Alnwick

The Angel Inn, Alnwick: A History

08/05/201803/04/2018 by Northumberland Archives

This poster, announcing the auction of Alnwick properties, was one of several thousand items belong to an Alnwick firm of solicitors, Dickson, Archer and Thorp, which are now held at the Northumberland Archives. When I first saw the poster I was intrigued and decided to try and discover the history of the inn, as I knew that it no longer existed. Could the Angel Inn have been a coaching inn? If so, it could have an intriguing story.

*Angel Inn Auction Poster. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT*

Cockfights and Innkeepers

The starting point of my research was a search of local newspapers prior to the date of the auction. Each search took me further back in time, with the earliest being an announcement of lost property in the Newcastle Courant, published on the 22^nd October 1726;

“Lost in Newcastle, or upon the road between that place and Morpeth, last Tuesday afternoon, a sack with three Holland shirts in it, two of them ruffled, the other a plain one, all of them marked in the neck, with the letters ‘J.G.’ whoever brings them to Widdow Greys at the Angel in Alnwick, to Mrs Smith at the post house in Morpeth, or to the printer of this paper, shall be well rewarded for their trouble.”

This announcement gave me the name of the innkeeper of the Angel Inn, a widowed lady called Grey. Another published issue of the Newcastle Courant, on the 3^rd June 1727, confirmed the owner of the Angel Inn to be Mrs Grey when it ran an article about the forthcoming horse races that were due to be held on Alnwick Town Moor. After listing the details of each race it stated that, on the morning of each race day, there would be “cock fighting at Mrs. Margaret Grey’s at the sign of the Angel.” Prize money for each ‘battle’ was to be two guineas [£2 and 10 pence] and forty guineas [£42] for the main battle. Both of these articles, and my later findings, confirmed my thoughts that the Angel Inn was indeed a coaching inn. Margaret Grey died in December 1730 and was buried in St Michael’s churchyard, Alnwick on the 19^th December.

After the death of Mrs Grey, the Angel was taken over by a Daniel Craster. The 22^nd May 1731 publication of the Newcastle Courant announced details of the horse racing to be held and that entries for the ‘Sheriff’s Plate’ race were to be submitted at ‘Mr. Daniel Craster’s, at the sign of the Angel, on Thursday 8^th Day of July’. Daniel continued to run the inn until late 1734. The Newcastle Courant dated the 22^nd November, advertised that the Angel Inn was to be let immediately or from May 1735. The offer was taken up instantly by a Mr. Cooper Wheeler who ran the following announcement in the next issue of the Courant:

“This is to give Notice to all Gentlemen, and Others, traveling to and from North-Britain, that the Angel in Alnwick, a well accustomed Inn, formerly kept by Mr Craister, is not taken by Mr Cooper Wheeler, from the Bull and White Hart in Newcastle upon Tyne, where all Travellers may have suitable Conveniency, and good Usage.”

Cooper Wheeler continued to run the Angel, and hosting cockfights, until his death in July 1745. He was buried at St Michael’s on the 10^th July.

After the death of Mr Wheeler, the inn was tenanted by Mr Charles Wilson who continued to provide the same services as previous innkeepers until his own death on the 2^nd June 1749. He was buried at St Michael’s on the 4^th June. The tenancy of the Angel was taken on by his widow Catherine Wilson, but ended when she died suddenly on the 30^th September 1749. She was buried at St Michael’s on the 2^nd October.

The next innkeeper of the Angel Inn was a Mr James Robertson who ran several announcements in the Newcastle Courant to inform travellers that he was continuing to provide hospitality and stabling. James was also a ‘surveyor of land’ and ran an announcement in the Newcastle Courant in July 1755:

A L N W I C K

JAMES ROBERTSON, SURVEYOR OF LAND

Having been brought up to that Business, and had much Experience therein, under his Father, and in his own Practice for himself, humbly begs Leave to acquaint all NOBLEMEN, GENTLEMEN &c. who have Lands to survey, lay out, or divide, that they may have such Business carefully and accurately done, and neatly planned, at very moderate Prices.

By their obedient Servant, JAMES ROBERTSON

N.B. The said JAMES ROBERTSON keeps the ANGEL INN, in Alnwick aforesaid, where Noblemen, Gentlemen, &c. who please to make Use of his House, may be assured of good Accomodations

From their obedient Servant.

