George Albert Chapman, linen draper

Tags

clothing

Street View: 53
Address: 263 Tottenham Court Road

As Chapman’s shop was on the corner of Tottenham Court Road and Great Russell Street, it was know by both addresses: 263 Tottenham Court Road and 1 Great Russell Street. The shop had had various occupants and the Sun Fire Office, lists the following:
1810 Jonathan Grove, fishmonger
1826 John Bradford, grocer
1828 Charles Ward, tobacconist
1831 George Blakeway, grocer
1834 Isaac Marsh, grocer
1835 Richard Taylor, esquire of Edgware Road, so presumably renting it out
1836 Lavell and Chapman, silk mercers and linen drapers

In an advertisement in The Morning Chronicle of 9 November 1835, James Alexander Lavell and George Albert Chapman announce a partnership at 1 Great Russell Street. They explain that Lavell had been a partner with Harvey & Co. of Ludgate Hill and Chapman was “from the same house”. The way they phrase this suggests that Chapman had not been a partner, but just worked there. They called their new business premises ‘Victoria House’ and sold “a choice and superior assortment of drapery goods, of every description, which, for fashion, variety, and extent, is not usually met with in one establishment”. The partnership only lasted a few years and in February 1838, they dissolved it with Chapman to continue on his own.⁽¹⁾

In 1841, the census lists George Albert at 1 Great Russell Street, apparently single, living with five male journeymen/servants and one female servant. Chapman’s shop was frequently visited by shoplifters and 1840 was a particularly bad year for him. It started in March 1840 with Isaac Eggenton who stole 22 yards of printed cotton. The Old Bailey record is unfortunately rather short and does not tell us much more than that Isaac was 19 years old [which was in fact, 13 years old], pleaded guilty and was sentenced to seven years transportation. We know that he was sent to the Isle of Wight, to Parkhurst Prison from where he, and many other “apprentices”, as they were called, were sent to Australia or New Zealand. Isaac ended up in Auckland, New Zealand, where he died in 1897 (see here).⁽²⁾

Some of Chapman’s shopmen had to give evidence in Old Bailey trials. Edward Griffith testifies that he is a shopman to Chapman in the trial of Catherine Broderick who had stolen several yards of cloth in March 1840.⁽³⁾ A month later, Margaret Callaghan is apprehended for stealing some printed cotton. In this case, William Harris, “in the service of” Chapman, gives evidence.⁽⁴⁾ Chapman’s shop must have been an attractive place for shoplifters, as a few month later, another female, Catherine Williams, attempted to steal a piece of mouseline-de-laine, but was caught hiding it in her shawl by Griffith. One Thomas Howes, a Manchester warehouseman of King-street, Cheapside, said he had known the prisoner for thirty years, and that “she had the best of character for honesty — she is of an absent character of mind — she scarcely knows what she is about”. She was found not guilty.⁽⁵⁾ Small cases of theft did not usually make it into the newspapers, but in this case, a journalist must have been short of copy and decided to do a write-up about the Williams case. Unfortunately, he got it all wrong and instead of Howes giving Ms Williams a good character, the newspaper wrote that it was a Mr. Williams who did so. He was reported to be a bookseller of 1 Great Russell Street, but that is hardly likely as that was Chapman’s address and the last name of the bookseller is the same as that of the alleged thief. And in the newspaper, Catherine Williams was not discharged after having been found not guilty, but was locked up and only released after two days when bail was granted. It looks as if the journalist combined the notes on two cases and came up with a muddle.⁽⁶⁾

Linen draper from The Book of English Trades (1818)

But Chapman’s woes were not over yet and the month after the Williams case, Martha Jones tried to nick a shawl, but Edward Griffith was on to her⁽⁷⁾ and in 1842, it was yet another shopman, Charles Hewitt, who stopped Peter Collins from wandering off with a pair of gloves.⁽⁸⁾ And in May 1844, it was Chapman himself who apprehended Mary Ann Watson for stealing 11 yards of mouseline-de-laine.⁽⁹⁾ Whether it was the frequent thefts or the less than perfect business acumen of Chapman himself, the drapery in Tottenham Court Road only lasted until 1845 when Chapman assigned his estate and effects onto John Bradury and Henry Sturt, both warehousemen, for the benefit of his creditors.⁽¹⁰⁾ What happened next to Chapman is unclear, so we will continue with the businesses who occupied the corner shop after him.

One William Hardwick, laceman, is next found on the premises, but he went bankrupt in 1849, so that business did not last very long either.⁽¹¹⁾ The 1851 Post Office Directory lists Henry Tautz & Co., silk mercers, on the premises; all still in the drapery line of business, but the 1856 Post Office Directory lists William Davies, hairdresser for 1 Great Russell Street, so a complete change. The 1871 census shows Joseph H. Starie, bookseller, on the premises, and in 1882, an advertisement appears in the Daily News for Benson’s, a company selling rubber hoses at number 263. They had another shop at 4 Tottenham Court Road, which was just across the road. We will sort their history out when we write the post on number 4, but for now, the story of 263 Tottenham Court Road / 1 Great Russell Street has come to an end.

Daily News, 29 May 1882

(1) The London Gazette, 16 February 1838.
(2) Old Bailey case t18400406-1078. Thanks go to Lyn Olds who is a descendent of Isaac.
(3) Old Bailey case t18400406-1161.
(4) Old Bailey case t18400511-1431.
(5) Old Bailey case t18400706-1862.
(6) The Southern Star and London and Brighton Patriot, 12 July 1840.
(7) Old Bailey case t18400817-2011.
(8) Old Bailey case t18420131-772.
(9) Old Bailey case t18440506-1501.
(10) The London Gazette, 13 June 1845.
(11) The London Gazette, 28 July 1849.

