THE CASE OF
OSCAR SLATER
A. CONAN DOYLE


r


THE CASE OF
OSCAR SLATER
BY
Sir ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
AUTHOR OF "THE LOST WORLD," "SHERLOCK HOLMES,"
"THE WHITE COMPANY," ETC.

HODDER & STOUGHTON
NEW YORK
GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY


Copyright, 1912
By George H. Doran Company


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER





THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
over a considerable number of years, from a
reputable jeweller. I lay stress upon the fact,
as some wild rumour was circulated at the time
that the old lady might herself be a criminal
receiver. Such an idea could not be enter-
tained. She seldom wore her jewelry save in
single pieces, and as her life was a retired one,
it is difficult to see how anyone outside a very
small circle could have known of her hoard.
The value of this treasure was about three
thousand pounds. It was a fearful joy which
she snatched from its possession, for she more
than once expressed apprehension that she
might be attacked and robbed. Her fears had
the practical result that she attached two pat-
ent locks to her front door, and that she ar-
ranged with the Adams family underneath that
in case of alarm she would signal to them by
knocking upon the floor.
It was the household practice that Lambie,
the maid, should go out and get an evening
paper for her mistress about seven o'clock each
day. After bringing the paper she then
usually went out again upon the necessary
shopping. This routine was followed upon
9


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
the night of December 21st. She left her
mistress seated by the fire in the dining-room
reading a magazine. Lambie took the keys
with her, shut the flat door, closed the hall
door downstairs, and was gone about ten min-
utes upon her errand. It is the events of those
ten minutes which form the tragedy and the
mystery which were so soon to engage the
attention of the public.
According to the girl's evidence, it was a
minute or two before seven when she went
out. At about seven, Mr. Arthur Adams and
his two sisters were in their dining-room im-
mediately below the room in which the old
lady had been left. Suddenly they heard "a
noise from above, then a very heavy fall, and
then three sharp knocks." They were
alarmed at the sound, and the young man
at once set off to see if all was right. He
ran out of his hall door, through the hall
door of the flats, which was open, and so
up to the first floor, where he found Miss
Gilchrist's door shut. He rang three times
without an answer. From within, however,
he heard a sound which he compared to the
10


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
two safety locks and opened the door. At this point there is a curious little dis-
crepancy of evidence. Lambie is prepared to
swear that she remained upon the mat beside
young Adams. Adams is equally positive that
she walked several paces down the hall. This
inside hall was lit by a gas, which turned half
up, and shining through a coloured shade,
gave a sufficient, but not a brilliant light.
Says Adams: "I stood at the door on the
threshold, half in and half out, and just when
the girl had got past the clock to go into
the kitchen, a well-dressed man appeared. I
did not suspect him, and she said nothing;
and he came up to me quite pleasantly. I did
not suspect anything wrong for the minute.
I thought the man was going to speak to me,
till he got past me, and then I suspected
something wrong, and by that time the girl
ran into the kitchen and put the gas up and
said it was all right, meaning her pulleys.
I said: 'Where is your mistress?' and she
went into the dining-room. She said: 'Oh!
come here!' I just went in and saw this
horrible spectacle."

xa


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
"He was a man a little taller and a little
broader than I am, not a well-built man but
well featured and clean-shaven, and I cannot
exactly swear to his moustache, but if he had
any it was very little. He was rather a com-
mercial traveller type, or perhaps a clerk, and
I did not know but what he might be one
of her friends. He had on dark trousers and
a light overcoat. I could not say if it were
fawn or grey. I do not recollect what sort of
hat he had. He seemed gentlemanly and well-
dressed. He had nothing in his hand so far
as I could tell. I did not notice anything
about his way of walking."
Helen Lambie, the other spectator, could
give no information about the face (which
rather bears out Adams' view as to her posi-
tion), and could only say that he wore a
round cloth hat, a three-quarter length over-
coat of a grey colour, and that he had some
peculiarity in his walk. As the distance trav-
ersed by the murderer within sight of Lambie
could be crossed in four steps, and as these
steps were taken under circumstances of pe-
culiar agitation, it is difficult to think that
15


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
any importance could be attached to this last
item in the description.
It is impossible to avoid some comment
upon the actions of Helen Lambie during the
incidents just narrated, which can only be
explained by supposing that from the time she
saw Adams waiting outside her door, her
whole reasoning faculty had deserted her.
First, she explained the great noise heard be-
low: "The ceiling was like to crack," said
Adams, by the fall of a clothes-line and its
pulleys of attachment, which could not pos-
sibly, one would imagine, have produced any
such effect. She then declares that she re-
mained upon the mat, while Adams is con-
vinced that she went right down the hall. On
the appearance of the stranger she did not
gasp out: "Who are you? " or any other sign
of amazement, but allowed Adams to suppose
by her silence that the man might be some-
one who had a right to be there. Finally, in-
stead of rushing at once to see if her mistress
was safe, she went into the kitchen, still ap-
parently under the obsession of the pulleys.
She informed Adams that they were all right,
16


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
as if it mattered to any human being; thence
she went into the spare bedroom, where she
must have seen that robbery had been com-
mitted, since an open box lay in the middle of
the floor. She gave no alarm however, and
it was only when Adams called out: "Where
is your mistress?" that she finally went into
the room of the murder. It must be admitted
that this seems strange conduct, and only ex-
plicable, if it can be said to be explicable, by
great want of intelligence and grasp of the sit-
uation.
On Tuesday, December 22nd, the morning
after the murder, the Glasgow police circu-
lated a description of the murderer, founded
upon the joint impressions of Adams and of
Lambie. It ran thus:
"A man between 25 and 30 years of age,
five foot eight or nine inches in height, slim
build, dark hair, clean-shaven, dressed in light
grey overcoat and dark cloth cap."
Four days later, however, upon Christmas
Day, the police found themselves in a position
to give a more detailed description:
"The man wanted is about 28 or 30 years
17


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
of age, tall and thin, with his face shaved
clear of all hair, while a distinctive feature is
that his nose is slightly turned to one side.
The witness thinks the twist is to the right
side. He wore one of the popular tweed hats
known as Donegal hats, and a fawn coloured
overcoat which might have been a waterproof,
also dark trousers and brown boots."
The material from which these further points
were gathered, came from a young girl of
fifteen, in humble life, named Mary Barrow-
man. According to this new evidence, the
witness was passing the scene of the murder
shortly after seven o'clock upon the fatal
night. She saw a man run hurriedly down
the steps, and he passed her under a lamp-post.
The incandescent light shone clearly upon
him. He ran on, knocking against the wit-
ness in his haste, and disappeared round a cor-
ner. On hearing later of the murder, she con-
nected this incident with it. Her general
recollections of the man were as given in the
description, and the grey coat and cloth cap
of the first two witnesses were given up in
favour of the fawn coat and round Donegal
18