As you can see, he also announced that he ‘keeps the Angel Inn in Alnwick’ as well.

Joseph Turnbull

Nothing more has been found on James, but it is known that he was no longer the innkeeper of the Angel Inn by November 1760 as the Courant yet again ran an announcement on the 22^nd November to say that a Mr Joseph Turnbull was the new innkeeper. This announcement is shown below.

J O S E P H T U R N B U L L

Late Servant to the Right Honourable the Earl and Countess of Northumberland;

Having fitted up the ANGEL INN, Alnwick, Northumberland, with new Furniture, &c. begs the Continuance of the former Customers; and all who are pleased to favour the said Inn, may depend upon being accommodated in the genteelest Manner, by

Their most obedient humble servant,

JOS TURNBULL

N.B Neat Four-wheel’d Post-chaifes, able Horses, and careful Drivers, on the least Notice.

As you can see in the announcement, he declares that he was ‘late servant to the Right Honourable Earl and Countess of Northumberland’. This statement was intriguing and after research it was found that Joseph was a noted player of the Northumbrian pipes and in 1756 had been appointed ‘Piper to the Countess of Northumberland’. A portrait of Joseph hangs in Alnwick Castle with a copy held by the Morpeth bagpipe museum. The Newcastle Courant dated the 16^th October 1773 also reported that on Wednesday, 6^th October 1773, ‘his Grace, the Duke of Northumberland, and Earl Percy, dined along with the Justices for the County of Northumberland, at the Angel Inn in Alnwick, and next day, the Justices, Grand Jury, Gentlemen of the Law, etc., dined at the castle with his Grace.’

In addition to providing hospitality to travellers Joseph carried on with the tradition of hosting cock fights, and announcing these in the Newcastle Courant:

To be F O U G H T for,

At Mr Joseph Turnbull’s Pit, at the Angel Inn, at Alnwick, on Monday the third of May next; ONE HUNDRED POUNDS, by Stags, four Pounds, two OUNCES the highest.

On Tuesday the fourth of May, ONE HUNDRED POUNDS, by Cocks, four Pounds four Ounces the highest.

On Wednesday the fifth of May, ONE HUNDRED POUNDS, by Cocks, Stags, and Blenkards, four Pounds four Ounces the highest; to weigh and enter on the Saturday before.

On the 9^th April 1775, Joseph died as a result of falling off his horse and fracturing his skull. He was buried at St Michael’s on the 12^th April, the same day that his newly born daughter, Sarah, was baptised.

It isn’t known who looked after the running of the inn immediately after Joseph’s death, it may have been his widow, Elizabeth. What is known is that the next innkeeper of the Angel was a Mr John Dodd but this appears to have been a temporary appointment as the tenancy of the Angel was offered the following year. A description of the inn appeared in a ‘to let’ announcement in the Newcastle Courant of the 21^st September 1776. The inn is described as “consisting of two large dining rooms, fifteen other fire rooms, two exceeding good cellars, a convenient brew-house, and brewing utensils, stabling for above thirty horses, a chaise-house, a garden, and other conveniences.”

In response to the vacancy announcement a local man, Thomas Bell, applied and was granted the tenancy of the Angel. He and his wife, Mary, carried on providing hospitality to travellers until he died on the 12^th April 1784. He was laid to rest at St Michael’s on the 15^th April. Mary, his widow, continued as innkeeper. By November 1787, a ‘to let’ announcement appeared in the Newcastle Courant for someone to take over the tenancy as from the 12^th May 1788. Research has failed to find anything concerning who took over the tenancy in 1788 but an announcement in the Newcastle Courant dated the 5^th June 1790 shows “The creditors of Mr Robert Smart ……. are requested to meet at the house of Andrew Henderson, known by the sign of the Angel, in Alnwick.” Mr Henderson may well have taken the tenancy as from May 1788 but research has failed to confirm this. Various announcements in the Courant record that he was still the innkeeper in July 1791.