Neighbours:

<– 262 Tottenham Court Road

264 Tottenham Court Road –>

Peart & Dossetor, hosiery warehouse

Tags

clothing

Street View: 38
Address: 12-13 Poultry

In 1788, Joseph Peart, son of John Peart of Stanhope, Durham, acquired the freedom of the City of London through the Needle-makers’ Company, and from 1790 onwards, we find his name in the Land Tax records for 13 Poultry and from 1792 onwards, also for number 12. In 1790, his younger brother Cuthbert is apprenticed to him and at some point, the brothers are in partnership as “hosiers, traders and dealers” in Friday Street, but that partnership was dissolved in April 1819.⁽¹⁾ The business with his brother seems to have been in addition to the shop in the Poultry, as that continues to be listed for him in the various records. In 1805, Joseph took on another apprentice, Thomas Dossetor (also Dosseter), the son of Daniel, a Dagenham farmer. This Thomas takes over the hosiery business in ±1820. The tax records for the Cheap Ward of 1820 still show Peart’s name for the two properties at 12 and 13 Poultry, but from 1821 onwards, it is Thomas Dossetor who pays the tax, although the business continued to be called ‘Peart & Dossetor’.

top part of the oath of the Needlemakers

entry for Peart & Dossetor in the 1851 Exhibition

Thomas Dossetor and Harriet Richolls marry in December 1819 and their son Thomas Peart Dossetor is born in December 1821, or at least, he is baptised that month. The Bishop’s copy of the parish record does not give a date of birth. The 1841 census does not show the Dossetor family at the Poultry, just a number of shopmen, porters, apprentices and other servants, but in 1851, Thomas and his son Thomas Peart are to be found living above the shop. Ten years later, Thomas is still there, but Thomas Peart is lodging in Queens’ Road, Marylebone. He is still listed as a hosier, but without an indication where he is working. Still in the family business? Probably. He is certainly listed at the family address in 1863 in the probate record for his father⁽²⁾, and also in 1864, when he takes out the freedom of the City.

advertisement in Tallis’s Street View

But Thomas Peart’s real interest did not lie in hosiery as we shall see in a moment and in 1869, a notice in The London Gazette states that Thomas has granted by indenture to Joseph Solly and Thomas Bayley all his copyhold and freehold estate, and all and every stock in trade for the benefit of his creditors.⁽³⁾ Not that Solly and Bayley were to take over the business; they just dealt with the transfer to a new owner. The tax records for 1869 still show Dossetor’s name, but in 1870, the property is listed as “late T.P. Dossetor” and in 1871 its is Charles Sadler who pays the tax. Sadler was to remain at the Poultry until his death in 1888. More on him in a moment, but first the rest of the story for Thomas Peart Dossetor.

The 1871 census does not seem to list Dossetor, but in 1881, he can be found in Norwich as a lodger with occupation entomologist & wood carver. Well, that is certainly different than hosiery, and far less profitable. When he died in 1886, he left an estate of only £25 15s, to be administered by Henry Ralph Nevill, archdeacon of Norfolk.⁽⁴⁾ Thomas Peart had been a member of the Entomological Society since 1851 and in their Annuals his interests are listed as British Coleoptera and Lepidoptera (beetles and butterflies to you and me). In 1859, E.W. Janson, the secretary of the Society, wrote in the Entomologist’s Annual about newly reported insects and mentioned Thomas as having, “with his wonted liberality”, presented Janson with a specimen of Hydrochus, which he had found in Holme Fen.

illustration of the new building from The Building News, 4 February 1876

In the mean time, Charles Sadler had grand plans with 12-13 Poultry and in 1876, The Building News of 4 February reported on a new building, designed by architect Frederick Chancellor, to replace the former which “had become much dilapidated”. The new premises were “erected in red brick, with mullioned windows on each floor, executed in red Dumfries stone, but the principal features are 4 large panels in terra-cotta between each floor, representing scenes which have been enacted in the street below”. The panels were sculpted by Joseph C. Kremer. The Art Journal also reported on the new building and called it a “lofty edifice of four storeys, and dormers”. They describe the bas-relief panels in some detail:

The lowermost panel shows the procession of Queen Victoria at the opening of the Royal Exchange; the next above it, represents a presumed incident which occurred on the site of the newly-erected house on the occasion of Charles II making his public entry into London on the 29th of May, 1662, when his majesty saluted the landlady of the house of that date, which was then an inn: the good woman, though suffering much from illness, insisted on welcoming the monarch. Looking still higher up, the next panel shows the procession of Queen Elizabeth entering London in state, on the 28th of November, 1551: and above this, is the uppermost panel, representing Edward VI passing from the Tower to Westminster to be crowned, on February, 1546.

Despite the Grade II listing, the 1875 Sadler building fell victim to the re-development plans for the Mappin and Webb building at 1 Poultry, which had stood on the corner of Poultry and Queen Victoria Street for more than a hundred years. There was a lot of opposition to the plan, but it happened anyway and yet another part of London’s history disappeared. The new development at 1 Poultry, designed by Stirling and Wilford, is in itself now a Grade II listed building and all that is left of the original Mappin and Webb building is the clock. And all that is left of 12-13 Poultry are the terracotta panels which have been incorporated in the new building above Bucklersbury Passage. You can read more about the panels on the websites of London Remembers (here) or Ornamental Passions (here)

panels above Bucklersbury Passage (Google Street View)

The 1875 building is sometimes given as the property of Alfred Hawes, hosier, but that is not correct. According to the tax records, Charles Sadler occupied the building from ±1870 when Dossetor left to 1888 when Sadler died.⁽⁵⁾ It is true that Hawes is listed at 12-13 in The London Gazette in an 1880 bankruptcy notice, but before that he was listed at 40-41 Poultry (1873) and at 33 Poultry (1872). Tallis lists Hawes & Ottley at Nos 40-41. Hawes may just have rented some space in the Sadler building near the time of his bankruptcy. I will see if I can find out when I do some more research on him for the post on 40-41 Poultry. Also notice that the name of Sadler is on the building in the illustration in The Building News.

Advertisement in London: a Complete Guide to the Leading Hotels, 1872

(1) The London Gazette, 27 April 1819.
(2) England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1864. Estate valued at under £7,000.
(3) The London Gazette, 2 March 1869.
(4) England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1887.
(5) England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1888. Estate valued at over £7,600.

Neighbours:

<– 14 Poultry

11 Poultry –>

Solomon and Louisa Asser of Burlington Arcade

Tags

clothing

Street View: 71
Address: 9 and 59 Burlington Arcade

Tallis, in his Burlington Arcade Street View booklet, tells us that “this beautiful arcade was the first of that description of building in London, and is composed of elegant shops, principally for the sale of fancy articles. It forms a morning lounge for the fashionable, and is particularly adapted for such in inclement weather, since its skylight shelters it from rain and wind”. The situation has not changed much since the Asser family ran their businesses from the arcade as the roof still protects the shopper from the weather and the shops still sell luxury goods. I have chosen to write about the two establishments the Assers had in the Arcade together as there was a close family link. Louisa was a milliner and artificial florist at number 59 and Solomon an artificial florist at number 9, or, at least, that is how Tallis described them in his Street Directory. But things are not so straightforward when we look a little further. Solomon had put an advertisement in the Tallis booklet, which says that he is trading from numbers 8 and 9, and that, besides flowers, he also supplied feathers.

