New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-05-20
EDALJI'S EXONERATION.
The Difficult Work of Forcing the
Home Office to Act.
. the Editor Of The Tribune.


Sir am glad to see that the news of the par
don" OF Mr.. EdaU which I in the privileged
position of being enabled 10 communicate 10 the
press on Thursday last is confirmed by the New
York correspondent of your contemporary. "The
Daily Telegraph in to-day's issue.
1t may be OF interest to your readers II I. as
chairman of the Edalj general committee. sitting
In the temple. give short summary OF the incl
dents which have led up 10 the happy result OF
clearing Mr.. Edalti from suspicion OF c dastardly
outrage, and a result which has also relieved an
honorable profession and distinguished race from
the foul shadow OF q crime" 1t was as long ago
October 1903, that I asked by the Rev. Mr..
Edalr 70 take up the task of demonstrating his
sons innocence. and I undertook 1t with enthusi-
asm because had, by careful analysis of the
so-cslled proofs and critical examination OF
the Irregularities Of the trial, convinced myself
that was vindlcating innocent man. It is not
for me to dilate upon my personal exertions.
That leave TO other pens than mine. but
at the outset encouraged by the support Of
Sir John Gray-Hill. the then president OF the In
corporated Law Society. and many men Of my own
profession who agreed with US 10 Mr.. Edaljis
innocence. In my position 1 fortunately able
TO enlist the sympathy OF many distinguished
X C.s and others. and brought the matter before
them and also before the two distinguished men
who now are the Law Officers Of the Crown. Me
MORALS were signed by upward Of ten thousand
persons OF all classes throughout the country, and
these. together with printed criticisms and analy
ses. were forwarded the Home Office. with
request that the advisers OF Mr.. EdaIu might have
the opportunity Of submitting 20 expert criticism
the anonymous letters which had played so impor
tant part in his trial. and we also desired TO be
allowed 10 that which I Will describe as the
'dossier'-namely. the coat which was supposed TO
be marked with hairs, the down-at-heel boot etc.
This tho Home Ofice refused. and inasmuch as
tho refusal covered the so-called discriminating
anonymous letters I was very much surprised and
disappointed at the conduct OF the department
Ne F11,-
to interfere stating. inquiries made by IT, the
officials were convinced OF Mr.. EdaIUs guilt. We
then asked to be allowed to know what were the
incrminating details which since the trial had
come 10 tho knowledge OF the department. This
demand was strenuously supported by Mr.. EdaIn,
ST.. but refused. We wrote TO the Home Offlce
over and over again for several months two or
three times a week, but without avail
we then secured the assistance OF several friends
In Parliament, and the result was that the Home
once secretly submitted the papers TO the then
law officers OF the Crown (Sir Robert Flnlay and
Sir Edward CARSON, and I then ascertained by
means OF private inquiry that these law officers re-
ported that the trial was a "mstriaI" but that as
TO the guilt or innocence OF Mr.. EdaIu they would
express no opnion-probably they were not asked
10 do so. Efforts were now II possible redoubIed.
the Rev. Mr.. EdalU became an active partictpator
in tho struggle. The Society Of Indian Christians
headed by the Rev. DIR. Bhabba, took up the case
and IN 1905 the powerful assistance OF Truth" was
SONN'NN' anu t!dL JouIIdl rendered the greatest
possible support 10 our efforts. and practically Sc
cured the reduction OF the sentence OF seven years
suited in Mr. Edats Teeos s,t ,1 {g@Ts, Tmtch re-
l should remark that during the time we We're
Engaged IN endeavorlng to convince the Home Office
piled by US with expert testimony from Edward
cism completely demolished the theory OF the
prosecution that the crime could have been com
United IN the way described AMI demonstrated that
any person committing such crime would have
he Hon
Office with about fifteen statutory declarations the
effect OF which was 10 show clearly that Mr.. EdaIu
never left his house the night early morn
ing OF the crime, and that the allegations Of the
ponce: which allegations were entirely unsup-
ported by Independent testimony. that they found
damp We're entirely Untrue We also fJTSsba6 T ere
Home Office with certificates from his college at
with whom he served his articles and from his old
sehoo!mast'ers Of MT Edajls high character and
petraton Of such an outrage as he was accused Of.
self into personal Communication with me He was
invited by well known North Country newspaper
mas Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote 10 me- request
and the necessary details, stating his willingness
TO throw himself. as he SO nobly did into the
graph was enlisted Sir Arthurs poWer}u sbd
remarkably analytical articles in that journal are
tces themselves were before their public tion read
I trust It is not trespasslng too far upon your
space for me 70 be allowed 10 give the names Of
mittee. through whose exertions. conjointly with
the committee OF Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, this
matter has been elpcidated We number among
US DIR. Waldo. coroner for the City OF London
pr. Bastian. Professors Churtop Collins, Faraday
versity men;3 Sir William Bull, Member of Parlia-
nlent for Hammersnith the Hon John Gordon !
Jerome x. Jerome. Roy Hornman. both Of them
writer's the Rev Allan f Gardiner /
gentlemen OF Indian lineage dncluding B. r. Khan
Dr. Muthu Mr. Cowasjee and Mr. Byramjee) Mr.. |
Beddoes the eminent surgeon. and about hun
hred other distinguished with several others
less distinguished. constituting. you will see, a !
very powerful committee I think also il should |
be noticed that the proprietor of Parsons Week
~" has given most valuable assistance TO our cause
by allowing TO appear week by week in his journal
Mr. EdaIjfs own statement OF and criticism upon |
his case
Apologizing for the length OF this letter I re- |
main, SIR, yours faithfully
r. d YELVERTON.