The next known innkeeper was a Thomas Salkeld but the date when he took over isn’t known. Research has found an announcement in the Courant dated the 14^th March 1795, which states that there will be a public auction “at the house of Mr Thomas Salkeld, the Angel Inn, Alnwick.” The Courant carried further announcements in the years to follow showing that Thomas was the Angel’s innkeeper until George Coxon took over in 1805. The Newcastle Courant dated the 6^th July of that year announced that he had taken over the Angel Inn “lately occupied by Mr Thomas Salkeld.” The announcement went on to say “that he assures those who may favour him with their support that no endeavour shall be wanting on his part to render the accommodation agreeable.” George Coxon continued to be the licensee of the Angel until Whitsun, 1814 when he took over the nearby Star Inn. He placed an announcement in the 1^st June 1814 issue of the London Courier and Evening Gazette in which he thanked clients and friends for their custom whilst he occupied the Angel Inn.

Edward Cummings

An auction announcement in the Tyne Mercury, Northumberland and Durham and Cumberland Gazette, published on the 16^th May 1815, tells us the name of the owner of the Angel Inn at this time. He was an Alnwick merchant called James Elder who had earlier been declared bankrupt, hence the sale of his property and goods. The second sale lot was the Angel Inn and the announcement read; “Lot 2^nd. All that well frequented inn adjoining Lot 1, called the Angel Inn, now in the occupation of Mr. Edward Cummings, under a lease for seven years from Whitsuntide 1814.” The inn was described as “consisting of three parlours, a kitchen and a bar on the ground floor, with a cellar below part of the same, a dining room, a large pantry, four lodging rooms on the first floor and five lodging rooms on the attic storey. Also a brew house, five stables with hay and corn lofts above, a yard and a large building formerly used as a cock pit and now partly fitted up as a stable.”

Edward Cummings purchased the inn for the sum of £1005. With the purchase he became the owner as well as the innkeeper of the Angel Inn. It is known from the Dickson Archer and Thorp collection that Edward Cummings had borrowed money to effect the purchase, including borrowing £600 by way of a mortgage from a Joseph Nicholson.

A town map of Alnwick by John Wood, published in 1827, clearly shows the location of the Angel Inn, Edward’s new property, on the town’s Fenkle Street. A portion of the map is shown below.

*A map showing the location of the Angel Inn, 1827*

In addition to the inn, Edward was also one of the proprietors of a coach service known as ‘The Wonder Coach’ which ran between Berwick and Newcastle on a daily basis.

Edward continued to own and run the Angel until his death in June 1838, he was buried in St Michael’s churchyard on the 19^th June. William Gibb, one of Edward’s executors and also an agent for Edward’s bank, placed an announcement in the Newcastle Journal on the 21^st July 1838 that the Angel Inn was to be let with immediate effect. Applications had to be submitted to Mr Gibb by the 24^th July. The successful applicant was George Adcock who previously worked as a cook at the Queen’s Head Inn, Newcastle. George ran the Angel until May 1840. The Newcastle Journal, published on the 7^th March, announced that the proprietor of the Angel Inn, Mr John Clark was seeking a new tenant to take over the inn at Whitsuntide.

*The cover letter found with Mary Cummings’ Last Will and Testimony (wife of Edward Cummings) REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT*

Auctions and Bids

This new tenant was a local man called William Archbold, as confirmed by both the 1841 and 1851 Census records. William continued to run the Angel until his death on the 10^th January 1853. He was buried in St Michael’s churchyard on the 12^th January. His widow, Elizabeth, continued as innkeeper until a William Elliott took over circa September 1855.

William Elliot was taken to court in March 1856, as the Alnwick Mercury dated 1^st April records “William Elliott of the Angel Inn, Alnwick, was fined thirty shillings (£1 – 50 pence) for selling beer in his house before half past 12 o’clock in the forenoon of Sunday, the same not being as refreshment to travellers.” Looking at the 1861 Census, it is found that William was still the innkeeper of the Angel. Intense research has failed to find any further information between 1861 and 1869, it is possible that William Elliott continued as innkeeper of the Angel.

The Alnwick Mercury, published on the 15^th May 1869, announced that John White, previous the innkeeper of the nearby Half Moon Inn, had taken over the tenancy of the Angel. In the following month the Angel Inn, the Angel Brewery and two other properties were put up for auction. The auction poster confirmed that John White was the innkeeper of the Angel. The auction was held on the 23^rd June at the nearby Star Inn. The successful bidder for both the inn and the brewery was a local man called William Patterson. He paid £605 for the Angel Inn and £555 for the Angel Brewery. Mr Patterson retained John White as the innkeeper. December 1873 saw various newspapers announcing that the Angel Inn and brewery were to be let again and applications were to be submitted to his solicitors, Messrs Dickson of Dickson Archer and Thorp. The successful applicant was the current innkeeper, John White.

