Crime

A Life of High Jinks

by

William Beresford Orde Lisle was born into upper Northumbrian society on June 25th 1886 at 50 Jermyn Street, London. His parents, Jane Lucinda (an Australian lady) and Bertram Lisle (a barrister-at-law from Alnwick), were well connected and their financial standing allowed William to lead a life of luxury and entertainment.

Childhood

William grew up between the family home in Jermyn Street, London and their country seat at Brainshaugh House, Northumberland. One can still visit William’s birthplace in Jermyn Street; just around the corner from St James’ Palace. References to the street first appeared in rate books for St Martin’s parish in 1667. In these documents the street was referred to as ‘Jarman Street’ in reference to the Earl of St. Alban’s, a man called Henry Jermyn, whose trustees had originally leased the land from the crown in the latter 1600s.

Number 50, the place of William’s birth, is now a high-end fashion shop called BOGGI MILANO. During the nineteenth century Jermyn Street was filled with hotels including the notable Waterloo Hotel and Cox Hotel (the latter of which was the Lisle’s contemporary neighbours, occupying numbers 53 – 55). An influx of visitors to the area was therefore facilitated by the wide choice in accommodation, and this allowed the street to develop both financially and culturally.  In the 1890s Messrs J. Lyons and Company decided to capitalise upon the up-and-coming area by expanding their successful teashop in Piccadilly to new premises in Jermyn Street. A museum was even established in the street, thus encouraging a cultural surge. The museum was first established in the 1840s to house a collection of geological specimens although, by the time of William’s birth in 1886, the collection had begun to outgrow its site and the building was eventually demolished in the early 1900s. Numbers 57 and 58 of Jermyn street, although altered significantly over time, were used extensively as workshops. Whilst number 80 had been some form of public house since 1783.

The Jermyn Street familiar to the Lisle’s would therefore have been a bustling centre full of people and trade. Moreover, its close proximity to the Royal buildings would have made it a nucleus for political activity and the perfect base for an up-and-coming barrister such as Bertram. In comparison, the Lisle’s home in Brainshaugh House offered a completely different pace of life; in a rural setting with greater space. This second property is now a grade II listed building close to a picturesque ruined priory.

Family Connections

Bertram, William’s father, was a well-established member of Northumberland society. In the 1889 electoral poll for his local area he was registered as being one of only two “Ownership Voters, Parliamentary.” He also sat on the Board of Governors for the Alnwick Infirmary and chaired the Alnwick Ragged School Board. In 1882 he was involved in a terrible cart accident along with another gentleman (most likely his father or brother). During the accident the two passengers, along with their driver, were thrown from their vehicle when the horse became spooked. The out-of-control the horse and cart then trampled a passing regiment of the 3rd Northumberland Fusiliers; leaving two seriously injured.

Bertram survived the accident seemingly unscathed but, following the birth of his only child, it seemed to “intimates” that “Mr. Lisle’s brain was weakening, and for a prolonged period he was under the night and day supervision of three male nurses in his own home.” Frightened at his son’s rapid decline Bertram’s father allowed for him to be operated on at Morningside Royal Infirmary. He survived barely a fortnight before dying in his Edinburgh hospital bed during November 1893. Upon his death the barrister-at-law left an estate equaling £1745.8s.6d to his widow Jane Lucinda and Thomas Alder Thorp, a friend from his Alnwick legal circle. Thomas Alder Thorp was a main partner in the county’s well-known Dickson, Archer and Thorp legal firm. Found amongst the firm’s papers, now held by the Northumberland Archives, was a scrapbook of newspaper clippings. This fascinating item traces the history of Alnwick folk through their criminal misdemeanors, and William Lisle was by far its most prolific character.

 

A tragic description of William’s childhood trauma, taken from a scrapbook of newspaper clippings. Reference NRO 11343 B/DAT/26

 

Following his father’s untimely demise William appears to have floated between relatives. In retrospect, relatives stated that they knew his father’s early death meant Beresford would likely become “a troublesome lad.” William did not disappoint – running away from his boarding school twice. In 1908 he gave his address as Bailiffgate, Alnwick – the previous home of a William Beresford Lisle (potentially his grandfather) who had died in 1903 leaving an estate of £1869.19s.11d. There is substantial evidence to support the notion that William the younger received consecutive inheritances made up of substantial amounts. But this constant flow of money only seemed to fuel his desire to live a ‘fast’ life.