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
hat of the young girl. Since she had seen no
peculiarity in his walk, and they had seen none
in his nose, there is really nothing the same in
the two descriptions save the "clean-shaven,"
the "slim build" and the approximate age.
It was on the evening of Christmas Day
that the police came at last upon a definite
clue. It was brought to their notice that a
German Jew of the assumed name of Oscar
Slater had been endeavouring to dispose of
the pawn ticket of a crescent diamond brooch
of about the same value as the missing one.
Also, that in a general way, he bore a resem-
blance to the published description. Still
more hopeful did this clue appear when, upon
raiding the lodgings in which this man and
his mistress lived, it was found that they had
left Glasgow that very night by the nine
o'clock train, with tickets (over this point
there was some clash of evidence) either for
Liverpool or London. Three days later, the
Glasgow police learned that the couple had
actually sailed upon December 26th upon the
Lusitania for New York under the name of
Mr. and Mrs. Otto Sando. It must be ad19


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
man whom they had seen in Glasgow. So far
at every stage the case against the accused was becoming more menacing. Any doubt as
to extradition was speedily set at rest by the
prisoner's announcement that he was prepared,
without compulsion, to return to Scotland and
to stand his trial. One may well refuse to
give him any excessive credit for this sur-
render, since he may have been persuaded that
things were going against him, but still the
fact remains (and it was never, so far as I can
trace, mentioned at his subsequent trial), that
he gave himself up of his own free will to
justice. On February 21st Oscar Slater was
back in Glasgow once more, and on May 3rd
his trial took place at the High Court in Edin-
burgh.
But already the very bottom of the case
had dropped out. The starting link of what
had seemed an imposing chain, had suddenly
broken. It will be remembered that the origi-
nal suspicion of Slater was founded upon the
fact that he had pawned a crescent diamond
brooch. The ticket was found upon him, and
the brooch recovered. It was not the one 23


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
been made, long before the crime, for his emi-
gration, though it should be added that the
actual determination of the date and taking of
the ticket were subsequent to the tragedy.
This hurrying-up of the departure certainly
deserves close scrutiny. According to the evi-
dence of his mistress and of the servant, Slater
had received two letters upon the morning of
December 21st. Neither of these were pro-
duced at the trial. One was said to be from
a Mr. Rogers, a friend of Slater's in London,
telling him that Slater's wife was bothering
him for money. The second was said to be
from one Devoto, a former partner of Slater's
asking him to join him in San Francisco.
Even if the letters had been destroyed, one
would imagine that these statements as to the
letters could be disproved or corroborated by
either the Crown or the defence. They are of
considerable importance, as giving the alleged
reasons why Slater hurried up a departure
which had been previously announced as for
January. I cannot find, however, that in the
actual trial anything definite was ascertained
upon the matter.
24


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
Another point had already been scored
against the prosecution in that the seven
trunks which contained the whole effects of
the prisoner, yielded nothing of real impor-
tance. There were a felt hat and two cloth
ones, but none which correspond with the
Donegal of the original description. A light-
coloured waterproof coat was among the out-
fit. If the weapon with which the deed was
done was carried off in the pocket of the as-
sassin's overcoat — and it is difficult to say
how else he could have carried it, then the
pocket must, one would suppose, be crusted
with blood, since the crime was a most san-
guinary one. No such marks were discovered,
nor were the police fortunate as to the weapon.
It is true that a hammer was found in the
trunk, but it was clearly shown to have been
purchased in one of those cheap half-crown
sets of tools which are tied upon a card, was
an extremely light and fragile instrument, and
utterly incapable in the eyes of commonsense
of inflicting those terrific injuries which had
shattered the old lady's skull. It is said by
the prosecution to bear some marks of hav25


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
twelve people who had, at various dates, seen
a man frequenting the street in which Miss
Gilchrist lived, and loitering in a suspicious
manner before the house. All of these, some
with confidence, but most of them with re-
serve, were prepared to identify the prisoner
with this unknown man. What the police
never could produce, however, was the es-
sential thing, and that was the least connect-
ing link between Slater and Miss Gilchrist, or
any explanation how a foreigner in Glasgow
could even know of the existence, to say noth-
ing of the wealth, of a retired old lady, who
had few acquaintances and seldom left her
guarded flat.
It is notorious that nothing is more tricky
than evidence of identification. In the Beck
case there were, if I remember right, some
ten witnesses who had seen the real criminal
under normal circumstances, and yet they
were all prepared to swear to the wrong man.
In the case of Oscar Slater, the first three
witnesses saw their man under conditions of
excitement, while the second group saw the
loiterer in the street under various lights, and
27


TH12 CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
Apart from the additions in the second de-
scription there are, it will be observed, two
actual discrepancies in the shape of the hat
and the colour of the coat.
As to how far either of these descriptions
tallies with Slater, it may be stated here that
the accused was thirty-seven years of age, that
he was above the medium height, that his nose
was not twisted, but was depressed at the end,
as if it had at some time been broken, and
finally that eight witnesses were called upon
to prove that, on the date of the murder,
the accused wore a short but noticeable mous-
tache.
I have before me a verbatim stenographic
report of the proceedings in New York and
also in Edinburgh, furnished by the kindness
of Shaughnessy & Co., solicitors, of Glasgow,
who are still contending for the interests of
their unfortunate client. I will here compare
the terms of the identification in the two
Courts:Helen Lambie, New York, January 26th, 1909.
Q. "Do you see the man here you saw
there?"
29


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLAVER
A. "One is very suspicious, if anything."
Q. "Describe him."
A. "The clothes he had on that night he
hasn't got on to-day — but his face I could
not tell. I never saw his face."
(Having described a peculiarity of walk,
she was asked):
Q. "Is that man in the room?"
A. "Yes, he is, sir."
Q. "Point him out."
A. "I would not like to say"
(After some pressure and argument she
pointed to Slater, who had been led past her
in the corridor between two officers, when
both she and Barrowman had exclaimed:
"That is the man," or "I could nearly swear
that is the man.")
Q. "Didn't you say you did not see the
man's face?"
A. "Neither I did. I saw the walk."
The reader must bear in mind that Lambie's
only chance of seeing the man's walk was in
the four steps or so down the passage. It
was never at any time shown that there was
any marked peculiarity about Slater's walk.
30