Landlords and Landladies

February 1876 saw the Angel Inn and Brewery once more put up for sale. The Alnwick Mercury published on the 12^th February announced that both were to be sold by private contract. Offers in writing were to be received by W. & W. Dickson, Solicitors, by the 26^th February. The new owner of the Angel was a Ralph Watson of Morpeth. By Whitsuntide, the Angel had a new innkeeper called Mary Ann Ross. She had replaced John White who had moved to the Blue Bell Inn. However, Mary Ann did not stay long, in May 1878, the licence was transferred from her to Charles Crawford, who had been the innkeeper of the Mason’s Arms.

On the 4^th October 1879, Charles found himself in front of the Alnwick magistrates, the charge against him was “permitting drunkenness on his licensed premises on Wednesday, 3^rd September last.” After hearing the evidence, the magistrates found the case proven and Charles was fined £5 and ordered to pay costs. Orders were also given that his licence should be endorsed.

Ralph Watson, the owner of the Angel, died on the 12^th May 1879. His two sons, Ralph and George William Watson were his executors and eventually they put the Angel up for auction once more. The Alnwick Mercury published on the 8^th January 1881 carried an announcement that the Angel was to be sold by public auction on the 13^th January. The inn was described as “consists of a large bar, two rooms, two kitchens and other conveniences on ground floor, with six good rooms above. Connected therewith is very extensive cellarage and ample stabling.” The successful bidder and new owner of the Angel was George Stott Smart, a master brewer and wines and spirits merchant who had premises on Clayport Street.

By the 12^th May 1881, the Angel had yet another change of innkeeper, his name was James Gowenlock and his tenure was for four years. In the 21^st March 1885 issue of the Alnwick Mercury, George Smart announced that he was seeking a new innkeeper.

The successful applicant and new innkeeper was John Forster who took over on the 12^th May. The first mention of John Forster as the Angel’s licensee was in the Alnwick Mercury dated the 11^th July 1885 which reported on a court case against a Thomas Wakenshaw who had refused to leave the Angel when asked to do so by John Forster. It was alleged that Wakenshaw had drunk twenty five glasses of ale. Wakenshaw was found guilty and fined twenty shillings (£1). If he failed to pay his fine he was to serve fourteen days in prison.

Watered Whiskey

It is not known how long John Forster remained at the Angel but at some stage a Robert Wilson became the landlord and remained as such until William Anderson took over. The transfer of licence between Wilson and Anderson was granted by the magistrates on the 3^rd August 1889.

The Morpeth Herald newspaper dated the 25^th October 1890 revealed that William Anderson had been in front of the Alnwick magistrates on the 18^th October. The charge against him was that on the 23^rd September 1890, he sold watered down whisky. Reading the report, it would appear that there had been some concerns that this had being going on for some time. The report states ‘William Anderson, innkeeper, Angel Inn, Alnwick, was summoned for selling one pint of whisky which was adulterated with 30.3% underproof of water to Police Superintendent Rutherford’. The report goes on to say that Anderson offered the whisky from a bottle but the superintendent requested that it was to be sold from the barrel. When given the whisky, for which he paid two shillings for (10 pence), Superintendent Rutherford told Anderson that it was going to be sent for analysis. He then divided the whisky into three, one part was given to Anderson, one part retained by Rutherford and the third part was sent to the county analyst. The analysis proved that the whisky had been watered down by 30.7%. The charge was proven with Anderson fined twenty shillings (£1) and ordered to pay costs of ten shillings and sixpence (52¹/₂ pence) and the analyst’s fee, also ten shillings and sixpence. During his appearance in court, Anderson told the magistrates “I have not taken over £3 pound a week, so I cannot do a very big trade. In fact, I am leaving the house through that.”

It would appear that Anderson left the Angel soon after with his replacement being a Robert Anderson. The 1891 Census confirms that Robert was indeed the Angel’s innkeeper as does an entry in the 1894 edition of Kelly’s Directory for Northumberland.

At an unknown date a John Wright became the landlord of the Angel and at the Alnwick Petty Sessions held on the 2^nd May 1896, the licence was transferred to a James Armstrong who was described as a miner from Radcliffe.

