ALAN STROUD WRITES: ON A quiet afternoon in April 1889, a passenger approached the ticket office at Newport railway station.

He was served by 21-year-old Christopher Mursell, who sold him a single ticket, number 2658, for the 6.24pm train to Mill Hill station at Cowes.

On arrival there, he handed the ticket to the young porter waiting on the platform.

Two hours later, the same man, a Mr Lawler, returned to the Newport booking office where he was again served by Mr Mursell and bought a ticket for the 8.47pm to Mill Hill. Remarkably, it was also numbered 2658.

Somehow this ticket, collected at Cowes a couple of hours before, had found its way back to the Newport booking office, to be sold to him a second time.

Mr Lawler was quite sure of that for two reasons — firstly, because he had taken a note of his ticket number, 2658, and, secondly, he had noted it because he was a private detective, hired by the IW Central Railway to detect a fraud which they thought was being perpetrated upon them.

Mr Lawler had also noted the fact the young man who had collected his ticket at Mill Hill station was none other than Christopher Mursell’s brother, Robert.

A few weeks later Christopher appeared in court at Newport Guildhall charged with embezzling monies.

In the words of the County Press: “The case excited great interest and there was a large attendance of the public.”

Mr Fardell, prosecuting, said the case was simple: “On April 12, the prisoner stated by his train book that ticket 2658, for Cowes, was issued at 4.15pm.

“For the 8.47pm train he said that he issued a ticket numbered 2659 — but what the prisoner stated was not what had happened,” insisted Mr Fardell.

Mr Fardell cut to the chase: “The prisoner’s brother was stationed at Mill Hill and it was part of his duty to collect tickets there.

“It was a curious fact his brother came back to Newport by the same train as Mr Lawler did, and on arriving at Newport, Mr Lawler saw him walking in the direction of the booking office.

“Mr Lawler returned at 8.47pm and asked for a ticket to Cowes. The ticket issued to him was 2658 — one of the tickets which, according to the prisoner’s own entry in his train book, he had already issued for the 4.15pm train.”

Mr Fardell went for the kill: “If Christopher Mursell was in a position to issue it again at 8.47pm, that ticket must have been collected at Mill Hill and brought back to Newport.

“How? I say they were collected at Mill Hill by the prisoner’s brother and brought back by him to Newport and reissued by the prisoner.”

Christopher’s brother, Robert, then took the stand.

“I don’t remember if the tickets by the 4.15pm train were collected at Mill Hill. I don’t remember if I travelled to Newport by the 7.20pm train on the day in question. I don’t remember if I was in Newport that evening.”

Mr Fardell tried to jog Robert’s memory: “Did you bring anything up from Cowes on the evening referred to?”

Witness: I decline to answer.

The chairman: Is it on the grounds that it may incriminate yourself that you decline to answer?

Witness: It is.

Herbert Simmons, traffic manager, told the court: “I summoned the prisoner into my presence. I said, ‘Did your brother bring you back any tickets from Mill Hill?’

“The prisoner said, ‘No’. I then said ‘Did you issue 2658 over again?’ and the prisoner said, ‘I have no knowledge of it’.

“I said ‘You issued 2658 by the 4.15pm train. This gentleman (pointing to Mr Lawler) purchased it from you at 8.47pm’. The prisoner said, ‘I cannot account for it’. I said he must consider himself suspended.”

Mr Lamport, defending, said: “There was an entire absence of anything that could suggest crime. It was said the prisoner misappropriated the sum of 9d. Had they proved it? No.”

So there was the evidence — two brothers perfectly placed to commit the crime, a convenient loss of memory by one of them, coupled with the damaging admission that answering the prosecution’s questions might incriminate him.

The magistrates took 20 minutes to consider their verdict — not guilty, due to insufficient evidence.

The courtroom erupted with cheers and loud applause.

Christopher, probably as surprised by the verdict as anyone, left the court to return home an innocent man.