Living on the Wrong Side of the Law

William’s string of good financial fortune brought with it the temptation of fast cars, alcohol and women. His leisurely lifestyle was a one of high jinks and increasingly wild escapades – activities which often found him stood before a judge. Alongside him, pleading his defense, were usually the Dickson, Archer and Thorp firm. These men were clearly close to William’s late father and often persuaded the presiding judges to act with clemency, whilst repeatedly encouraging William to find help from rural rehabilitation centres. Court records repeatedly mentioned a mystery ‘illness’ suffered by William, and often used to explain his wild behaviour. It would appear that this ‘illness’ may have been some form of addiction.

William’s first crime, and arguably his most scandalous, was a motor jaunt taken in the summer of 1907 which led to accusations of drink driving, the abduction of a child and an international gun-fight. Barely two months later Lisle and his motor-car were in trouble yet again when, on August 30th 1907, Lisle arrived in Chester-le-Street from Durham to visit the Lambton Arms. Accompanying him were his chauffeur and a young gentlewoman – possibly his wife. Upon leaving the premises Lisle got into the car and attempted to start it. When the vehicle refused to start he became increasingly agitated, and was further irritated by onlookers querying what was wrong. He eventually got the car to move but, as he did so, it creeped backwards crashing into a shop window. The window belonged to John Byers, a tobacconist and “fancy-goods” dealer, and the accident resulted in £64.11s.3d of damage. At first Lisle accepted liability, but in the days which followed, he changed his story and wholly denied his role. Yet witnesses to the accident attested to seeing him commit the crime, and the judge presiding over the Byers’ compensation case slammed Lisle’s actions labelling him as an inexperienced driver who should not have been behind the wheel.

 

Chester-le-Street crash newspaper clipping, taken from a scrapbook held within the Dickson, Archer and Thorp collection. Reference: NRO 11343 B/DAT/26

 

The year of 1907 did not close quietly for Lisle, as he was once again hauled before the courts to stand alongside George Taylor and Albert Ferguson when accused of poaching game and trespassing. The men were said to have used a motor-car to stalk the countryside and woodland surrounding Felton and gun down game. These activities resulted in a judge binding Lisle over with a hefty sum; in return for good behaviour. When passing his sentence the judge commented that Lisle had many more upcoming court dates for additional crimes of a more ‘serious nature’.

 

Accusations and court appearances for game hunting, as reported and recorded in the scrapbook. Reference NRO 11343 B/DAT/26

 

It was during the October of 1908 when Lisle really began to spiral and developed a certain notoriety for criminal high jinks. At the beginning of the month he was placed before Bow Street Police Courts for attempting to steal an automatic money box attached to one of the lavatories in Leicester Square’s Tube Railway Station. A witness claimed to have seen him attempting to release the box from its fixings using a chisel. The court heard that Lisle, who gave no fixed address and was listed as being twenty two years old, had been reduced to stealing the money box having inherited a vast fortune of £5,000 with a £10,000 annuity which he had completely blown within eight months. He was described as looking “ill and dejected as he stood in the dock, … leaned heavily on the rail, with his head bent” and his solicitor Mr Dixon (possibly a mispelling of Dickson) had advised him to admit his guilt. Mr Dixon argued that the crime had been the result of heavy drinking and that Lisle did not need or want the money in the box. The solicitor claimed that, should the young man need money, he could ask his friends in the North. He then argued that his client needed medical attention not jail, and the judge praised Dixon (Dickson) for his kind and considerate treatment of a client. The judge then agreed with the defense, and bound Lisle over with a value of £200.

 

Newspaper reports regarding William’s theft from a public toilet. Reference NRO 11343 B/DAT/26

 

Following this particular court case Lisle sought treatment and entered himself into a rehabilitation hospital. But, after only two days, he discharged himself and headed straight to Romano’s restaurant in London where he enjoyed a lavish meal. However, upon receiving the bill, he “suddenly realised” that he lacked the sufficient funds to pay and was hauled once again before the Bow Street Police Court for obtaining credit by fraud. The judge once again acted leniently and this time he was forced to enter a rehabilitation retreat for twelve months.