A Final Chapter

When George Smart, the Angel’s owner, died on the 23^rd January 1895 his widow, Jane Ann, became the owner. In addition to the Angel Inn, Jane Ann Smart also owned the Robin Hood Inn which was also on Fenkle Street. In September 1899, she applied to the Alnwick Brewster Sessions for the licences of the Angel Inn and the Robin Hood Inn to be removed and merged into one and to be granted to the premises immediately adjoining the Robin Hood. The reasons that she gave was that she wished to provide a small hotel to cyclists and tourists to Alnwick who could not afford to stay at the better class hotels in Alnwick. Despite objections from a number of people, including the owners of the nearby Nag’s Head Hotel and the Star Hotel, the magistrates granted Jane Ann’s application.

Due to Jane Ann’s plans, the Angel Inn closed its doors for the very last time sometime in 1900 and ended over 200 years as a coaching inn.

This piece has been researched and produced by a volunteer working on the Dickson, Archer and Thorp Project. We would like to thank him for his work.

The Meeting, Marriage and Parting of Ways – “To be placed in a safe till called for”

08/05/201823/03/2018 by Northumberland Archives

This is the first blog in our mini-series entitled “The Meeting, Marriage and Parting of Ways.” The series will use a number of marriage settlements, discovered amongst the Dickson, Archer and Thorp papers, to explore the intimate lives of nineteenth century Northumbrians. Nineteenth century marriage settlements were very similar to modern prenuptial agreements. They would be used to outline how ownership and inheritance of property would be protected during a marriage; thus protecting both individual assets and familial legacy.

*A solicitor’s handwritten instructions; “to be placed in a safe till called for.” REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT*

The first relationship to be considered will be that of Reverend William Procter, occasionally referred to as Proctor in contemporary documents, and his betrothed sweetheart Isabella Gilchrist Young. This young couple hailed from northern Northumberland and were contracted to marry in the spring of 1867. They seem to have chosen the Dickson, Archer and Thorp firm to draw up their marriage settlement as the Dickson and Procter families were closely linked. The solicitors gave due care to the drafting of the document, and issued specific instruction it to “be placed in a safe till called for.” This blog will explore the interesting circumstances under which the couple met and how their relationship progressed. You can read a transcribed version of the Procter’s marriage settlement, as well as marvel at the original piece, on our Flickr page.

Family Ties

William Procter the younger was born in the parish of Doddington, in the county of Northumberland, in 1839 and baptised on the 22^nd of December. William was the son of William Procter the elder; Doddington’s parish vicar. William the elder had been born in 1792, and had married his wife Esther at some point in the early 1830s. The couple also had a second child, Mary, born in 1842. The family lived together in the Doddington vicarage adjoining St Mary and St Michael’s church, now a grade I listed property.

In adulthood William the younger followed his father’s spiritual footsteps, and in 1871 was listed as curate for the parish of Doddington. His role as a curate would have involved assisting his father, the vicar, in administrating both spiritual and daily tasks within the parish.

William’s future sweetheart, Isabella Young Gilchrist, was born in Berwick-Upon-Tweed in 1832, making her roughly seven years older than William. She was the second of six daughters born to Thomas and Margaret Gilchrist. Her sisters were Frances, Margaret, Josephine, Elizabeth and Georgina. The couple also had a son called Thomas. This brought the total number of children to seven – a significantly larger family then William’s.

Acquaintances

How Isabella and William became acquainted was referenced to in documents adjoining the marriage settlement. These papers allude to a close connection between the Procter and Gilchrist families; a connection which potentially spanned decades. A Procter relative, Reverend Thomas, was based in Berwick upon Tweed and a regular visitor to the Gilchrist household. The families even attended social events, with an article from The Alnwick Mercury in 1863 noting the attendance of both the Rev. William Procter and the Gilchrist sisters to a “Grand Ball” held at Alnwick’s Assembly Room in honour of the Second Northumberland Artillery Volunteers. More interestingly, it is possible Isabella and William may have even spent their childhoods in the same household.