Number 8, however, is listed in Tallis’s directory for a cutler by the name of Underwood, and the 1843 Post Office Directory lists a Miss Mary Underwood, cutler, at number 8. I presume that Solomon used the whole of number 9 and part of number 8, but exactly how the division worked is unclear. The 1886 insurance map by Goad shows 8 and 9 as one shop without any internal division. I will come back to Underwood in a later post. But first Solomon who made it into the newspapers in 1846, when he was accused by a Mr. Martin, whip maker of Burlington Arcade, of assault. Martin said that Asser had suddenly rushed into his shop and given him a blow on the chest and one on the head with a whip. Asser defended himself by explaining that he had come to the rescue of Martin’s younger brother who was whipped by Martin for neglecting his duties as a shop boy, and the only way he could stop the fighting was by grabbing the whip. The judge commended Asser for trying to protect the younger boy, but in doing so he had been led into greater violence than was justifiable. Asser was to pay 40s and costs, which led to his aggrieved response that in future he would think twice before interfering when boys were beaten.⁽¹⁾

1886 insurance map by Goad showing shops no. 8 and 9 outlined in red

In the Tallis Street View, 59 Burlington Arcade was occupied by Louisa Asser who, according to the 1843 Post Office Directory, ran a baby linen warehouse from 56 & 57 Burlington Arcade, so she must have moved shortly after Tallis produced his booklet. The 1841 census confirms this, and, although it does not give any house numbers, we can work out from the order of the people listed that Louisa was resident at number 57. Living with her is Henriette Asser, also a milliner, and two younger servant girls. By 1843, Louisa had extended the business to include number 56 (Post Office Directory). Tallis, in 1839, listed number 57 for a Mr. Hadley, “Hair Cutter. Wig & Scalp Maker. Removed to 10 Marchmount Street, Russell Square”, and number 56 for shoe maker Durlin. We know that Louisa had had her shop in Burlington Arcade at least since 1836 as in March of that year a fire destroyed many properties in Old Bond Street, the Western Exchange and in Burlington Arcade itself. In a newspaper report, Louisa, still at number 59, is mentioned as one of the shopkeepers whose premises were severely damaged. Luckily, she was insured with the Globe insurance company.⁽²⁾

Louisa died in 1849 and provided a valuable source of information about the family relations between the Asser shops in her will. At the time of her death, she was living at 25 Westbourne Park Road, not far from Solomon, whom we find at number 33 in the 1851 census. Louisa mentions Solomon in her will as her brother and one of her executors. Louisa wanted her assets to be sold and invested with the dividend to be paid to various family members: her sisters Adelaide and Rachel, her brother Henry, and after the death of the last survivor of these three, to the daughters of her sister Mary Peck. Also mentioned are her brothers Nathaniel and Louis, and various nieces.⁽³⁾ So, Solomon, the artificial florist, is her brother, and indeed, after Louisa’s death, the baby linen shop at numbers 56 and 57 is taken over by Solomon.

Entry from the 1851 Post Office Directory

Louisa, Solomon and their siblings were all the children of Asher Asser, a stationer, and Joicey (or Joyce) Levien and over the years, several of them had had a shop in Burlington Arcade.⁽⁴⁾ Brothers Henry and Louis had a business as china and glass-men at Burlington Arcade, but their partnership was dissolved in July 1823 with Louis to continue on his own.⁽⁵⁾ Louis is later to be found as a glass and china dealer at 147 Regent Street (later changed to a “ready made linen warehouse”) and Henry at 406 Strand. Despite the end of the partnership in 1823, Henry could still be found at the same address as Louis in the 1841 census, apparently working in the same china shop in Regent Street. In 1851, Henry is living with his sisters Adelaide and Rachel at 57 Westbourne Street, all three living on their own means, no doubt facilitated by the capital their sister Louisa had left them.

Advertisement in The Pall Mall Gazette, 12 April 1866

Nathaniel can be found as a tailor at 52 Burlington Arcade in the 1822 and 1825 Pigot’s Directories. He married Mary Ann, the daughter (or possibly sister) of Thomas Sherwin, who also had a shop in Burlington Arcade. After a spate in Scotland, Nathaniel settled in Surrey Street where the 1839 directory finds him as a clothes dealer. After Nathaniel’s death, two of his sons are working in the games industry, no doubt because that was what the Sherwins were involved in. Nathaniel’s son James, who had worked as a solicitor, joined forces with his cousin Charles Sheppard Sherwin (the son of Mary Ann’s brother James) at 81 Strand as dealers and manufacturers of bags, dressing cases, games, and sport equipment (see here). James’s son Ernest, with John Arthur Turnbull, founded the shirt making company Turnbull & Asser, which is still in business in Jermyn Street (see here for portraits of the two founders).

Part of a poem by Joseph Barnard from his Among the Gods, 1874

But let’s get back to where we started. Solomon expanded his business as an artificial florist at number 9 to include numbers 8, 56 and 57. Besides flowers, he also dealt in ostrich feathers, straw hats, fans and various millinery wares. In 1861, the census reported him as employing 20 men, although that probably included more women than men, as the millinery side of the business tended to be a female affair. Solomon died in 1877, naming his second wife Emma, who, by the way, was 30 years younger, as sole executrix.⁽⁶⁾ Emma continued the business in Burlington Arcade and is favourably mentioned in a newspaper “column for ladies” about the latest fashion (see illustration below). She also supplied the hats for the wedding of Lieutenant Radcliffe and Miss E.M. Orpen in 1894.⁽⁷⁾ We still find her at numbers 8 and 9 in the 1902 Post Office Directory, listed as ladies outfitter. Burlington Arcade 56 and 57 had by then been relinquished and were occupied by Scott, a hosier. According to Dick Sherwin, Emma continued in the Arcade till 1918 and died in 1921.

