The Birkenhead News and Wirral General Advertiser. — 1888-06-16 (Birkenhead, Merseyside, England)

THE RELEASE OF TRAVIS.  THE HOME SECRETARY QUES TIONED.  In the House of Commons:on Tuesday night Mr. W. Redmond asked the Home Secretary whether it was true that Albert Travis, sentenced to death in 1886, had been proved to be innocent of the crime of which he was convicted, whether it was true that he had been unconditionally released, and if so, whether the Government intended to compensate him for his unmerited imprisonment, and whether it was true, as reported, that the police at the time of the trial had information in their poseeEsion showing that Travis was not guilty. Mr. Tatton Egerton also put s question on the subject, inquiring whether it was true that an unconditional release of Travis, had been made, and on what grounds; whether it was true that at the time of the trial the police knew that Travis did not commit the murder, and whether the release was due to reconsideration of the same papers in the Home. office at the time of the commutation of the capital sentence. Mr. Matthews.—lt is true that the remainder of Travis's sentence has been remitted on the ground that there is too much doubt in the ease to justify his further detention in prison. There is no intention to grant compensation. It is not a fact that at the time of the trial the police knew that Travis did not commit the murder, or that they had information in their possession showing that he was not guilty. Since the commutation of the sentence further information has been received which has led me on two occasions to reconsider the whole of this most difficult and ' singular case. I arrived at my final decsion after consulting more than one eminent judge, from whom I have received most valuable assistance; but the difficulties of the case are sufficiently shown by the fact that the learned judge who tried the case is still satisfied with the verdict.  Mr. W. Redmond.—Has the attention of the right hon. gentleman been called to a statement made by Major Barker, chief constable of Birkenhead, to the effect that it was known to the police authorities after the case had been fully investigated before the justices that Travis did not commit the murder, and that it was against the judgment of the police authorities that the prosecution was continued at the Chester Assizes. _ _  Mr. Matthews—No, sir; I have not seen that statement, nor am I aware that it is an authentic one. So far as I know the only matter in the knowledge of the police that did not come out at the trial was evidence which the police have since laid before me to contradict the unexpected statement of a woman. Platt, called at the trial. Sir W. Harcourt—May I ask whether the rule which formerly prevailed is still observed, that in all cases of the capital charge the prosecution shall be under the direction of the Public Prosecutor.  Mr. Matthews.—l am not aware of any ease in which that rule has not been observed, but off hand and without searching the documents at the Home-office, I should be sorry to say positively. As far as lam aware that rule has always been observed. The Public Prosecutor is directly responsible for such cases, although in many instances he employe a local agent to represent him. Mr.Conybeare.—l should like to ask the right hon. gentlemen whether it is not usual in such a case, where a man has been imprisoned in an unmerited fashion, to give him compensation  Mr. Matthews.—No, sir; on the contrary, it is without precedent. I think I may say so (Cries of" No.") Mr. O'Hea.-111 it not & fact that compensation was given to a man named Hebron at Manchester, whose ease stood on exactly parallel lines to the present on.? (Hear, hear.) Mr. Matthews.—l must ask for notice of that question. lam not aware of the circumstance.