Exactly where Isabella was living in early 1840s is difficult to ascertain. Her name appears on forms compiled for the 1841 census in both the Procter and Gilchrist households. In the Gilchrist’s census return she is listed as a daughter living in the family home, but her occupation and social standing becomes harder to interpret on the Procter form. Here she is listed alongside two other women, Jane Murphy. (35 years old) and Jane Henry (15 years old), and given the occupational status “F.S.” The term was an official abbreviation used for female servant. Her age is also listed incorrectly in the Procter return form – but it was fairly common for ages to be recorded inaccurately during the 1841 census.

The Gilchrist family appeared to be of a settled and prosperous nature, with Isabella’s father named in newspaper articles as “Thomas Gilchrist Esq” the Town Clerk for Berwick Upon Tweed. Even more interesting is the notion that, on three separate census returns, the Gilchrist’s appeared to have two or three domestic servants of their own. Moreover their only son, Thomas, went on to pursue a legal career and his daughters are listed in subsequent censuses as living on “independent means” (or family money). Hence, if the Gilchrist family were so well stationed and comfortably maintained, why was Isabella listed as serving as a female servant in the Procter household?

This mystery is most likely explained by an incompetent census taker mixing non-family members with the domestic staff. Also living in the Procter household at this time was an aging Dorothy Dickson (which had been misspelt as Dixon) along with her daughter Grace Eleanor and granddaughter Grace Thorp Dickson. Dorothy was the widow of William Dickson, one of the founding fathers of the Dickson, Archer and Thorp firm, and she chose the parsonage belonging to her close friends as a place of respite in her old age. Isabella may therefore have been staying in the house to further her domestic education or to act as a companion for the Proctor/Dickson girls. Either way it is highly unlikely that she was there in the capacity of a domestic servant.

Isabella’s appearance on the Gilchrist census return could also be explained by the census taker, or the person giving the information, not quite understanding the concept of the census and listing all immediate family members regardless of whether or not they were residing at the address. Nonetheless the 1841 census clearly pinpoints a moment in time, illustrating the intimacy between Isabella and William’s families.

Witnesses and Marriage

Twenty-six years after the erroneous 1841 census the legal firm of Dickson, Archer and Thorp drafted a more considered legal document for the couple’s marriage.

The marriage settlement was sent across the country to be checked, signed and counter-signed by stream of varied witnesses. Firstly the young couple signed the document, under the watchful presence of Isabella’s mother and James Gray. They were followed by Reverend Aislabie Proctor, possibly William’s uncle, and Arthur Baxter Visick, a London based dentist, who signed the document in the presence of Edwin Trevor Septimus Carr. Carr was a well-established individual whom had recently been elected to be a fellow of St Catherine’s College Cambridge in August 1862.

Witness signatures as shown on the original marriage settlement, 1867. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

The document was then returned to Northumberland and officially dated 24^th April 1867. The young couple married at Berwick’s parish church three days later in a ceremony presided over by Reverend William Procter the elder and his brother the Reverend Aislabie Procter.

Marital Tears

Unfortunately the marriage attracted tragedy when Isabella died on the 26^th November 1868 in the parish of Tynemouth. Her death came barely a year since the couple had uttered their marriage vows. It appears William never remarried and also died young, at the age of 34, at Budleigh Salterton in Devonshire on the 30^th January 1874.

Because the young couple predeceased their respective parents any issues regarding the protection and ownership of inheritance, covered by the settlement, never occurred. The “future children” repeatedly mentioned in the marriage settlement were also never born. Hence the document which had been carefully constructed during a period of happiness and intended to stand the test of time, lay unneeded and forgotten on a solicitor’s shelf.

We would like to especially thank the volunteers who made this piece of research possible by tirelessly transcribing the original marriage settlements.

Elizabeth Longstaff – A Career Criminal

08/05/201819/03/2018 by Northumberland Archives

As the Northumberland Summer Assizes assembled on the 18^th July 1887 Elizabeth “Longstaff” stood trial charged with the larceny of two bed sheets worth three shillings. The bed sheets had been relieved from an Amble lodging house belonging to Obadiah Self; a coal miner with three daughters and a son. Obadiah testified to the assembled court that, on the afternoon of the 9^th July 1887, he had made-up the lodging house’s ten beds. At 10:30pm, when he went to check on the beds, he found two sheets missing.