Column for Ladies in Aberdeen Weekly Journal, 16 December 1882 (click here to see the whole article)

The Assers in Burlington Arcade (taken from information supplied by Dick Sherwin, directories, census and other records):

Solomon
8 (and 9) 1839 (or earlier) – 1877 (the 1861 census mentions son Edward and family on the premises)
56 and 57 1851 – 1856 (or later, see Adelaide)

Emma
8 and 9 1877 – 1918
7, 8 and 9 1883 – 1885

Louisa
59 1836 (or earlier) – 1840
56 and 57 1840 – 1849

Adelaide (Nathaniel’s daughter)
56 and 57 1861 (or earlier, see Solomon) – 1865⁽⁸⁾

Henry and Louis
? 1823

Louis
63 1823? – 1829

Nathaniel
26 1820
52 1822 – 1825
62 1826 – 1829 (Sherwin’s shop)

Burlington Arcade in festive attire (2014)

(1) Daily News, 30 September 1846.
(2) The Morning Post, 28 March 1836.
(3) PROB 11/2086/21.
(4) Thanks go to Dick Sherwin for providing me with lots of genealogical information on the Asser and Sherwin family.
(5) The London Gazette, 12 July 1823. Although the notice about the partnership only mentions Burlington Arcade, Henry had also been trading from 406 Strand since at least 1822 and where he continued to work afterwards (Pigot’s Directory, 1825).
(6) England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1877. Estate valued at under £1,500.
(7) Trewman’s Exeter Flying Post, 3 February 1894.
(8) Adelaide ran the business with her partner Mrs Lawledge. In 1865, advertisements announce their departure from Burlington Arcade to their showrooms at 5 New Bond Street. Even as late as 1871, there are advertisements about their departure from Burlington Arcade, but then their new address is given as 4 Vere Street.

Neighbours:

<– 8 Burlington Arcade <– 58 Burlington Arcade

10 Burlington Arcade –> 60 Burlington Arcade –>

Phillips and Sampson, tailors and drapers

Tags

clothing

Street View: 32
Address: 68 Lamb’s Conduit Street

We saw in a previous post that Isaac Salaman had his business at 69 Lamb’s Conduit Street, but next door Tallis found Phillips and Sampson, tailors and drapers. There is a link between the two neighbouring families as in 1854 Abraham Salaman, son of Isaac, the ostrich feather dealer, married Bloom Phillips, the daughter of Israel (Asher b David) Phillips, the tailor. They were married at St. James’s Westminster and from later census records, it appears that Abraham was – not surprisingly – also involved in the ostrich feather business. But let’s start with Israel Phillips who, in 1830 at the Western Synagogue, married Maria (Reina) Sampson, hence ‘Phillips and Sampson’ as her brother Simeon was also a tailor and lived with the Phillips family at 68 Lamb’s Conduit Street. Neither Phillips, nor Sampson, appear in the 1829 Post Office Directory, so it is unclear when exactly they started trading from Lamb’s Conduit Street, but presumably after Israel and Maria’s marriage. The 1841 census also shows another of Maria’s brother living with them, Joseph, who is described as a bootmaker. We will come across him again later on.

headstone on Israel’s grave (Source – with grateful thanks: Cemetery Scribes)

The Phillips and Sampson family were not as rooted to one address as the Salamans had been, as in, or just after, 1851, they moved to 40 High Holborn, possibly after the death of Israel in March 1851. The census, which was taken on 30 March, and the 1851 Post Office Directory still have the business at Lamb’s Conduit Street, but the 1856 Post Office Directory found them in High Holborn. The previous occupant of that shop, Joseph Robinson, a bookseller, had been declared a bankrupt in 1851 and apparently moved out shortly after that. A perfect opportunity for the tailors to move to busy Holborn.

Goad’s insurance map of 1886 for 68 Lamb’s Conduit Street, which was renumbered in the late 1860s to 21

The 1861 census saw Maria Phillips with four sons and four daughters at High Holborn.⁽¹⁾ Simeon and Joseph Sampson are not listed, but in 1871 Simeon is back and given as ‘retired tailor’. Maria was not at home at the time and the census taker duly noted in the margin “The head of the family, a widow, is absent”. We find her at 25 Clifton Gardens with her son Frederick Samuel David, a recent widower, and her grandson Raymond of just 3 months old. Frederick is described as ‘photographer’ in the 1871 census, and, although he lived away from the shop, still traded from 40 High Holborn. Somewhere in the 1870s, the tailoring family moved once again and in the probate record for Simeon, who died 19 December 1878, we find him described as “formerly of 40 High Holborn, but late of 46 Warwick Road Maida Hill.⁽²⁾ In the later 19th century, many Jews moved from the centre of London to Maida Hill and Maida Vale and the area became known as a predominantly Jewish district with the Spanish/Portuguese Synagogue on Lauderdale Road.

Charles Booth’s 1889 descriptive map of London poverty, showing Warwick Road and Clifton Gardens

Frederick continued with his photographic company at High Holborn, but we will follow the rest of the family to 44 Warwick Road and will come back to Frederick when the post on 40 High Holborn gets written.

In the 1881 census, we see Samuel Ellis Phillips (usually called Ellis), unmarried tailor, as the head of the family at 44 Warwick Road. Also living there is his brother Louis, also an unmarried tailor, his sister Annie, a widow, and her son Eddie, a scholar. We could assume from all this that Joseph Sampson, Simeon’s brother, left the family after the 1841 census to lead his own life. That is true, he did and became a furrier, but at the end of his life, he returned and the head stone at Brompton Jewish Cemetery reads “Joseph SAMPSON of 44 Warwick Rd Maida Hill who departed this life Sept 4th 1885 – 5646 aged 71”.⁽³⁾

From a list of bankruptcy cases in The London Gazette of 4 October 1887, we learn that Samuel Ellis had continued the tailoring business at 40 High Holborn and 44 Warwick Road. He managed to come to an agreement with his creditors and the receiving order was rescinded, so we know that the Holborn address was still in use as a tailor’s in 1887. In the 1891 census, Ellis and Louis have changed places with Louis now the head of the family, but they are still at Warwick Road. Louis died in 1898, but was then no longer living in Maida Vale, but in St. Ann’s-heath Virginia Water, Surrey.⁽⁴⁾ And the last of the tailors, Samuel Ellis died in 1917 at Cleveland Mansions, Willesden Lane. His sister Clara Alberts, widow, is named as the executor. In 1920, however, a new probate is granted to Clara’s daughter, Lilian Weil. Samuel’s estate had by then dwindled to a little over £500.⁽⁵⁾