 

Newspaper reports regarding his fraud in Romano’s restaurant in London Reference NRO 11343 B/DAT/26.

 

During his time in treatment another case was heard against him, this time in Newcastle’s magistrates court. Here he was accused of discharging a revolver in the “danger of passengers” on Shields Road West, Newcastle during the previous April. Lisle was represented in this case by a Mr Lambert, yet he received no formal punishment on accord to being forcibly housed in a protected rehabilitation center. After discharging the revolver Lisle appears to have gone on the run. The police, working on false information, believed him to be hiding in Eleanor Maud Reidford’s lodging house on Westgate Road. The house was popular with theatrical workers and the police decided to storm and search it. Involvement with the police in such a violent crime caused the business to loose clients, and the whole affair tarnished Reidford’s reputation. Reidford would later bring a case of defamation against the Newcastle Corporation for her treatment.

 

Shields Road Incident, detailed in newspaper reports. Reference NRO 11343 B/DAT/26

 

In 1909 Lisle was again held before the court for the offence of theft; reportedly committed against his own family. This crime took place at the home of Lisle’s father-in-law in Lish Avenue, Whitley Bay. During the court case Lisle’s in-laws testified to his odd behaviour, and claimed that Lisle had stolen money and goods before wrecking the dwelling to make it unlivable.

 

Whitley Bay theft against relative, recorded in the newspaper scrapbook. Reference: NRO 11343 B/DAT/26

 

The scrapbook obsessively records other court appearances, extending into the 1920s, which clearly exasperated the Dickson, Archer and Thorp lawyers. One of whom, Thomas Alder Thorp, told an assembled court in 1907 that “It appears nobody can prevent him from doing these things if he wishes to do so.”

A Timeline of Crime

1907, June: Abducts Louisa Rose Whittle, 15 years old, and Theresa Roper, 17 years old.

1907, August: Car crash at Chester-Le-Street, causing considerable damage to a shop window.

1907, December and 1908, January: Repeated offenses of trespassing and poaching game.

1908, October: Attempts to steal an automatic money box, attached to one of lavatories at Leicester Square Tube Railway Station.

1908, October (only a few days after prior offence): Stands accused of obtaining credit by fraud at Romano’s Restaurant, London.

1908, October (following prior two offences): He is taken to a ‘home’ at Huntingdon (probably some form of rehabilitation retreat) to stay for twelve months.

1908, November: A case against him is heard before the magistrates but he does not appear. He is accused of discharging a revolver during the previous April in the “danger of passengers” on Shields Road West, Newcastle.

1909: At the Northumberland Assizes Eleanor Maud Reidford accuses the Newcastle Corporation of slander and defamation of character having lost business from the police (working on false information) circling and entering her lodging house on Westgate Road in their search for Beresford Lisle.

1909, October: Lisle is accused of attempted theft from his father-in-law’s property on Lish Avenue, Whitley bay.

 

The information held in this blog has been extracted from original documents held in the Dickson, Archer and Thorp collection as well as contemporary newspapers. A special credit is given to British History Online for access to Survey of London: Volumes 29 and 30, St James Westminster Part 1 ed. by FHW Sheppard (London, 1960).

The One Eyed Man

by

The Court Calendar  for the Easter Quarter Sessions held at the Moot Hall, Newcastle upon Tyne on 10th April 1890 lists that appearing at court that day was Arthur Stanhope .He was also known by the names of Arthur Reed, Arthur Wilson and Albert Edward Newton. The Calendar gives his age as 34 years, his trade as a decorator and records that he was only able to read and write imperfectly. He pleaded Guilty to an offence of Obtaining Money by False Pretences and was sentenced to twelve months.

Calendar of Prisoners, Easter Quarter Sessions 1890. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

The brief for the prosecution states that the prisoner “seems to be well acquainted with the district” and has been “exciting sympathy on account of his having lost an eye in September last and him being on his way to Edinburgh Infirmary”. He is also described as an “old offender” having been convicted at the Northumberland Easter Quarter Sessions in April 1885 “as well as at other places previously”. For this offence of Obtaining Money by False Pretences which was committed at Rock, Northumberland he was sentenced to six months.