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
Now take Helen Lambie's identification in
Edinburgh, May gth, 1909.
Q. "How did you identify him in Amer-
ica?"
A. "By his walk and height, his dark hair
and the side of his face."
Q. "You were not quite sure of him at
first in America?"
A. "Yes, I was quite sure."
Q. "Why did you say you were only sus-
picions?"
A. "It was a mistake."
Q. "What did you mean in America by
saying that you never saw his face if, in point
of fact, you did see it so as to help you to
recognise it? What did you mean?"
A. "Nothing."
On further cross-examination she declared
that when she said that she had never seen
the man's face she meant that she had never
seen the "broad of it" but had seen it side-
ways.
Here it will be observed that Helen Lam-
bie's evidence had greatly stiffened during the
three months between the New York and the
3i


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
crooked nose was not much more apparent to
others than the peculiarity of walk which so
greatly impressed Helen Lambie that, after
seeing half a dozen steps of it, she could
identify it with confidence. In Edinburgh
Barrowman, like Lambie, was very much more
certain than in New York. The further they
got from the event, the easier apparently did
recognition become. "Yes, that is the man
who knocked against me that night," she said.
It is remarkable that both these females,
Lambie and Barrowman, swore that though
they were thrown together in this journey out
to New York, and actually shared the same
cabin, they never once talked of the object of
their mission or compared notes as to the man
they were about to identify. For girls of the
respective ages of fifteen and twenty-one this
certainly furnishes a unique example of self-
restraint.
These, then, are the three identifications by
the only people who saw the murderer. Had
the diamond brooch clue been authentic, and
these identifications come upon the top of it,
they would undoubtedly have been strongly 34


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
and in many from Slater on the other. Here
is a synopsis of their impressions:
Mrs. McHaffie.—" Dark. Moustached, light
overcoat, not waterproof, check trousers,
spats. Black bowler hat. Nose normal."
Miss M. McHaffie.— " Seen at same time
and same description. Was only prepared at
first to say there was some resemblance, but
'had been thinking it over, and concluded that
he was the man.'"
Miss A. M. McHaffie.— "Same as before.
Had heard the man speak and noticed nothing
in his accent. (Prisoner has a strong German
accent.)"
Madge McHaffie (belongs to the same
family).— "Dark, moustached, nose normal.
Check trousers, fawn overcoat and spats.
Black bowler hat. 'The prisoner was fairly
like the man .'"
In connection with the identification of these
four witnesses it is to be observed that neither
check trousers, nor spats were found in the
prisoner's luggage. As the murderer was de-
scribed as being dressed in dark trousers, there
was no possible reason why these clothes, if
36


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
Slater owned them, should have been de-
stroyed.
Constable Brien. "Claimed to know the
prisoner by sight. Says he was the man he
saw loitering. Light coat and a hat. It was
a week before the crime, and he was loitering
eighty yards from the scene of it. He picked
him out among five constables as the man he
had seen."
Constable Walker.— " Had seen the loiterer
across the street, never nearer, and after dark
in December. Thought at first he was some-
one else whom he knew. Had heard that the
man he had to identify was of foreign appear-
ance. Picked him out from a number of de-
tectives. The man seen had a moustache."
Euphemia Cunningham.— " Very dark, sal-
low, heavy featured. Clean shaven. Nose
normal. Dark tweed coat. Green cap with
peak."
W. Campbell.— " Had been with the previ-
ous witness. Corroborated. 'There was a
general resemblance between the prisoner and
the man, but he could not positively identify
him.'"
37


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
Alex Gillies.—" Sallow, dark haired and
clean shaven. Fawn coat. Cap. 'The pris-
oner resembled him, but witness could not say
he was the same man.'"
R. B. Bryson.— "Black coat and vest.
Black bowler hat. No overcoat. Black
moustache with droop. Sallow, foreign.
(This witness had seen the man the night
before the murder. He appeared to be look-
ing up at Miss Gilchrist's windows.)"
A. Nairn.— " Broad shoulders, long neck.
Dark hair. Motor cap. Light overcoat to
knees. Never saw the man's face. 'Oh! I
will not swear in fact, but I am certain he is
the man I saw — but I will not swear.'"
Mrs. Liddell.— " Peculiar nose. Clear com-
plexion, not sallow. Dark, clean shaven,
brown tweed cap. Brown tweed coat with
hemmed edge. Delicate man 'rather drawn
together.' She believed that prisoner was the
man. Saw him in the street immediately be-
fore the murder."
These are the twelve witnesses as to the
identify of the mysterious stranger. In the
first place there is no evidence whatever that
38


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
this lounger in the street had really anything
to do with the murder. It is just as probable
that he had some vulgar amour, and was wait-
ing for his girl to run out to him. What
could a man who was planning murder hope
to gain by standing nights beforehand eighty
and a hundred yards away from the place in
the darkness? But supposing that we waive
this point and examine the plain question as
to whether Slater was the same man as the
loiterer, we find ourselves faced by a mass of
difficulties and contradictions. Two of the
most precise witnesses were Nairn and Bryson
who saw the stranger upon the Sunday night
preceding the murder. Upon that night
Slater had an unshaken alibi, vouched for not
only by the girl, Antoine, with whom he lived,
and their servant, Schmalz, but by an ac-
quaintance, Samuel Reid, who had been with
him from six to ten-thirty. This positive evi-
dence, which was quite unshaken in cross ex-
amination, must completely destroy the sur-
mises of the stranger and Slater. Then come
the four witnesses of the McHaffie family who
are all strong upon check trousers and spats,
39


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
women, by the receipt of the two letters al-
ready referred to, which caused him to hasten
his journey to America. The whole day
seems to have been occupied by preparations
for his impending departure. He gave his
servant Schmalz notice as from next Saturday.
Before five (as was shown by the postmark
upon the envelope), he wrote to a post office
in London, where he had some money on de-
posit. At 6.12 a telegram was sent in his
name and presumably by him from the Central
Station to Dent, London, for his watch, which
was being repaired. According to the evi-
dence of two witnesses he was seen in a bil-
liard room at 6.20. The murder, it will be
remembered, was done at seven. He re-
mained about ten minutes in the billiard room,
and left some time between 6.30 and 6.40.
Rathman, one of these witnesses, deposed that
he had at the time a moustache about a quar-
ter of an inch long, which was so noticeable
that no one could take him for a clean-shaven
man. Antoine, his mistress, and Schmalz, the
servant, both deposed that Slater dined at home at 7 o'clock. The evidence of the girl
41