Leeds Mercury, 8 January 1881

This all sounds very boring and straightforward and I was wondering what I could write about the family to interest my readers when I came across a notice in a newspaper about one Clara Govier, 23 years old, of St. Mary’s Terrace, Paddington. Govier was charged at the Marylebone Police Court with “wilfully disturbing the inhabitants by ringing the bell at 44 Warwick Road, without lawful excuse; also with assaulting Ellis Phillips”. Ellis appeared in court to give evidence with his eye bandaged, and claimed that Govier had followed him all day and had been ringing the bell at night. He managed to send her away several times, but she kept coming back and finally struck him with a roll of paper and that was why he had given her into custody. It had not been the first time she had struck him as two weeks before she had hit him on the mouth, but he had not appeared against her, because she promised not to do it again. When asked why she behaved in such manner, Govier said that she “had great provocation” and had five children by Ellis. Phillips said in reply, “I am keeping one child and doing the best I can for her, but she won’t do any good”. The judge ruled that “because you have been profligate, and had a child by a man, is no reason why you should persecute him all the rest of his life”. Sentence: two months hard labour.⁽⁶⁾ There does not seem to be any suggestion that Phillips’ behaviour was in any way reprehensible, but different times, different ideas and morals, I suppose. Having said that, Govier may not have been the easiest person to get along with and I could not find any evidence of the five children she claimed to have had. The only possibility is the baptism at All Saints, Harrow, of 15-year old Ethel Govier, daughter of Clara Govier. The 15 years would make 1884 her birth year, so definitely in the right time-frame. Another possibility (or maybe it is the same child?), is Ethel Philip Govier, daughter of Ellis and Clare Gouvier of 7 Lambs Conduit Passage, baptised on 25 February 1883 at St. John the Evangelist, Red Lion Square. Occupation father given as ‘tailor’. An Ellis Govier does not appear to have existed other than in this baptism record. If anyone can solve the Govier riddle, I’d love to know. [Update: Gaby Laws of Cemetery Scribes found an 1891 census for Ethel Govier as a foster child living with Edward Swain, a stonemason from Harrow, and his wife Sarah Ann, along with two other foster children (not named Govier)]

And to round off this post an advertisement for a tailor named Sampson, although this is John Sampson, and quite likely no relation of Joseph or Simeon at all, but as I have not found an advertisement for the ‘right’ Sampson, this will have to do.

1860 advertisement in E. Walford’s The County Families of the United Kingdom

(1) Frederick, Lawrence, Louis, Ellis, Jeanette, Annie, Rosetta and Clara.
(2) England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1879. Estate valued at £600. Simeon’s brother Joseph and nephew Frederick are listed as the executors. Frederick is by then living in Bayswater, and Joseph in Hornsey Rise.
(3) http://www.cemeteryscribes.com/getperson.php?personID=I3536. England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1885. Estate valued at £800. His adress is given as “late of Tilekile-lane [= Tile Kiln Lane], Southgate”. Samuel Ellis Phillips, his nephew, is named as the executor.
(4) England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1898. Estate valued at just over £930. His brother Frederick is named as the executor.
(5) England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1918. Estate valued at just over £920.
(6) Lloyd’s Weekly Newspaper, 7 September 1884.

Neighbours:

<– 69 Lamb’s Conduit Street

67 Lamb’s Conduit Street –>

Mademoiselle Salaman, milliner and dress maker

Tags

clothing

Street View: 32
Address: 69 Lamb’s Conduit Street

It may have been “Mademoiselle Salaman” who made it into the Tallis Street View booklet as milliner and dress maker, but 69 Lamb’s Conduit Street was firmly in the hands of Isaac Salaman, an ostrich feather manufacturer. In 1838, it is his name that appears in the insurance records of the Sun Fire Office, and we also find him in the census records of 1841, 1851, and 1861, although in 1841 the censor mistakenly lists him as John. His wife Jane, however, seems to have been the milliner mentioned by Tallis. She is listed as such in the 1841 census, but the 1851 census no longer gives an occupation for her. In 1841, daughter Betsy is called a milliner’s apprentice, but by 1851 she, and her sister Rachel, have taken up feather making. There need not be any conflict here; the ladies of the household may very well have been making bonnets and such like with the feathers Isaac dealt in.

feather worker from Tabart’s Book of Trades, part 2 (1806)

Tabart explained that – of course – geese were used to obtain feathers, but ostrich feathers were the most valuable and

round feathers, such as the woman in the plate is at work upon, are composed of a number of smaller ones: if they are taken from the cock’s neck, they are neatly tied on wire with thread; but if they are small ostrich feathers, they are twisted round an upright wire. The single ostrich feathers have usually a small piece of wire at the end, for the purpose of fixing into the cap, turban, or hair. Women that work at this business can earn two shillings a day. Feathers make a considerable article of commerce, being used for beds, writing-pens, &c. Those imported from foreign countries pay a heavy duty to the revenue. There is also a duty upon ostrich feathers, both in the undressed as well as in the dressed state.

In other words, a luxury product worth stealing, and the Old Bailey records frequently mention the “unlawful possession” of them, but a thief who made it into the Salaman’s house was after other goods. In an Old Bailey case of March 1851, Betsy tells the judge that she lives with her father Isaac whom she describes as a feather-bed maker. Curtains, a shawl and some vases have disappeared from the house and Betsy claimed that, although the street door was usually open during the day, the inner door was kept shut. That may have been the case, but the accused managed to get his hands on the items anyway and since nobody believed his story how he obtained them, he was found guilty and sentenced to transportation.⁽¹⁾ In 1859 and 1860, the Salamans were short of hands and applied for “ostrich feather makers” with “two good hands” and in 1863 they were looking for an apprentice girl.⁽²⁾ Jane Salaman died in October 1863 and was buried at the Jewish Cemetery at Brompton.⁽³⁾

portrait that may or may not be of Isaac (Source: Blackden Trust). See the link for another portrait of a much younger Isaac(?)

