The Press.
London, England, 1857-06-27 00:00:00

THE DUBLIN MURDER.

OUR readers can scarcely have forgotten the
discussion in our columns of the atrocious
Broadstairs murder, at Dublin, of Mr. LITTLE,
the unfortunate cashier. We took special
means for secaring particular information on
that occasion, and the result of our inquiries
was that gross mismanagement had been
shown by the official authorities at Dublin,
and that the close inquiry had aided in the
concealment of the murderer, who, in our
belief, was connected in some way with the
railway. We showed, also, that the Dublin
journals had not been well treated by the
authorities, while knowledge of particular facts
was allowed to circulate freely in certain
families; and we strongly dwelt on the danger
resulting from the lamentable impunity given
to daring criminality. The cruel injury done
to the private characters of several innocent
persons we also dwelt upon, and we carefully
closed our columns against certain unworthy
suggestions of a sectarian character, which
seemed to us made with more zeal than discre-
tion. We intimated strongly our opinion that the
whole inquiry was much mismanaged, and we
have now additional reasons for entertaining
that conviction. Without discussing the case
against the person or persons now accused,
we may call attention to some apparent cases
of neglect of search. One of the places where
the missing money has been found "is situ-
" aced at the western side of the cattle plat-
" form, adjoining the boundary wall of the
" North Dublin Union Workhouse grounds."
It is a house of office ; and, recollecting the
wild and desperate characters that are too
often to be found in a workhouse, we may
express our surprise tbat the place in ques-
tion had never been searched. Every place of
that sort in the immediate locality of the
railway should have been carefully examined,
it' not for the money, at least for
some of the weapons or incidental accessories
employed in the atrocious deed. Again,
it is asserted that " a statement made by
" SPOLLEN (the accused) as to his whereabouts
" on the night of the murder was accepted as
" true by the police, because it was corrobo-
rated by the wife before she had any means
"of communicating with him. These state-
" ments agreeing satisfied the police." How
could the police have known whether there
had not been a previous agreement as to what
story should be told? Agreements in such
cases are often extremely indicative of artifice.
It is stated also that " early iu November"—
the murder was on the 13th—" the accused
" was employed in painting portions of the
" interior of the building, and, according to
" sonic, upon the day itself, or on the one pre-
" ceding the murder, was engaged in some
" painting-work in the room of the deceased
" gentleman." We have asked previously in
these columns—" Why were the counter and
" railing of defence, put up by Mr. Little,
" removed from the room Why were the fixtures
" dismantled? And on whose authority was that
" dilapidation of the apartment caused ? And what
" possible good was to be expected from the removal

SATUIiDAY,

-
"of those objects !" These were questions
which we know were eagerly asked by learned
persons profoundly experienced in the prac-
tice of the criminal law. We now forbear to
put certain questions as to those fixtures,
which may be of immense importance in a
judicial inquiry. In our former comments we
reminded our readers that Lord Chancellor
BRADY had never been eminent as a practi-
tioner in criminal law, that Mr. Attorney-
General PITZGERALP excelled chiefly at Nisi
Pries; that Mr. CHRISTIAN, the Solicitor-Gene-
ral, was a leading equity lawyer, not versed in
criminal practice. We strongly urged that
there should be an " open inquiry," and that
Government shoulJ aid the Crown lawyers
with the help of Mr. BREWSTER, or Mr. NA-
PIER, or Mr. WHITESIDE, or Mr. M`DoNoon,
or Mr. Burr. With the last news from Dublin
before us, we see more reasons than one for
believing that there was miscarriage of justice
in the previous inquiry. Against the person
now accused we say nothing, but enough has
transpired (without discussing the guilt or
innocence of SPOLLEN) to warrant us in charg-
ing the authorities with mismanagement of the
investigation in November.