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
der, Slater was shown at Cook's Office, bar-
gaining for a berth in the "Lusitania" for his
so-called wife and himself. He made no secret
that he was going by that ship, but gave his
real name and address and declared finally
that he would take his berth in Liverpool,
which he did. Among other confidants as to
the ship was a barber, the last person one
would think to whom secrets would be con-
fided. Certainly, if this were a flight, it is
hard to say what an open departure would be.
In Liverpool he took his passage under the as-
sumed name of Otto Sando. This he did, ac-
cording to his own account, because he had
reason to fear pursuit from his real wife, and
wished to cover his traces. This may or may
not be the truth, but it is undoubtedly the fact
that Slater, who was a disreputable, rolling-
stone of a man, had already assumed several
aliases in the course of his career. It is to be
noted that there was nothing at all secret
about his departure from Glasgow, and that
he carried off all his luggage with him in a
perfectly open manner. The reader is now in possession of the main
43


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
facts, save those which are either unessential,
or redundant. It will be observed that save
for the identifications, the value of which can
be estimated, there is really no single point of
connection between the crime and the alleged
criminal. It may be argued that the existence
of the hammer is such a point; but what
household in the land is devoid of a hammer?
It is to be remembered that if Slater com-
mitted the murder with this hammer, he must
have taken it with him in order to commit
the crime, since it could be no use to him in
forcing an entrance. But what man in his
senses, planning a deliberate murder, would
take with him a weapon which was light, frail,
and so long that it must project from any
pocket? The nearest lump of stone upon the
road would serve his purpose better than that.
Again, it must in its blood-soaked condition
have been in his pocket when he came away
from the crime. The Crown never attempted
to prove either blood-stains in a pocket, or
the fact that any clothes had been burned.
If Slater destroyed clothes, he would naturally
have destroyed the hammer, too. Even one
44


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
of the two medical witnesses of the prosecu-
tion was driven to say that he should not have
expected such a weapon to cause such wounds.
It may well be that in this summary of the
evidence, I may seem to have stated the case
entirely from the point of view of the defence.
In reply, I would only ask the reader to take
the trouble to read the extended evidence.
(" Trial of Oscar Slater" Hodge & Co., Edin-
burgh.) If he will do so, he will realise that
without a conscious mental effort towards
special pleading, there is no other way in
which the story can be told. The facts are on
one side. The conjectures, the unsatisfactory
identifications, the damaging flaws, and the
very strong prejudices upon the other.
Now for the trial itself. The case was
opened for the Crown by the Lord-Advocate,
in a speech which faithfully represented the
excited feeling of the time. It was vigorous
to the point of being passionate, and its effect
upon the jury was reflected in their ultimate
verdict. The Lord-Advocate spoke, as I un-
derstand, without notes, a procedure which
may well add to eloquence while subtracting
45


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
a description to himself, or why should he for-
bear to carry out a journey which he had al-
ready prepared for? The point goes for ab-
solutely nothing when examined, and yet if
the minds of the jury were at all befogged as
to the dates, the definite assertion of the Lord-
Advocate, twice repeated, that Slater's name
had been published before his flight, was
bound to have a most grave and prejudiced
effect.
Some of the Lord-Advocate's other state-
ments are certainly surprising. Thus he says:
"The prisoner is hopelessly unable to pro-
duce a single witness who says that he was
anywhere else than at the scene of the murder
that night." Let us test this assertion. Here
is the evidence of Schmalz, the servant, ver-
batim. I may repeat that this woman was
under no known obligations to Slater and had
just received notice from him. The evidence
of the mistress that Slater dined in the flat
at seven on the night of the murder I pass,
but I do not understand why Schmalz's posi-
tive corroboration should be treated by the
Lord-Advocate as non-existent. The prisoner 48


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
might well be "hopeless" if his witnesses
were to be treated so. Could anything be
more positive than this?
Q. "Did he usually come home to din-
ner?"
A. "Yes, always. Seven o'clock was the
usual hour."
Q. "Was it sometimes nearly eight?
A. "It was my fault. Mr. Slater was in."
Q. "But owing to your fault was it about
eight before it was served?"
A. "No. Mr. Slater was in after seven, and
was waiting for dinner."
This seems very definite. The murder was
committed about seven. The murderer may
have regained the street about ten minutes or
quarter past seven. It was some distance to
Slater's flat. If he had done the murder he
could hardly have reached it before half-past
seven at the earliest. Yet Schmalz says he
was in at seven, and so does Antoine. The
evidence of the woman may be good or bad,
but it is difficult to understand how anyone
could state that the prisoner was "hopelessly
unable to produce, etc." What evidence could
49


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
he give, save that of everyone who lived with
him?
For the rest, the Lord-Advocate had an easy
task in showing that Slater was a worthless
fellow, that he lived with and possibly on a
woman of easy virtue, that he had several
times changed his name, and that generally he
was an unsatisfactory Bohemian. No actual
criminal record was shown against him.
Early in his speech, the Lord-Advocate re-
marked that he would show later how Slater
may have come to know that Miss Gilchrist
owned the jewels. No further reference ap-
pears to have been made to the matter, and
his promise was therefore never fulfilled,
though it is clearly of the utmost importance.
Later, he stated that from the appearance of
the wounds, they Must have been done by a
small hammer. There is no "must" in the
matter, for it is clear that many other weap-
ons, a burglar's jemmy, for example, would
have produced the same effect. He then
makes the good point that the prisoner dealt
in precious stones, and could therefore dispose
of the proceeds of such a robbery. The crim50


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
be explained consistently with innocence."
That may be true enough, but the change can
surely be explained on some cause less grave
than murder. Finally, after showing very
truly that Slater was a great liar and that not
a word he said need be believed unless there
were corroboration, the Lord-Advocate wound
up with the words: " My submission to you is
that this guilt has been brought fairly home
to him, that no shadow of doubt exists, that
there is no reasonable doubt that he was the
perpetrator of this foul murder." The ver-
dict showed that the jury, under the spell of
the Lord-Advocate's eloquence, shared this
view, but, viewing it in colder blood, it is dif-
ficult to see upon what grounds he made so
confident an assertion.
Mr. M'Clure, who conducted the defence,
spoke truly when, in opening his speech, he
declared that "he had to fight a most unfair
fight against public prejudice, roused with a
fury I do not remember to have seen in any
other case." Still he fought this fight bravely
and with scrupulous moderation. His appeals
were all to reason and never to emotion. He
53