The year after his wife’s death, Isaac dissolved the partnership he had with Betsy, Rachel and his two sons, Nathan and Myer, as ostrich feather manufacturers at 69, Lamb’s Conduit Street and at 45, Monkwell Street. The four children continued the business for a while, but in December of 1864, Betsy and Rachel withdrew from the partnership. By then 46, Monkwell Street had been added to the business premises.⁽⁴⁾ Nathan obtained the freedom of the City in 1866 and he gives his business address as 46 Monkwell Street and his occupation as ostrich feather manufacturer. Myer did the same in 1882, also from 46 Monkwell Street. The 1871 census saw Isaac, retired, and his son Nathan, ostrich feather manufacturer, at 19 Lamb’s Conduit Street. No, they did not move, there had simply been a renumbering of house numbers. Isaac died in May 1872 and was also buried at the Jewish Cemetery, Brompton. Nathan went to live with his sister Rachel and her husband Abraham Simmons, and stayed with them until his death in 1905.⁽⁵⁾

headstone on Isaac’s grave (Source – with grateful thanks: cemeteryscribes.com)

After the deaths in 1896 of Myer and Aaron, another of Isaac’s sons, one of the properties of Isaac’s estate was sold and a deed of settlement clearly lists the then beneficiaries of Isaac’s trust. It turned out that besides sons Nathan, Myer and Aaron, Isaac and Jane also had a son Abraham and besides Betsy and Rachel, a daughter Fanny, so four sons and three daughters in total. Betsy is named as Mrs Feist of 43 Rue Chateaudun, Paris, widow, Rachel as the wife of Abraham Simmons, but Fanny seems to have died before her brother as only her children are listed as beneficiaries.⁽⁶⁾ Myer had expanded the feather business his father had started and established offices and warehouses in London, Paris, New York & Buenos Aires, and depots in Cape Town, Port Elizabeth and Durban, so it should not come as a surprise that Betsy was living in Paris. The head office in London was named Monkwell House after Monkwell Street (see for a photograph here). The generous income of the family had over the years been invested into property, which turned out to be a very sensible move as feathers went rather out of fashion after Word War I and were by then only used for feather dusters, rather than as items to wear. By the 1920s, the Salamans were more or less the only ones left in London trading in feathers and they ceased trading altogether in 1943.⁽⁷⁾ And with the end of the Salaman feather business, this blog post also comes to an end.

French post card of a woman with ostrich feathers in her hat (Saved from Pinterest)

(1) Old Bailey case t1851003-759.
(2) Various advertisements in Lloyd’s Weekly Newspaper, 1859-1863.
(3) England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1863. Estate valued at under £3,000. Isaac was named as the executor.
(4) The London Gazette, 19 January 1864 and 6 December 1864.
(5) England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1905. Estate valued at over £198,000, later resworn at more than £374,000.
(6) London Metropolitan Archives, CLC/499/MS14743: Deed of settlement of proceeds of sale and stock, by Isaac Salaman, ostrich feather manufacturer, in favour of Nathan and Myer Salaman, 1864, with a deed of release and indemnity from the trusts of the 1864 settlement by Mrs Betsy Feist (nee Salaman) to Nathan Salaman and others, 1897. The LMA has more papers of the family, see here.
(7) T.M. Endelman, Anglo-Jewish Scientists and the Science of Race, in Jewish Social Studies 11/1 (2004), p. 52-92; S.A. Stein, Falling into Feathers: Jews and the Trans‐Atlantic Ostrich Feather Trade, in The Journal of Modern History 79/4 (2007), p. 772-812.

Neighbours:

<– 70 Lamb’s Conduit Street

68 Lamb’s Conduit Street –>

Alexander Cheffins, music seller

Tags

book trade, clothing, music

Street View: 65
Address: 4 Mortimer Street

The index to booklet 65 of the Street Views, lists Cheffin, music seller, at 4 Mortimer Street, but the elevation in the street plan gives the name of Morse, bookseller & stationer, so what is going on? The bookseller was Edward Morse, who could be found at number 4 in Pigot’s Directory of 1839 and in the 1841 census, but that is more or less the end of the story for Morse, as I have not been able to find out anything else about him; he must have had a very short career indeed. I will leave Mr. Morse for what he was and continue with Cheffin whose name was usually spelled with an ‘s’, so Cheffins. If you search online for Cheffins, you will invariably end up with information about Charles Frederic Cheffins, but that was Alexander’s brother. Charles was the elder of the brothers and baptised in December 1807 at St. Bride’s as the son of Richard and Jane Cheffins. Richard Cheffins worked for the New River Waterworks Company and was a member of the Pattenmakers’ Company, although he described himself as surveyor on the indenture document when he took Charles on as his apprentice in 1822. Charles had a glittering career as mechanical draughtsman, lithographer, cartographer, consulting engineer, and surveyor. He published many maps, of which the majority depicted new railways that were either proposed or being built.

London & Birmingham Railway Map, published by Chas. F. Cheffins, Surveyor, Engineering Draughtsman & Lithographer, 1835 (Source: Andrew Cox PBFA via Abebooks)

Charles became assistant to John Ericson who was working on a faster engine for the Liverpool and Manchester Railway. This connection with Liverpool brought Charles into contact with Lucinda Harrison Grey, whom he married there in October 1830, but the couple went to live in London and the 1841 census finds them at 9 Southampton Buildings, Holborn, the address Cheffins continued to use throughout his life. Only in the very last year of his life, 1861, after the death of his wife the year before, did he move to 15 Gloucester Terrace, Hyde Park.⁽¹⁾

portrait of Alexander (Source: Kateelliott50 at ancestry.co.uk)

But back to 4 Mortimer Street where brother Alexander Cheffins had his music business, or at least, he had for a short while. Alexander, as we saw, was the son of Richard and Jane Cheffins, and he too was baptised at St. Bride’s, on 17 July 1814. In February 1837, he married Ann Pattison at All Souls, St. Marylebone. The earliest I found him in Mortimer Street is on the baptism registration for their son Frederick who was baptised on 22 May 1838. Alexander gives his occupation as pianoforte maker, so he was definitely involved in the music industry. The next child for the couple to be baptised is Anne Louisa (21 Aug. 1839). Alexander is then listed as a musical instrument seller, but the address given is 15 Mortimer Street. That section of Mortimer Street is not listed by Tallis, so I cannot say who occupied number 15 before Cheffins. Pigot’s Directory of 1839 also lists Cheffins at number 15, so the occupation of number 4 was as short-lived as it was for Edward Morse. And so was their sojourn at number 15, as the 1841 census already reports them at Upper Rosoman Street, Clerkenwell. Alexander is then a “professor of music” (see the post on Anthony Brown, musical instrument maker, for other residents at that address). In 1844, the Cheffins family lives in Granville Square, in 1845-1851 in Weston Street, in 1852-1856 in Ampton Street, all the while with Alexander described as professor of music. But then, in 1859, when the youngest child, Percy, is baptised, the family is living at Brunswick Street and Alexander is suddenly described as surveyor.⁽²⁾ What happened? Was music no longer profitable enough? Or perhaps, he was not as musical as he made out? The only publication I found for him is a ballad, “The Happy Bride” which begins: They said she was married. The text is by J.H. Jewell and the music by Cheffins.⁽³⁾

Whatever the reason for Alexander’s change of profession, from 1859 onwards he is variously described as draughtsman or surveyor. In other words, he followed in his father and brother’s footsteps. And in 1865, he is given a provisional patent as a mechanical draughtsman for an invention to improve the construction of omnibuses.⁽⁴⁾ In 1871 and 1881 the census found him at Kentish Town. He died in 1885. Son Edwin had a similar job change as his father; in 1871 he was listed as a railway clerk, but in 1881 as a pianoforte tuner. Music, drawing and mechanics were apparently skills that went together in this particular family.

