court of Justice, Edinburgh, on May 6th,. 1909, for a mun der committed in Glasgow the previ-

ous December, Owing to certain unsatisfactory features of his trial and the fact that; the verdict against him

was returned by a majority of nine to six only, he was reprieved. In 1914 the Secretary for Scotland ordered an enquiry into certain new evidence tending to prove Slater’s innocence, but the enquiry disclosed no ground for further action.

In 1912 Sir Arthur Clonan Doyle published a little book on the case in' which he maintained that Slater was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. There is now another book, “The Truth About Oscar Slater’ * (Psychic Press, 3s. 6d. net), by a Glasgow journalist, Mr William Park, for whom Sir Arthur has written a foreword. Mr Park is able to give some new matter, including Slater’s own story (which the defence did not see ‘fit to put before the jury), but nothing that adds materially to the facts as stated in the second edition of Mr Roughhead's “Trial of Oscar Slater” (Notable British. Trials).

The trouble about a controversial case is that after a while one can hardly see the wood for the trees. This is particularly true of the Slater case, in which the evidence bristles with discrepancies and contradictions. It may be useful therefore, to set out as simply as possible the broad facts. .

1.. .The Victim,

Miss Marlon Gilchrist was an old lady of eighty-two, who for /many years had occupied a first-floor flat in Queen’s Terrace, West Prince’s Street, Glasgow. She was in good circumstances, which enabled her to indulge a passion for jewellery. She kept her jewellery in her flat, most of it concealed in garments stored in a spare bedroom. Her habits were retired. She had relatives in Glasgow, but went out little, received few visitors, and was suspicious of strangers. She kept one servant, a girl of twenty-two, named Helen Lambie.

2. The Murder,

At seven o'clock on the evening of Monday, December 21st. 1908, Miss Gilchrist, according to her custom, sent Lambi e out to fetch an evening newspaper. When Lambie returned about ten or fifteen minutes later, she found on th e landing putside the door a Mr Adams, who occupied the ground-floor house below. He said he had heard suspicious noises in Miss Gilchristls flat. The servant opened the door with her latchkey, and as they were about to enter a well-dress-ed mp,n came out of the spare bedroom, walked calmly towards them with a pleasant smile, then suddenly darted past them, out of the flat and down the stairs. A few minutes later.

Lambie found the body of her mis

tress in the dining-room in front of the fireplace. The head had been smashed to pulp. 3. The Motive,

It was presumed that the murderer’s purpose was robbery. In the I spare bedroom a box containing- private papers had been ransacked, but jewellery of considerable value had been left lying on the dressing-table. Lambic, however, alleged that a diamond brooch was missing. 4. The Pursuit. On Christmas Day (four days after the murder) the police got information that a man named Oscar Slater, who lived within a few minutes’ walk of Miss Gilchrist’s house, had been trying to sell a pawn ticket for a diamond brooch. Detectives went to Slater’s house at midnight, but the bird had flown. A few hours earlier he had left Glasgow, bag and baggage Subsequently it was ascertained that he had travelled to Liverpool and had sailed for New York by the Lusitania on December 26, under th e name- of Otto Sando. When the Lusitania arrived off Sandy Hook, Slater -was arrested by the New York police. 5. Th e Accused. The accused man was a Silesian Jew, aged 38. His real name is believed to be Leschzinei'. He appears to have left Germany to avoid ' military service about 1888, and thenceforward to have led a vagrant underworld life on the Continent, in Great Eritain and in the United States. He first came to Glasgow in 1901, and married there, but soon separated from his wife. He was again in Glasgow in 1905. On both occasions he was known as Oscar Slater. In the late autumn of 1908 he came to Glasgow" for the’ third time. In the name of Anderson ,and describing himself as a dentist, he took a good fiat on the fringe of the West-end, w'here he lived with a young French woman with whom he had for some time associated in Paris and London. But Slater was still the name by which the mail, was commonly known at the gambling clubs, and public houses that he frequented. He was a professional gambler, a souteneur, and, when occasion offered, a “dealer in precious stones”—in othe r words a, receiver of stolen goods—but had always succeeded in keeping out of the way of the police. 6. The Evidence. While Slater was still on the Atlantic the Glasgow police were suddenly checked by discovering that the brooch that/ had sent them on his track was not th e missing article at