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
showed how clearly the prisoner had expressed
his intention of going to America, weeks be-
fore the murder, and how every preparation
had been made. On the day after the murder
he had told witnesses that he was going to
America and had discussed the advantages of
various lines, finally telling one of them the
particular boat in which he did eventually
travel, curious proceedings for a fugitive from
justice. Mr. M'Clure described the move-
ments of the prisoner on the night of the mur-
der, after the crime had been committed,
showing that he was wearing the very clothes
in which the theory of the prosecution made
him do the deed, as if such a deed could be
done without leaving its traces. He showed
incidentally (it is a small point, but a human
one) that one of the last actions of Slater in
Glasgow was to take great trouble to get an
English five-pound note in order to send it as
a Christmas present to his parents in Ger-
many. A man who could do this was not all
bad. Finally, Mr. M'Clure exposed very
clearly the many discrepancies as to identifi-
cation and warned the jury solemnly as to the
54


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
dangers which have been so often proved to
lurk in this class of evidence. Altogether, it
was a broad, comprehensive reply, though
where so many points were involved, it is
natural that some few may have been over-
looked. One does not, for example, find the
counsel as insistent as one might expect upon
such points as, the failure of the Crown to
show how Slater could have known anything
at all about the existence of Miss Gilchrist and
her jewels, how he got into the flat, and what
became of the brooch which, according to their
theory, he had carried off. It is ungracious
to suggest any additions to so earnest a de-
fence, and no doubt one who is dependent
upon printed accounts of the matter may miss
points which were actually made, but not
placed upon record.
Only on one point must Mr. M'Clure's judg-
ment be questioned, and that is on the most
difficult one, which a criminal counsel has ever
to decide. He did not place his man in the
box. This should very properly be taken as
a sign of weakness. I have no means of say-
ing what considerations led Mr. M'Clure to
55


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
ment may in some way be reconsidered and
the man's present punishment allowed to
atone for those irregularities of life which
helped to make his conviction possible.
Before leaving the case it is interesting to
see how far this curious crime may be re-
constructed and whether any possible light
can be thrown upon it. Using second-hand
material one cannot hope to do more than in-
dicate certain possibilities which may already
have been considered and tested by the police.
The trouble, however, with all police prosecu-
tions is that, having once got what they imag-
ine to be their man, they are not very open
to any line of investigation which might lead
to other conclusions. Everything which will
not fit into the official theory is liable to be
excluded. One might make a few isolated
comments on the case which may at least give
rise to some interesting trains of thought.
One question which has to be asked was
whether the assassin was after the jewels at
all. It might be urged that the type of man
described by the spectators was by no means
that of the ordinary thief. When he reached
61


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
the bedroom and lit the gas, he did not at
once seize the watch and rings which were
lying openly exposed upon the dressing-table.
He did not pick up a half-sovereign which was
lying on the dining-room table. His attention
was given to a wooden box, the lid of which
he wrenched open. (This, I think, was "the
breaking of sticks" heard by Adams.) The
papers in it were strewed on the ground.
Were the papers his object, and the final ab-
straction of one diamond brooch a mere blind?
Personally, I can only point out the possibility
of such a solution. On the other hand, it
might be urged, if the thief's action seems in-
consequential, that Adams had rung and that
he already found himself in a desperate situa-
tion. It might be said also that save a will it
would be difficult to imagine any paper which
would account for such an enterprise, while the
jewels, on the other hand, were an obvious
mark for whoever knew of their existence.
Presuming that the assassin was indeed after
the jewels, it is very instructive to note his
knowledge of their location, and also its limi-
tations. Why did he go straight into the spare
62


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
bedroom where the jewels were actually
kept? The same question may be asked with
equal force if we consider that he was after
the papers. Why the spare bedroom? Any
knowledge gathered from outside (by a
watcher in the back-yard for example) would
go to the length of ascertaining which was the
old lady's room. One would expect a robber
who had gained his information thus, to go
straight to that chamber. But this man did
not do so. He went straight to the unlikely
room in which both jewels and papers actually
were. Is not this remarkably suggestive?
Does it not pre-suppose a previous acquaint-
ance with the inside of the flat and the ways of
its owner?
But now note the limitations of the knowl-
edge. If it were the jewels he was after, he
knew what room they were in, but not in
what part of the room. A fuller knowledge
would have told him they were kept in the
wardrobe. And yet he searched a box. If
he was after papers, his information was com-
plete; but if he was indeed after the jewels,
then we can say that he had the knowledge 63


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
of one who is conversant, but not intimately
conversant, with the household arrangements.
To this we may add that he would seem to
have shown ignorance of the habits of the in-
mates, or he would surely have chosen Lam-
bie's afternoon or evening out for his attempt,
and not have done it at a time when the girl
was bound to be back within a very few min-
utes. What men had ever visited the house?
The number must have been very limited.
What friends? what tradesmen? what plumb-
ers? Who brought back the jewels after they
had been stored with the jewellers when the
old lady went every year to the country? One
is averse to throw out vague suspicions which
may give pain to innocent people, and yet it
is clear that there are lines of inquiry here
which should be followed up, however nega-
tive the results.
How did the murderer get in if Lambie is
correct in thinking that she shut the doors?
I cannot get away from the conclusion that
he had duplicate keys. In that case all be-
comes comprehensible, for the old lady —
whose faculties were quite normal — would 64


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
hear the lock go and would not be alarmed,
thinking that Lambie had returned before her
time. Thus, she would only know her danger
when the murderer rushed into the room, and
would hardly have time to rise, receive the
first blow, and fall, as she was found, beside
the chair, upon which she had been sitting.
That is intelligible. But if he had not the
keys, consider the difficulties. If the old lady
had opened the flat door her body would have
been found in the passage. Therefore, the
police were driven to the hypothesis that the
old lady heard the ring, opened the lower stair
door from above (as can be done in all Scotch
flats), opened the flat door, never looked over
the lighted stair to see who was coming up,
but returned to her chair and her magazine,
leaving the door open, and a free entrance to
the murderer. This is possible, but is it not
in the highest degree improbable? Miss Gil-
christ was nervous of robbery and would not
neglect obvious precautions. The ring came
immediately after the maid's departure. She
could hardly have thought that it was her
returning, the less so as the girl had the keys
65


