The Sun.
London, England, 1864-08-11 00:00:00

The Man in the Carpet II

Supposed explanation of the. Waterloo-bridge
mystery, as given by a correspondent of the Daily
Telegraph, signing himself " George Irwin, Ser.
pentine-avenue, Dublin, August 9, 1864."
While passing time has almost caused the Waterloo-
bridge mystery to be forgotten, even on the immediate scene
of its occurrence, information has gradually been collected
at a place distant from it by thousands of miles. Through
that extraordinary freemasonry existing among criminals
who from time to time recruit our convict class—men bound
together by the war of society against them, and leagued
in fidelity to each other by an acquaintance with or partici-
pation in each ether's crimes—there can be no doubt there
were those at the time in London who, if not privy to that
murder in its inception, very soon after the commission of
the crime knew the particular§ of it, and could, if they
would, have solved the mystery.
Without further preface, I will quote an extract from a
lettor received by B—, a gentleman well known in this
city from his brother, at present in Tasmania, and holding
there a highly respectable social position, and her Majesty's
Commission of the Peace, referring to a Mr B—, the sub-
ject of the tragedy which it is believed has been enacted.
He writes:—
" I feel convinced that his (R—'s) was the body found in
the carpet-bag under Waterloo-bridge. From what I have
heard horn a person lately come out, it appears R— was
lodging with a Jew named W—, a returned convict, close
to Waterloo-bridge at the time that he had about £1,400
worth of Tasmanian debentures, which for some time he had
been endeavouring to sell; that he sold them to a re-
spectable Jew named N—; that he received the money,
and the same day went home to his lodgings, and is sup-
posed to have had his money with him, from which hour
he has never been seen or heard of ; and when Mr. S—, a
friend of his, went to his lodgings a few days after, he
could get no tidings whatcyor of IL—, and the wretch W---
had fled no one knew where. I have no doubt he knew
had the money, then murdered him, cut him up, put
portions of the body (the head never was found) into the
carpet bag, and threw it into the river, Not a paper, not
a vestige of anything belonging to him has since turned
up, and I have no more doubt that that was his fate than
that lam writing this. We have ascertained that the man
W— is dead. . . Mrs. It is still very unsettled. I
told her of my suspicions, but still she hopes on. She says
she would know the carpet-bag he took with him, No
doubt the police have got it. Would it be possible to on•
tarn it, and any other articles connected with it, and have
them sent out here for her to see them ?"
A very few words in further explanation will be sufficient.
B—, above referred to, the recipient of the communication
from Tasmania, and at present in Dublin, was himself a
resident in Tasmania SOnla years ago, and while there met
R—, a
respectable position in life,
; he was then a person of
oandproperty,
andhim intimately
holding
R— came to Ireland some time previous to the Waterloo
Bridge event, and soon after called on B—, who at the time
happened to be from home, and did not see him, nor after-
s knew
wards during the stay in Dublin did they chance to meet
but R—'s arrival in Dublin from Tasmania at that time,
however, is confirmed from his having called on
others here as well as B—, From Dublin R—.
proceeded to Belfast, where he had business to
transact; thence he proceeded to London, where ho was
also known to have arrived safely, and was called on there
by a Mr. 8— (to whom, it appears, he was also in some
way nown), a few days after the finding of the carpet-bag
with k
the remains at Waterloo•bridge, with the result stated
in the Tasmania letter.
R— was somewhat eccentric, and though possessed of
considerable means, his habits were frugal and saving, if
not penurious. It is by no means impossible he may have
known the convict W— when that man was the denizen of
a penal settlement; perhaps lie looked upon him as a " re-
famed criminal," and as more to be encouraged and relied
upon than one who has all along led an honest life. R-- was
I few in London.
known to very - am not aware, indeed, that
he was known to anyone there except Mr S--, who called
upon him. His stay there was to be brief. In that
crowded hive it nay have seemed immaterial to him where
he stopped for the time, provided his expenses were small.
In any case, it has been ascertained by those in Tasmania
who knew him that he lodged with this returned convict
close to Waterloo-bridge at the time referred to, and has
never since been heard of—he, together with the proceeds
of his sale of Tasmanian debentures, having alike disap.
peered—neither have the mutilated fragments
of the human
body found in the carpet-bag been ever since accounted for
in any way the least satisfactory or credible. That it was
the means adopted by some anatomist to get rid of human
remains upon which he had been practising_the suggestion
accepted at the time when the police failed to make any dis-
covery—was not only exceedingly improbable, being so
different from what is customarily den. in such eases, but
inconsistent with the
was altogether mangled--and not
anatomised—appearance which the retrains
presented.
Had the information now possessed h
-eon at hand—had
Mr S— known the description of person with whom
R— had gone to lodge, his disappearance
at that parti-
cular time might have suggested aome inquiry; but an
his fate could not for
idea that such was moment have
entered S - 's
to this eve mind, otherwise
not to he would have
R
acted upon it. cry,
to transact some business and returnremain, but merely, and moving from
Dublin to Belfast, and from Belfast to Londe;
the natural
inference, on not finding him at his lodgings Was, that he
had finished hihas buss
returned to iness in Loindon, n
rn
asrnania. gene elsewhere;
t p2rp
eccentricity was calculated to make his disa-4, eon his known
remarkable.
ppearance less

ysi,balynditamreaythneyottltii
Within
Have the London police information whether a
erteetutmreeede
convict (A Jew, named NV—) was, immediately preceding
the event, residing close to Waterlco-bridge ? 1)0 they know
hatis‘vshuabt
steimqueehnet lenfatretherat? locraloist
su
their province to look after such characters. gaping
gra.
dusted in a penal settlement, they may, on their return, be
regarded as fully entitled to exemplify their matured expo-
,
sr
ifoo nn c. e society,uppiodnthe L ondo unchecked
detective by
staff,any un ntw
the e le otr 110
e pervi
of the
occurrence, discover that a gentlemen had been lodging
with that convict and that he suddenly and unaccountably
disappeared ? Did they discover that that gentleman had
previously sold Tasmanian debentures to a large amount to
aaother Jew, and been paid for them ? Could they ascer-
tain in what moneys those were paid for, and through what
channels they or any of them subsequently passed ? Dill-
cul lea apparently greater than any that such an inquiry
present, i
eto
4ave
arrive at
been
the I am prepare
truth, surmounted where
a ded
to
give the
names of all the parties represented by initials in this com-
munication, to any person competent or having authority
to investisto tile matter further.

SIGNOR TAMBERLIK, who recently left London
for Madrid, is said to be engaged to sing there for 20 nights
at £lOO a night, Mlle. Lagrn has an engagement for the
winter season at the San Qarlo in Naples.