all, but had been pawned by Slater long before the murder of Miss Gilchrist. Nevertheless, instead of clx’opping the case as one would have expected, they decided to proceed on other grounds. At the trial th e Crown undertook to prove, first, that Slater was the man who was seen by Adams and Miss Lambie in Miss Gilchrist’s house. If Adams and Lambie could swear to him beyond all doubt, the case was proved; Slater w-as the murderer. though these witnesses did, after a fashion, identify Slater as the.man, their evidence w r as not such as a jury could accept without something more. The police therefore sought further to prove Slater’s identity with (a) a man w ho was seen running away from the scene of the murder; (b) a man who, a little later, entered the Kelvinbridge subway station in great haste; and (c) a man who, from time to time had been seen loitering suspiciously near Miss Gilchrist’s house. On all these points the evidence of identity was extremely weak; and in regard to one—the man at the subway station —the police had conclusive infoi'mation which they did no(- disclose, tliat that man was not Slater. The suspicious circumstances of Slater’s departure for New r York corhpleted the police case. It will be noticed that the case involved the supposition that the police, following a wrong scent, had nevertheless found t.Jie right man—an improbability so great that only the very-strongest evidence could overcome it.

Let us turn to the other side. Weak as the Crown case was, the case for the defence was even weaker —indeed it w'as damaging. Slater did not go into the box on Ms own behalf. The witnesses called to prove an alibi proved nothing. It w'as true that he had for some time announced his intention of going to America —which again proved nothing—but the suddenness had surprised his associates. No satisfactory explanation was given for his booking his passage under the name of Otto Sando. 7. The Sequel. In Apx’il 1914, on instructions from the Seci’etary fo r Scotland, the Sheriff of Lanarkshire held a private enquiry upon certain allegations made by De-tective-Lieutenant Trench, of the Glasgow police. Trench’s story was that two days after the murder, in the coui'se of making enquiries, he visited Miss Birrell, a niece of Miss Gilchrist. Miss Birrell, he said, told him that on the night of the murder, the servant Lambie told her that she had recog-

nized the murderer as a certain A. 8., who was know r n to both Of them, and Miss Gilchrist. He reported :tliis -to his superior officers. Subsequently he saw' Lambie, who confirmed Miss Birrell’s statement But at the enquiry, Miss Birrell. Lambie, and Trench’s superiors declared in most emphatic terms that Trench’s story was absolutely false. On the other hand, a brother-officer said that Trench at the time told him about Miss Birrell’s statement regarding A. B. There was no other corroboration of Trench’s story.

Here are a few of the many questions that the discerning reader of the foregoing summary wall want to ask: —• How did the murderer gain access to the flat? Why, if robbery was his object, did ho confine his attention' to a box of private papers? Why, if Helen Lambie knew that she had left her mistress alon e in the flat, did she not challenge the stranger? Why, if Slater was guilty, ■ was no object found in his possession to connect him with the murder? Why, if Slater was innocent, did h e not go to the witness-box? Why did' Slater hasten his departure to America? Why did he try to cover up his tracks and travel in the name of Otto Sando'? Why did Lieutenant Trench, v-ho had paraded Slater for identification and gave evidence for., the Crown at the trial, keep silence for five years, knowing all the tim e that Slater was innocent? But all these questions and rnanyJnore quite as baffling have never been, and probably never will be, answered. A cable during the present week states that Sir John Gilmore, Secretary for Scotland, has introduced a single-clause Bill into the House of Commons, permitting reference of the Slater case to the Scottish Criminal Appeal Court. Thfe Bill was read a first time. ..I ; Sir John Gilmore stated that if the conviction had occurred since October 1926, he could have been empowered-* to submit it to the Criminal Appeal Court. The proposed legislation was to enable reference thus to be made of the case.