From correspondence between Superintendent John Kennedy of Wooler and Mr Robert Archer found with the case papers Mr Archer had also dealt with the 1885 case.

An example of correspondence found amongst case papers for Arthur Stanhope. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

His list of previous convictions shows his first conviction to have been at the age of 28 in May 1884 when he was sentenced to 3 months for obtaining money by forging letters. As his trade was given as a decorator one wonders if his eye sight had now become so bad that he had to resort to fraudulent means in order to get money to survive. Or perhaps this was the first time he had been caught. Other convictions followed for fraud and falsehood involving money or goods and were committed in the Scottish Borders, namely Edinburgh, Dunns, Jedburgh and Selkirk.

Arthur’s previous convictions, handed over as evidence to the solicitors. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

In the 1890 case the arresting officer was a Pc Thomas Robson stationed at Lowick. On the 20th March from information received he was on the lookout for Stanhope and tracked him down to a lodging house in Lowick. When spoken to he gave his occupation as a piano tuner and said he had got a job at Barmoor Castle. After further enquiries Pc Robson found this to be false. Stanhope  was arrested on the 22 March. He was charged two days later. Pc. Robson states Stanhope said that once he was clear of the case  he would leave the county “and the next time you hear of me I will be making an honest living”.

One can only speculate as to how Stanhope came to loose an eye. In his statement Superintendent Rutherford  states Stanhope “came into my custody at Alnwick on a similar charge between 22nd and 28 March 1885 and “at that time the prisoner was without the left eye” this being five years before this offence. One of his victims, Mrs Edith Maria Sitwell of Barmoor says in her disposition that Stanhope said he had been seen by Dr Argyll Robertson at the Edinburgh Infirmary and this may well have been true. Research has shown that he was the Senior Surgeon there from 1870 to 1897 specialising in eye disease and developed a procedure known as the Argyll Robertson Pupil which was used in the diagnosis of syphilis.

Stanhope was arrested after his visit to Mrs Sitwell. She was a widow and gave him 12/-. He is alleged to have asked for 11/- to get “New clothes to make him tidy to go into the Edinburgh Infirmary” Her generosity may have been swayed by Stanhopes referral to her neighbours a Mr Forster of Lowick who had “told him to come” and Colonel Hill of Low Lynn who he said had given him one pound. Colonel Hill had not believed his story and sent him away and Mr Forster had given him money. When arrested Stanhope was in possession of 6/-in silver.

Arthur Stanhope’s entry in the 1890 Calendar of Prisoners, Easter Quarter Sessions. REF: NRO 11343/B/DAT

Stanhope was also able to obtain money and in one case clothing from two Justices of the Peace for the County. George Pringle Hughes of Middleton Hall Wooler who became High Sheriff of the County in 1891 and Edward Collingwood the younger of Lilburn Tower. He was given 5/- by Hughes and clothes and 5/- by Collingwood. He used the same story namely he needed to get to Edinburgh for medical attention.

In an age when state support for persons unable to work due to illness or disability was minimal it would become necessary to either live on your wits, resort to begging or become an inmate of the workhouse. Stanhope seems to have chosen to live on his wits.

Stanhope states on two occasions that he is a Piano Tuner. This was a common occupation for people of limited sight in the nineteenth century and was helped by the demand for pianofortes as they were called by the well to do. Some were apprenticed to piano manufacturers but others may have seen it as an opportunity to make easy money. All that would be needed were a few tools and a teach yourself book. As Stanhope seems to have been able to convince upstanding members of the County of his intention to seek medical assistance, perhaps he perfected his skills of persuasion whilst visiting their houses.

Habitual Offenders were also receiving harsher sentences in 1890, and it may be that Stanhope was made an example of. After all he had managed to “con” a widow, a Justice of the Peace and a future High Sheriff of Northumberland out of substantial amounts of money.

Bibliography:

A History of Piano Tuning by Gill Green M.A

Wikipedia: Dr Douglas Argyll Robertson

 

We would like to thank the volunteer who kindly produced this blog piece; especially for their meticulous research of these documents and transcription of its contents.

 

 

 

 

 

Elizabeth Longstaff – A Career Criminal

by

 

As the Northumberland Summer Assizes assembled on the 18th 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 9th 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 10th 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 5th 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