HC Deb 23 January 1913 vol 47 cc619-21
69. Mr. CROOKS

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, having regard to the doubts in the case of Williams, who is awaiting execution for the Eastbourne murder, as to his sanity and identification, he will take steps to secure that Williams may be re spited to enable these points to be further investigated?

Mr. McKENNA

I am not aware of any circumstances which throw doubt upon the sanity or identification of this prisoner. The facts of the case have been fully investigated at the trial and by the Court of Criminal Appeal.

Mr. CROOKS

Has no additional evidence come in since?

Mr. McKENNA

Yes; additional statements have been made since.

MARQUESS Of TULLIBARDINE

In view of the fact that additional statements have been made which were not presented before the verdict, and may entirely alter the evidence against the prisoner, would the right hon. Gentleman in the meantime defer the execution pending a proper investigation?

Mr. McKENNA

The answer to a subsequent question on the Paper I think covers the point raised by the Noble Lord.

Mr. MACPHERSON

In view of the fact that it has been stated that this man is insane, will the right hon. Gentleman have him specially examined?

Mr. McKENNA

He has been examined as to the question of sanity.

70. Mr. MUNRO

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that, in connection with the Eastbourne murder, for which a man, who was convicted under the name of Williams, was sentenced to death, a man signing himself as Freddie Mike has written to the prisoner, stating that he (Williams) is innocent; that Inspector Bower and Mr. Curtis (Williams' solicitor) had an inter view on Monday, the 20th January, in Brixton prison, with the writer of the letter; that the man in question then asseverated the entire innocence of the prisoner Williams, and stated that the real murderer, who had a revolver in his possession, has now left the country; whether he is aware that the chief witness for the prosecution, Power, is a man of notoriously bad character, who has been frequently convicted of serious crime; that Florence Seymour has emitted a sworn declaration to the effect that the evidence which she gave at the Police Court was procured from her by police threats; and whether, in these circumstances, he will make full inquiry into the matter, and in the meantime defer the execution of the sentence, which is fixed for Wednesday, the 29th January?

Mr. McKENNA

Letters such as that referred to are frequently received in notorious murder cases. As is the practice in all such cases, the allegations made are being fully investigated. The character of Power, who was not however the principal witness, and the statements made by Florence Seymour, were fully before the jury at the trial and before the Court of Criminal Appeal.

Mr. MUNRO

Is not the' right hon. Gentleman aware that three material facts have emerged since the Court of Appeal heard the case: First of all, the sworn statement of Florence Seymour; second, the letter written by the man who signs himself Mike, who is referred to in the question, and, third, the letter received yesterday by the solicitors for Williams to the effect that the writer knows the name of the true culprit, that prisoner is innocent, that the writer is afraid to reveal the name because of threats of personal harm, but that if he receives an assurance of personal safety he will communicate the name; and in these circumstances will the right hon. Gentleman not defer the execution until a full investigation has been made?

Mr. McKENNA

The first two statements were well known to me. The third statement of my hon. Friend, I have not yet heard of. Of course, primâ facie if any grounds are shown for deferring the execution we should, of course, act upon those grounds, but I may tell my hon. Friend that after the fullest inquiry up till now nothing has been brought before me which would justify any delay.

Mr. ROBERT HARCOURT

Am I to understand that the statement of Florence Seymour, described in the question of my hon. Friend, was before the jury?

Mr. McKENNA

I think it was before the jury. I will look further into that point. I am not quite sure.

Mr. MUNRO

I beg to give notice that I will endeavour to raise the matter on the Motion for Adjournment on Monday evening.