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
and would not need to ring. If she went as
far as the hall door to open it, she only had
to take another step to see who was ascending
the stair. Would she not have taken it if it
were only to say: "What, have you forgotten
your keys?" That a nervous old lady should
throw open both doors, never look to see who
her visitor was, and return to her dining-room
is very hard to believe.
And look at it from the murderer's point of
view. He had planned out his proceedings. It
is notorious that it is the easiest thing in the
world to open the lower door of a Scotch flat.
The blade of any penknife will do that. If he
was to depend upon ringing to get at his vic-
tim, it was evidently better for him to ring at
the upper door, as otherwise the chance would
seem very great that she would look down, s „
him coming up the stair, and shut herself in.
On the other hand, if he were at the upper
door and she answered it, he had only to push
his way in. Therefore, the latter would be
his course if he rang at all. And yet the po-
lice theory is that though he rang, he rang
from below. It is not what he would do, and
66


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
if he did do it, it would be most unlikely that
he would get in. How could he suppose that
the old lady would do so incredible a thing as
leave her door open and return to her reading?
If she waited, she might even up to the last
instant have shut the door in his face. If one
weighs all these reasons, one can hardly fail,
I think, to come to the conclusion that the
murderer had keys, and that the old lady never
rose from her chair until the last instant, be-
cause, hearing the keys in the door, she took
it for granted that the maid had come back.
But if he had keys, how did he get the mould,
and how did he get them made? There is a
line of inquiry there. The only conceivable
alternatives are, that the murderer was ac-
tually concealed in the flat when Lambie came
out, and of that there is no evidence whatever,
or that the visitor was some one whom the
old lady knew, in which case he would natur-
ally have been admitted.
There are still one or two singular points
which invite comment. One of these, which I
have incidentally mentioned, is that neither
the match, the match-box, nor the box opened
in the bedroom showed any marks of blood.
67


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
Yet the crime had been an extraordinarily
bloody one. This is certainly very singular.
An explanation given by Dr. Adams who was
the first medical man to view the body is
worthy of attention. He considered that the
wounds might have been inflicted by prods
downwards from the leg of a chair, in which
case the seat of the chair would preserve the
clothes and to some extent the hands of the
murderer from bloodstains. The condition of
one of the chairs seemed to him to favour this
supposition. The explanation is ingenious,
but I must confess that I cannot understand
how such wounds could be inflicted by such
an instrument. There were in particular a
number of spindle-shaped cuts with a bridge
of skin between them which are very suggest-
ive. My first choice as to the weapon which
inflicted these would be a burglar's jemmy,
which is bifurcated at one end, while the blow
which pushed the poor woman's eye into her
brain would represent a thrust from the other
end. Failing a jemmy, I should choose a
hammer, but a very different one from the
toy thing from a half-crown card of tools 68


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
which was exhibited in Court. Surely com-
monsense would say that such an instrument
could burst an eye-ball, but could not possibly
drive it deep into the brain, since the short
head could not penetrate nearly so far. The
hammer, which I would reconstruct from the
injuries would be what they call, I believe, a
plasterer's hammer, short in the handle, long
and strong in the head, with a broad fork be-
hind. But how such a weapon could be used
without the user bearing marks of it, is more
than I can say. It has never been explained
why a rug was laid over the murdered woman.
The murderer, as his conduct before Lambie
and Adams showed, was a perfectly cool per-
son. It is at least possible that he used the
rug as a shield between him and his victim
while he battered her with his weapon. His
clothes, if not his hands, v. ..aid in this way
be preserved.
I have said that it is of the first importance
to trace who knew of the existence of the
jewels, since this might greatly help the solu-
tion of the problem. In connection with this
there is a passage in Lambie's evidence in
69


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
A. "Once, sir."
Q. "In your Glasgow deposition you say:
'He visited me at Girvan and was entertained
at tea with me on Saturday night, and at din-
ner on Sunday with Miss Gilchrist and me.'"
A. "Yes, sir."
Q. "Then you did see him more than once
in the country."
A. "Once."
He read the extract again as above.
Q. "Was that true?"
A. "Yes."
Q. "Then you invited this man to tea at
Miss Gilchrist's summer house?"
A. "Yes."
Q. "On Saturday night?"
A. "Yes."
Q. "And on Sunday night?"
A. "He wasn't there."
Q. "On Sunday you invited him there to
dinner with Miss Gilchrist and yourself,
didn't you?"
A. "Yes, sir. I didn't invite him."
Q. "Who invited him."
A. "Miss Gilchrist."
73


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
Q. "Had you introduced him?"
A. "Yes, sir."
Q. "He was your friend, wasn't he?"
A. "Yes, sir."
Q. "She knew nothing about him?"
A. "No."
Q. "She took him to the house on your
recommendation? MA. "Yes."
Q. "Did she wear her diamonds at this
dinner party?"
A. "I don't remember."
Q. "You told him that she was a rich
woman?"
A. "Yes."
Q. "Did you tell him that she had a great
many jewels?"A. "Yes."
Q. "Have your suspicions ever turned
towards this man?"A. "Never."
Q. "Do you know of any other man who
would be as familiar with those premises, the
wealth of the old lady, her jewelry, and the
way to get into the premises as that man?"
74


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
f
time in the case we seem to catch some
glimpse of the relation between possible cause
and effect, some connection between the dead
woman on one side, and outsiders on the other
who had the means of knowing something of
her remarkable situation.
There is just one other piece of Lambie's
cross-examination, this time from the Edin-
burgh trial, which I would desire to quote.
It did not appear in America, just as the
American extract already given did not ap-
pear in Edinburgh. For the first time they
come out together:
Q. "Did Miss Gilchrist use to have a
dog?"
A. "Yes, an Irish terrier."
Q. "What happened to it?"
A. "It got poisoned."
Q. "When was it poisoned?"
A. "I think on the 7th or 8th of Septem-
ber."
Q. "Was that thought to be done by some
one?"
A. "I did not think it, for I thought it
might have eaten something, but Miss Gil-
76


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
overcoat, dark tweed cap, and both hands in
his pockets. Here we have the actual assas-
sin described to the life, and had Miss
Brown declared that this man was the
prisoner, she would have been a for-
midable addition to the witnesses for
prosecution. Miss Brown, however iden-
tified Oscar Slater (after the usual ab-
surd fashion of such identifications) as the sec-
ond man, whom she describes, as of "Dark
glossy hair, navy blue overcoat with velvet
collar, dark trousers, black boots, something
in his hand which seemed clumsier than a
walking stick." One would imagine that this
object in his hand would naturally be his hat,
since she describes the man as bare-headed.
All that can be said of this incident is that
if the second man was Slater, then he certainly
was not the actual murderer whose dress cor-
responds closely to the first, and in no particu-
lar to the second. To the Northern eye, all
swarthy foreigners bear a resemblance, and
that there was a swarthy man, whether for-
eign or not, concerned in this affair would
seem to be beyond question. That there
78


