The Manchester Examiner. — 1848-05-13 (Manchester, Greater Manchester, England)

THE ROBBERY OF THE REV. MR.GERAION.—ThiS singular case of disputed identity will, we suppose, be shortly decided, for all the facts and documents connected therewith have, by the Home Secretary, been transmitted to Mr. Baron Alderson, before whom the two men charged with the robbery (O'Brien and Couolly), were tried and convicted at the recent Liverpool assizes. Some persons implicitly believe the confession of Mawdesley, that he and his companion Bates, who were sentenced to death at the last Chester assizes for the murder of the unfortunate Wyatt, were imma t et 01 y saveconnected them from with Orien alone concerned in the robbery of Mr. Gertnon. Considering the circumstances under which this disclosure NM made, aisncVneinthi it ought certainly to be confided in, unless it can be shown athnadt punishment by a false confession, or unless the evidence against them is so stroug as to justify the disbelief of that confession. We have never heard of any close intimacy having existed between the two parties of convicts, and we must certainly say that the evidence produced at the Liverpool trial, though CMoanov lie; laesYt to strong with regard to identity, was not altogether f doubts and difficulties. We remember that Mr.ree from Tindal Atkinson, the counsel for the defence, exceeded t.g his the bounds of professional duty by deliberately asserting belief that O'Brien and Conolly were innocnt; and for so doing he was reprimanded by the judge. Thaetbelll f e was no doubt grounded on the confidential statement of the men themselves; and although that ought to wei little or nothing, when opposed to clear and on proof of guilt, it ought to weigh somewhat in connection with other evidence tending to show the innocence of the ernes, and especially in a case of perplexing identity. ' Thep Guardian clings to the opinion that O'Brien and C 11 ono y are the really guilty circumstances which parties, and has given publicity to . , in its view, tend to establish the correctness An additional witness, named Whitehead, of that opinion. been found, who was in Slice pf _oo tehead, is said to have sstane on the day of ep the robbery, and who was by two wen) I description of whom is alleged to correspond with the personal appearance of the convicts the additional evidence is not worth _ Now, in our opinion., it could be depended upon; but much, even though connection with the discover of one remarkable fact in that the man was found long 3; 0 this notable witness is, 013rien and Conolly, and that 11 that he was taken to see men. It is fortunate that the ex- are tsaid they were not the paper will have no influence ouPtheeci3tatements of a newsof so much importance to the two con •ecision of a question feel aSsuredi whatever impressions i vide(' parties; and we quarters by the. course which the '4,3itty be created in other this curious and 'delicate question Guardian has taken on !police can have .no other object in viewtthe Manchester ; Ipg, of.: the truth, and that they will than the elicit'Motives. to interfere, with the straightfo allow no personal performance of their duty. We learn trvard arid impartial that the Rev. bery, to whom Mawdsley, in the first E. Carinstae his connection with the robbery of Mr. nt, confessed latown cost, and after much trouble, aucceeeirmon, has at his in this town, Mr. Germon's watch, and thatt Succeeded in recovering, in the hands of Mr. Daniel Lee, the magistrate. he has placed it nagi guides in connection with the w l Some inso that the particulars respecting watch are now in progress, made known. its yepoyery cannot yet be  Mae.