Milliner from Tabart’s Book of Trades, volume 2 (1806)

And 4 Mortimer Street? We saw Edward Morse there in the 1841 census and he had his name plastered on the front of the building in the Street View, but most of the building must have been overrun by the women of Anna Maria Hammans’s milliner’s business. The occupation of the building by the Hammanses pre- and post-dates that of Morse and Cheffin, so it seems that it was a multi-business property. The Hammanses were already there in early 1834, when Maria and Rebecca Hammans of 4 Mortimer Street dissolve their partnership, but possibly long before that.⁽⁵⁾ In 1841, Anna and at least nine women were living at the property, besides bookseller Morse, a porter and three gentlemen who were listed as independent. One of the milliners was Elizabeth Abrahall who is mentioned in Anna’s will of 1845 as her sister and who is left the business.⁽⁶⁾ The 1851 census does indeed see Elizabeth Abrahall at number 4 as dressmaker, although the 1851 Post Office Directory still has the name of Anna Maria Hammans for number 4. The 1856 Post Office Directory names the firm Mrs Elizabeth Hammans & Co. By 1861, however, her place has been taken by Eliza Johnson, a lodging house keeper. And is this the whole story? No, censuses and Tallis do not tell us everything. We know, for instance, that in 1848, one Jacques Robert Lavenne, heraldic engraver and fancy stationer, was listed as “late of no. 4” in the bankruptcy records. And the same goes for John James MacGregor, surgeon, who had to appear before the commissioners in 1855. What does seem clear is that 4 Mortimer Street, contrary to many long-running single-family businesses listed in the Street Views, had numerous occupants, as well as a resident family not mentioned in Tallis, in the years just before, during and after the period in which Tallis produced his booklets.

—————-
(1) Charles was buried at All Souls, Kensal Green 28 October 1861. England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1861. Estate valued at under £35,000. Sons Charles Richard and George Alexander were two of the executors.
(2) Children: Frederick, bapt. 22-05-1838; Anne Louisa, bapt. 21-8-1839; Henry Alexander, bapt. 31-10-1841; Richard Albert, bapt. 8-9-1844; Julia, bapt. 8-11-1845; Herbert George, bapt. 23-05-1852; Edwin John, bapt. 17-9-1854; Alfred Courtenay, bapt. 8-6-1856; and Percy Frank, bapt. 28-8-1859.
(3) British Library music collection H.282.o.(8).
(4) Patent Office, Chronological and Descriptive Index of Patents, Cheffins, 27th July 1865.
(5) The Hammanses came from Garford, Berkshire. Rebecca, Maria, Anna Maria and Elizabeth were all daughters of William Hammans and his wife Elizabeth.
(6) PROB 11/2022/350. Elizabeth Hammans had married John Abrahall by licence on 28 July 1828.

Neighbours:

<– 5 Mortimer Street

3 Mortimer Street –>

Everington & Graham, India shawl warehouse

Tags

clothing

Street Views: 6 and 15 Suppl.
Address: 10 Ludgate Street

On 12 February 1812, William Everington, linen draper, insured 10 Ludgate Street with the Sun Fire Office. A few months earlier, in September 1811, the partnership between Robert and John Waithman of Fleet Street and William Everington had been dissolved. And in 1840, evidence is given by John Francis, a silk manufacturer of Norwich, who stated that he had made shawls for 20 or 30 years and also made them “for Everington when he was in company with Waithman”.⁽¹⁾ I have no absolute proof that the Everington who was the partner of the Waithmans and who ordered shawls from Mr. Francis and the Everington who insured 10 Ludgate Street are the same – there are various William Everingtons around at that time – but it seems likely. [Postscript: Have since found out from William Ablett’s Reminiscences of an Old Draper (1876) that “Everington originally had been a lad occupying a very humble position in the establishment of Robert Waithman, who made him his partner; but on the occasion of the elder Waithman wishing to take his son into partnership also, Mr. Everington would not agree to the arrangement, and the partnership … was dissolved”. Ablett also says that to avoid the heavy import duty on India shawls, ladies coming from abroad would bring as many as they could as their personal clothing, “which they would sell to Everington, who had paid great attention to this part of the business”.]

trade card (Source: British Museum Collection)

Everington advertised in 1817 with Irish linens that he had obtained cheaply because of “the great depression in the price of Irish linens”.⁽²⁾ And two years later he has bought up “the whole of the elegant Cachemere Shawls, sent to her Majesty as presents from the different Foreign Courts”. The shawls had been Queen Charlotte’s who had died in November 1818.⁽³⁾ Things went well for Everington as in 1834, the Sun Fire insurance records suddenly hve him of 9 and 10 Ludgate Street. If we compare the frontage of the shop in the bill head below with the elevations Tallis depicted for the shop, you can see the difference. It is telling that number 9 (the right-hand side of the building in the Tallis elevations) has disappeared from the Tallis Index as if completely incorporated into Everington’s number 10.

bill head (Source: British Museum Collection)

elevation in the 1847 Supplement

Somewhere around 1839 or 1840, Everington must have entered into a partnership with John Graham as advertisements start to appear with both their names and Tallis has their joint names in index of the 1839/40 edition of his Street Views, although the elevation just shows the name of Everington. And in 1840 Nathaniel Whittock also depicts the shop with just the name of Everington. Whittock says that, despite the fact that the ceiling is low inside the old building,

the projector of this front exercised considerable ingenuity and skill in raising the windows so much above the brestsummer⁽⁴⁾, and adding to their light and elegant effect by a concave ceiling. The height of this front is obtained by intrenching on the windows of the first floor, yet by a skilful alteration of their form, they do not appear unsightly. The whole front is coloured in imitation of white-veined marble; the name and ornaments are gilt.