*Case of Elizabeth Longstaff for the Prosecution. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT*

An Elizabeth “Longstaff” had been lodging at the house and her disappearance on the evening of the crime made her the most likely perpetrator. Having absconded from the scene she tried to rid herself of the evidence. She met Margaret Gilmore from Broomhill and told her that she “was hard up and … would sell the sheets for the price of a stone of flour and a bit of yeast.” Margaret then unknowingly bought the stolen sheets for one shilling and a loaf of bread. Obadiah had immediately reported the incident to the local Police Sergeant and, as Elizabeth returned from her dealings on the Radcliffe to Amble railway, Lewis Scaife, the local Police Sergeant, was able to identify and apprehend the suspect. Elizabeth immediately admitted her guilt to the Sergeant.

Elizabeth was further incriminated during the trial by the prosecution’s key witness Frank Mack; an Amble-based hawker of no fixed aboded. He had also lodged in the house that fateful night and told the court how he had innocently helped Elizabeth gain entry to the bedroom as she could not open the heavy door. She was eventually found guilty by the presiding Bench and the case made headline news in the Morpeth Herald as an example of “bad character.”

Elizabeth’s 1887 court appearance appears to be the first, and only, time the Dickson, Archer and Thorp firm were involved in the prosecution of a Mrs “Longstaff.” However, Mr Archer believed her crimes extended far beyond the parish of Warkworth. To prove his hunch Mr Archer sent various letters to contacts across the Durham county. A picture of Elizabeth soon emerged of a colourful character whom had carved herself a career in crime. Her previous convictions included indecent exposure, drunk and disorderly behaviour, the theft of money and food, passing of counterfeit corn, use of counterfeit coins and larceny of clothing. This extensive criminal record can be traced from 1887 to 1900 using newspaper articles, criminal registers and original documents produced for the aforementioned court case of 1887.

*Witness statements in the 1887 case of Elizabeth Longstaff. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT*

Elizabeth Johnson

Elizabeth was born in 1857 as Elizabeth Johnson. She hailed from Sunderland in County Durham, and married Miles Longmires in 1876. Their marriage was a turbulent one; which Elizabeth yearned to escape.

On the 10^th January 1879 reports were published in the Durham County Advertiser regarding a domestic assault which had occurred between the couple in the October of 1878. Miles Longmires, described as being a potato hawker, had assaulted his wife Elizabeth by delivering a strong blow to the back of her head. Elizabeth had pressed for charges immediately following the incident, but she subsequently dropped them. Whilst being questioned as to why she had dropped the accusations against her husband she changed her version of events to divert the blame. She claimed she was struck by someone in the dark passageway of their lodgings, and had blamed her husband. She then claimed she had been mistaken and, having been informed by her more knowledgeable “neighbours,” the assailant had actually been another resident at the Coxon Lodging house called John Jones. We will never know why Elizabeth changed her story but, having escaped to her mother’s home for a short time, she returned to her husband and in 1879 gave birth to the couple’s only child John William.

But the birth of their child did not lesson Miles’ temper, and his domestic abuse of Elizabeth continued. By the November of 1879 this behaviour had pushed Elizabeth to take drastic measures, and led to her first brush with the law.

A Poisoned Beer

John Lewis was a business acquaintance of Miles Longmires and known throughout the county as “Partridge Jack.” On the 5^th November 1879 the elderly man had went to the Longmires’ household to conduct business, whilst there John gave Elizabeth one shilling to procure him something to eat. Upon her return all Elizabeth had purchased was beer, to which she added a brown powder claimed to be allspice. The concoction made John ill, and Elizabeth told the old man to lie down. John obliged and, as he was emptying his pockets, Elizabeth grabbed one of his satchels of money and “bolted out of the house, locking him in.”

Whilst John attempted to escape through a window, Elizabeth had retreated with her infant son to a neighbour’s home and told them that she had “cleaned Miley out.” This comment was a clear reference to having gained revenge over her abusive husband by ruining his business deal and escaping. She took the money, burned the satchel and fled with her son. However, she was soon caught a few days later at Spennymoor by PC Houlds. The policeman testified in court that, when found, she admitted to having spent the money on new clothes for herself and her child. John told the police that he had been carrying at least £10 but, when apprehended, Elizabeth claimed it had only been £3.

On the advice of her solicitor Elizabeth took responsibility for her actions and pleaded guilty when she then appeared in the dock with “an infant in her arms.” The infancy of her child and her honesty, which was to become a pattern in her court appearances, did not gain her mercy from the Bench. Instead, “the Bench considered this a very bad case, and the prisoner was therefore ordered to undergo the heaviest penalty in the power of the magistrates, six months hard labour.”