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
should have been two confederates, one of
whom had planned the crime while the other
carried it out, is a perfectly feasible supposi-
tion. Miss Brown's story does not necessarily
contradict that of Barrowman, as one would
imagine that the second man would join the
murderer at some little distance from the
scene of the crime. However, as there was no
cross-examination upon the story, it is difficult
to know what weight to attach to it.
Let me say in conclusion that I have bad
no desire in anything said in this argument,
to hurt the feelings or usurp the functions of
anyone, whether of the police or the criminal
court, who had to do with the case. It is dif-
ficult to discuss matters from a detached point
of view without giving offence. I am well
aware that it is easier to theorise at a distance
than to work a case out in practice whether
as detective or as counsel. I leave the matter
now with the hope that, even after many days,
some sudden flash may be sent which will
throw a light upon as brutal and callous a
crime as has ever been recorded in those
black annals in which the criminologist finds
79


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
the materials for his study. Meanwhile it is
on the conscience of the authorities, and in the
last resort on that of the community that this
verdict obtained under the circumstances
which I have indicated, shall now be recon-
sidered.
Arthur Conan Doyle.
Windlesham,
Crowborough.
80


UNTO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LORD
PENTLAND, HIS MAJESTY'S SECRE-
TARY OF STATE FOR SCOTLAND
MEMORIAL
ON BEHALF OF
OSCAR SLATER
THIS Memorial is humbly presented on be-
half of Oscar Slater presently a Prisoner
in the Prison of Glasgow, who was, in the High
Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh, on Thurs-
day, the sixth day of May, Nineteen hundred and
nine, found guilty of the charge of murdering
Miss Marion Gilchrist in her house in West
Princes Street, Glasgow, and sentenced to death.
The Prisoner is a Jew, and was born in Ger-
many. He is 37 years of age.
The Jury returned a verdict of "Guilty" by
a majority of nine to six, and the legal advisers
of the condemned man hold a very strong opin-
ion that the verdict of the majority of the Jury
was not in accordance with the evidence led,
and that this evidence was quite insufficient to
identify the Prisoner with the murderer, and so
to establish the Prisoner's guilt. This view, they
believe, is shared by the general public of all
classes in Scotland, and by the Glasgow press 83


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
(vide leading article in The Glasgow Herald of
7th May, 1909, sent herewith).
Your Memorialist has endeavoured in this
paper to deal with the matter as briefly and with
as little argument as possible; but in view of
the fact that the trial of the Prisoner occupied
four days, it is inevitable that the Memorial
should extend to some length.
It is common ground that the late Miss Gil-
christ, a lady of about 82 years of age, resided
alone with her domestic servant, Nellie Lambie,
a girl of about 21 years of age.
According to the evidence of Lambie, the lat-
ter left Miss Gilchrist alone in the house at
seven o'clock on the evening of 21st December,
1908, and went to purchase an evening paper.
Lambie deponed that she securely shut the house
door behind her, and also the door at the close,
or street entry; that she was only absent about
ten minutes; that on returning about ten minutes
past seven o'clock she found the close door open;
that upon ascending the stair she found Mr.
Adams, a gentleman who resides in the flat be-
low, standing at Miss Gilchrist's house door;
that Adams informed her that he had gone up to
Miss Gilchrist's door because he had heard knock-
ing on the floor of Miss Gilchrist's house, and
had rung the bell, but that he could obtain no
admittance; that the lobby was lighted by one
84


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
longed, informed the Police that Slater's appear-
ance somewhat corresponded with the descrip-
tion advertised, and that he had been trying to
sell a pawn ticket for a diamond brooch. Fol-
lowing up this clue, the Police went to Slater's
house at 69, St. George's Road, Glasgow, on the
night of Friday, 25th December, and learned that
he and Miss Andree Antoine, with whom he had
been cohabiting, had left Glasgow that night with
their belongings. The Police thereafter ascer-
tained that Slater had sailed on the " Lusitania"
for New York from Liverpool on Saturday, 26th
December, and cabled to the Authorities at New
York to detain and search him on his arrival.
This was done, and the pawn ticket, which he
had been trying to sell, was found upon him,
but turned out to be a pawn ticket for a brooch
which belonged to Miss Antoine, had never be-
longed to Miss Gilchrist, and had been pawned
a considerable time before the murder. Proceed-
ings, however, were instituted for Slater's ex-
tradition. The witnesses Lambie, Adams, and
Barrowman gave evidence in America, purport-
ing to identify him as the man seen leaving Miss
Gilchrist's house, and Slater was (he states of
his own consent) extradited, and brought back
to Scotland for trial.
An advertisement was published by the Au-
thorities in Glasgow offering a reward of £200
86


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
for information which would lead to the arrest
of the murderer.
The only evidence against Slater, which might
be called direct evidence, was the evidence of the
persons who saw a man walk out of the lobby
or hall in Miss Gilchrist's house on the night of
the murder (Lambie and Adams), or leaving the
close leading therefrom, or running along the
street (Barrowman).
At the trials Lambie professed to identify
Slater, as the man whom she had seen leaving
the house, by the side of his face. It was put
to her, however, and clearly proved, that when
she gave evidence in New York in the extradi-
tion proceedings she stated in Court there that
she did not see the man's face, and professed to
identify him by his walk. When Slater's own
coat, the one found in his luggage, was shown
to her at the trial, she at once remarked, even
before it was unrolled, that it was not like the
coat the man in the lobby wore — it was the
coat. It was obviously impossible that she
knew it to be the same coat. Lord Guthrie re-
ferred to this in his charge to the jury as a
typical example of the nature of her evidence.
With regard to the positive nature of her evi-
dence generally, it is interesting to note that her
first answer in America, when asked if she saw
the man, was, "One is very suspicious, if any1
87


THE CASE OF 03CAR SLATER
be described as "twisted to the right." It has
a noticeable prominence in the centre. .
All of these three witnesses had, as has been
said, only a momentary view of the man, and it
was proved that before Barrowman professed to
identify Slater in New York she was shown his
photograph, and that both she and Lambie, be-
fore attempting to identify him in New York,
saw him being brought into Court by a Court
official, wearing a badge. In her New York evi-
dence she first said, "He is something like the
man I saw." At the trial she stated that
he was the man. These facts very much reduce,
if they do not altogether vitiate, the value of the
evidence of these identifying witnesses.
Another witness, Mrs. Liddell, who is a mar-
ried sister of the witness Adams, stated that, at
five minutes to seven on the evening of the mur-
der, she saw a dark, clean-shaven man leaning
against a railing at the street entry to Miss Gil-
christ's house, but that this man wore a heavy
brown tweed coat and a brown cap. It is to be
observed that Constable Neil, who passed the
house at ten minutes to seven, saw no one there;
and Lambie, who left the house promptly at
seven, or, as she said in America, "perhaps a
few minutes before seven," saw no one there.
Further, Mrs. Liddell did not observe where the
man went to; according to her he merely glided 90


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
away; and although she was in Miss Gilchrist's
house that night and saw the body, and would
naturally be greatly concerned over the murder,
she did not recollect having seen this man until
the Wednesday after the murder. Even taking
her evidence as absolutely true and reliable, it
provides an excellent object-lesson on the diffi-
culty and responsibility of convicting on such
evidence as this, because the man she saw was
obviously dressed differently from the man seen
by the other three witnesses. Her evidence does
not, to any appreciable extent, further the case
against Slater, as she stated that she thought
this man was Slater, but admitted that she might
be in error.
The other witness is a girl named Annie Ar-
mour, a ticket clerk in the Subway Station at
Kelvinbridge, who says that between 7.30 and
8 that evening a man, whom she identified as
Slater, rushed past her office without waiting
for a ticket, and seemed excited. Lord Guthrie
in his charge to the jury did not refer to this
witness, and your Memorialist thinks advisedly.
The mere question of time is sufficient to render
her evidence valueless. She is sure the incident
did not happen before 7.30. According to the
other witnesses, the murderer must have run
from the house by at least 7.15. It was proved
that it would only take a man five or six min91


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
to deal at length with this part of the evidence,
except to point out that two witnesses (Nairn
and Bryson) say they saw Slater in West
Princes Street on the Sunday evening previous
to the murder. Against this there is the evi-
dence that Slater on this day, as usual, spent all
Sunday (day and evening) in his house. Three
witnesses from Paris, London, and Dublin spoke
to this. Coming from different places, they had
no chance to concoct a story.
At Slater's trial it was suggested that there
were various circumstances tending to create an
atmosphere of suspicion around him; but it is
submitted that all these were capable of explana-
tion, and in no way pointing to Slater's guilt as
a murderer. Slater had written to Cameron that
he could prove where he was on the evening of
the murder "by five people." When this letter
was written, he thought that the date of the mur-
der was the Tuesday, the 22nd.
The evidence of his witnesses was to the effect
that on the evening of the murder he was in a
billiard room until 6.30 p. m., after which he went
home for dinner.
It was shown that Slater dealt in diamonds.
There was, however, no evidence of any dishon-
est dealing of any kind. The brooch said to have
been missing from Miss Gilchrist's house has not
been traced. There was no evidence of any kind
93


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
led to show that Slater ever knew, or even heard
of, Miss Gilchrist or her house, and the Memorial-
ist would emphasise the fact that it was the miss-
ing brooch that put the Police on the track of
Slater.
With reference to Slater's departure for Amer-
ica on 25th December, 1908, it was proved that
he had formed the intention, some weeks before
the murder, of going to America. Cameron,
Rattman, and Aumann proved this. Slater had,
in fact, tried to get the last named to take over
his flat. The letter from Jacobs, of 28th De-
cember, and the card bearing the words " address
till 30th December," produced by the Crown, also
corroborate the evidence of this intention of
leaving, which is further corroborated by the
evidence of Nichols, the barber, a Crown wit-
ness.
On the morning of 21st December, 1908, Slater
received two letters — one from London, stating
that his wife was demanding his address, and
the other from San Francisco, asking him to come
over. These were spoken to by Schmalz, his
servant girl, and Miss Antoine. Further cor-
roboration of his intention to leave is (1) on the
morning of 21st December he raised a further
£30 from Mr. Liddell, pawnbroker, on his
brooch, and on the same day tried to sell the
ticket; (2) he wrote to the Post Office for pay94


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
Office, where Slater was amongst about a dozen
men, none of whom were like him. (Cunning-
ham says she could see that the other men were
policemen in plain clothes.) All these witnesses
knew that Slater had arrived from America, and
was in the room. They had all read his descrip-
tion in the newspapers, or had seen his photo-
graph. They all, therefore, looked for, and had
no difficulty in pointing out, a dark, foreign-
looking man, with a somewhat peculiarly shaped
nose. It is submitted that this is not identifica-
tion evidence in the proper sense at all. Had
these people been able to pick out, as their man,
from amongst several others, a man whose
description they only knew from what they
had previously seen of him, unassisted by
description, and unassisted by a photograph, the
value of their evidence would have been entirely
different.
Some Crown witnesses identified him as the
man they had seen and talked to (Shipping
Clerk, Porter, &c), but they, of course, were
able to do so. None of the identifying witnesses
had ever spoken to him.
Identification evidence is a class of evidence
which the law distrusts. The most famous
authority is the case of Adolf Beck. Beck was,
in 1896, sentenced to seven years' penal servitude,
on the evidence of ten women, who swore posi98


THE CASE OF OSCAR SLATER
1
Street, crossed West Princes Street, and ran
down Rupert Street, a street further west, and
opening off the opposite side of West Princes
Street. Your Memorialist understands that, in
the identification proceedings before referred to,
this witness pointed out Slater as the man in the
Melton coat, as she thought. This witness's evi-
dence is thus in sharp contradiction on material
points to that of the message girl Barrowman
(who had only a momentary glance at the man),
but upon whose evidence so much weight has
evidently been laid, and who says that Slater
was dressed in a light coat, a Donegal hat, and
brown boots, was alone, and ran down West
Cumberland Street.
Your Memorialist respectfully submits that
this illustrates the danger of convicting a man
upon the kind of evidence given in this case.
Miss Brown was in attendance at the trial, but
was not called as a witness. Even on the evi-
dence led, the votes of two more jurymen in his
favour would have liberated the prisoner. In
England the probability is that a conviction
would never have been obtained.
Your Memorialist is authorised to state that
Slater's Counsel agree that the evidence did not
justify the conviction.
Your Memorialist, who has all along acted as
Slater's Solicitor since he was brought back from
102