A Time Line of Crime

Elizabeth served her sentence but in the October of 1880, less than five months after her release, she was imprisoned again for “obtaining goods by means of false pretences after a previous conviction.” Perhaps Elizabeth actively sought to be imprisoned in an attempt to escape her turbulent home-life? However, as her criminal spree continued long after her husband died a premature death in 1882, it was more likely influenced by her economical situation.

In the 1881 census Elizabeth was residing in Durham Prison, here she is listed as being a “fish hawker” beyond the prison walls. Those who worked as hawkers were often loud and charismatic people; able to barter and manipulate a situation to gain a sale. Victorian hawkers often walked a thin line between legal trade and loopholes. Some operated with licences, but many sold a mix of legal and black-market items in an ad-hoc way. It was an unstable lifestyle, which didn’t always guarantee money, and often became a gateway to crime. Thus her tendency to steal items which she could easily pass on for a profit, such as clothing and material, may have been rooted in her “occupation.”

Following her 1880/81 stint in Durham gaol Elizabeth moved to Northumberland and developed her criminal repertoire. It was around this time that Elizabeth also began to use a collection of aliases whilst committing her crimes. This made it harder for her prosecutors to prove previous criminality – as Mr Archer experienced first-hand. These aliases included her married name of Longmires, her maiden name Johnson and two invented names of Longstaff/staffe and Clayton.

*Letter confirming aliases. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT*

In January 1886 she was convicted at Northumberland’s Epiphany Sessions, held at the Moot Hall in Newcastle, for the use of counterfeit coins. She received a prison sentence lasting 12 calendar months, along with a three year police supervision order. It was following her release from this particular crime that Elizabeth stole Obadiah Self’s bed-sheets, for which she received two months hard labour.

The following year Elizabeth was free once more and returned to Durham, where she proceeded to commit two separate crimes of “simple larceny.” The first occurred in June, and she received a second police supervision order. However, by the October she had stolen another bedsheet (this time from an Edward Toole.) For this crime, and because she had broken the rules of her previous supervision order, she was sentenced to six months hard labour.

In September 1889 she returned to prison again for “14 days” having failed to report herself to her Police Supervisors in Auckland whilst on a “ticket of leave.” Then, in the December of 1889 at the age of 33, she returned to prison for five years having stolen:

“a piece of ham, a shoulder of mutton, a quantity of flour, six yards of black velvet, one hat, one pair of cotton sheets, one black skirt and two pairs of stockings, value £1 4s, the property of Margaret Crawford at Jarrow.”

Her lengthy jail time gained her some sympathy when she offended once again in 1894 for stealing a quantity of clothes belonging to William Liddell at Cowpen. During this trial it was noted that;

“The Bench were sorry to find she had spent most part of her life in prison, the last sentence she had undergone being five years’ penal servitude. She was even now out on ticket-of-leave. She would have three more years’ penal servitude after she had completed the unexpired one on which she was now out.”

Escape to Yorkshire

By the close of the century Elizabeth had spent extensive periods in a series of northern prisons. In 1899 she was charged once again, this time in Blyth’s Police Court, for failing to report a change of address whilst on another ticket-of-leave. It is assumed her new address was somewhere in Yorkshire as, later that year, she spent fourteen days in HMP Wakefield for the crime of “begging.” The admittance register for Wakefield HMP describes Elizabeth’s physical features as standing at just over four foot tall with grey hair. The register also notes that she was illiterate. Elizabeth was now 42 years old with twelve previous convictions.

Elizabeth’s story is difficult to trace from this point forward; she may have died or changed her name again. Her son, John William, seems to have grown up away from Elizabeth. Tracing him is also difficult; but there was a John William Longmires born in the county of Durham and working as a barber in the Alnwick workhouse in 1901.

Elizabeth’s adult life had been spent mostly incarcerated, and her petty crimes had kept the county’s magistrates busy. A mix of Elizabeth’s marital, economic and social situation forced her hand to crime. Her first serious crime against “Partridge Jack” seems to have been an attempt to escape a violent life. It is easy to fall for the Victorian rhetoric and see Elizabeth as an enterprising criminal but it was more likely that she was a victim of her time, sadly restricted by her social context.

+ More