Plate XVIII of N. Whittock’s On the Construction and Decoration of the Shop Fronts of London (1840)

In the 1841 census, William Everington, then said to be 60 years old, is still living above the shop with 5 male assistants, 2 male porters, one male servant and 3 female servants. But at the end of 1842, the partnership between Everington and Graham is dissolved with Graham to continue the business.⁽⁵⁾ Everington retires and can be found at Gloucester Terrace in the 1851 census. He died in 1860.⁽⁶⁾

At some point John Graham may have entered into a partnership with George Smith. That partnership was quickly dissolved again, and in an 1845 advertisement George Smith describes himself as ‘late Graham and Smith, successors to Everington’ and now trading from 32 Ludgate Hill, the shop previously occupied by Rundell and Bridge.⁽⁷⁾ The following year, Smith had a very unusual visitor in his shop: a large Durham cow came in, walked round the shop and exited through another door without doing any damage to the china jars and glass on display.⁽⁸⁾ The Era of 29 August 1847 relates a story about an American lady who bought a shawl from the “ruination shop of Everington on Ludgate Hill” which elicited smirks from passers-by as she had failed to remove the price ticket, but the 1851 and 1861 censusus still see John Graham, his family, and a large workforce, living at 9 & 10 Ludgate Street. As no house number is given in the notice about the end of the partnership, nor in the story about the American, nor in the advertisements by Smith, these stories may have been about another Everington, as there were more Everingtons trading in the area.

Advertisement in Street View 6

In 1870, John Graham’s son, John junior, described as a shawl warehouseman, married Amy Attenborough. She was the daughter of Robert Attenborough, the pawn broker who featured in a previous post. The couple had two daughters, but all was not well. In 1875, divorce proceedings were started in which Amy, who was then living with her father again, claims that John threw a bottle of wine at her and that he, on various occasions, had hit her and that she had therefore left him. As can be expected, Graham denied the allegations and alleged that Amy was “a woman of extravagant habits and violent temper” who “habitually neglected her children and her household duties”, and that she was the one doing the hitting. And to top it all, she also had an affair with one Petrocochino, something Petrocochino and Amy denied. Amy continued to call herself Amy Graham, at least she did in the 1881 census when she is still living with her father, and given as ‘unmarried’. John junior and his father can be found at Brockhill Farm, Warfield, Berkshire, in the 1881 census (Google Street View here). John senior is listed as a retired shawl merchant and John junior, ‘unmarried’, is now a farmer, employing 4 labourers and a boy. In the 1891 census, Amy is still living with her father at 56 Avenue Rd, claiming to be a widow.

The Graphic, 9 February 1878

In 1878, John Graham senior had sold off his stock and Peter Robinson, a linen draper in Oxford Street, bought the whole lot to sell on again. Two of Robinson’s sons had also married Attenborough girls, but I am afraid these marriages ended in divorce as well; more on that in the forthcoming post on Robinson.⁽⁹⁾

The research on this post once again found unexpected links between London shopkeepers, an aspect of this blog that continues to amaze me and had not expected at all when I first started writing. I hope to show more interconnections in the future.

———————–
(1) Parliamentary Papers 1780-1849, Volume 8: Report from the Select Committee on East India Produce, 1840.
(2) The Morning Chronicle, 6 January 1817.
(3) The Morning Chronicle, 23 February 1819.
(4) Brestsummer is a variation of bressummer ‎(plural bressummers), a term used in architecture for a large, horizontal, supporting beam which bears the weight of a wall starting on a first or higher floor.
(5) The London Gazette, 6 January 1843.
(6) England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1860. Estate valued at under £180,000.
(7) The London Gazette, 22 October, 1844; The Examiner, 28 June 1845.
(8) Glasgow Herald, 16 February 1846.
(9) Frank Robinson married Catherine, daughter of James Attenborough; his brother Peter married Fanny, the sister of Amy. Both left their wives and established illegitimate families with other women. I am grateful to Nick Thomson for supplying the information on the Graham/Robinson/Attenborough links.

Neighbours:

<– 11 Ludgate Street

8 Ludgate Street –>

William Spratswill, tailor and draper

Tags

clothing

Street View: 3
Address: 36 Holborn Hill

It does not occur all that often in the Tallis Street Views that the name of the shop does not indicate the name of the owner, but in this case, the Spratswill that gave his name to the draper’s shop was long dead by the time Tallis came round to depict it. William Spratswill (sometimes given as Spratswell) started trading in Holborn in 1819, not yet at number 36, but at number 52. The land tax records find him there from 1819 to 1825 when he moved to premises a little closer to Fetter Lane. Number 36 Holborn Hill was the third house from the corner with Fetter Lane and was severely damaged not long after Spratswill moved in. In April 1825, a fire broke out which was first discovered at Mr. Davis’s, a perfumer, who had his shop at number 38. Next door, number 39, the premises of Mr. Gray, seedsman, also caught fire and it spread on the east side of Davis’s towards Fetter Lane, first to Mr. Harwood’s, a turner at number 37, then to Spratswill’s and finally to trunk maker Pratt’s at number 35. According to the newspaper report, the shops of Gray, Davis and Harwood (numbers 37-39) were totally destroyed, Spratswill’s partly and the back of all the houses mentioned were burnt. A fireman was seriously injured when he fell from Mr. Davis’s shop; he had contusions on the head and a broken thigh. Other people received injuries from falling rubble.⁽¹⁾ The Land Tax records for 1825 clearly show the affected buildings.

Situation in 1799 when Horwood published his map. Spratswill’s indicated by a red arrow

Spratswill died in May 1828, just 43 years old. He left most of his worldly goods to his widow Mary, but whether she continued the shop herself is doubtful. I think it was put in the hands of others and she lived on the income of invested money as she said in her will (she died in 1851) that her share and interest of the money held by the executors of her husband’s estate are to go to the three children of her brother Benjamin Figgins. She names John Wade of Winchmore Hill one of the executors.⁽²⁾ In 1830, the shop got broken into – it is still described as “of Mr. Spratswill”, by the way – and goods were taken to the value of £100. The thieves gained access to a cellar-flap which had not been secured by the carpenter who had altered it after a new pavement had been laid. A reward was offered for the apprehension of the thieves, but whether they were caught …..?⁽³⁾

Daily News 5 December 1853

From 1831 onwards, John Wade is mentioned as the proprietor of 36 Holborn Hill in the Land Tax records, but other resources still give the name of Spratswill, such as Pigot’s 1839 Directory. J. Wade & Son are given at 57 Holborn Hill, just as Tallis was to do. The son is William Benjamin who obtained his freedom of the City by redemption on 24 March 1846 and is then listed as tailor of Winchmore Hill and 57 Holborn Hill. Both number 36 and number 57 continue to be listed for the Wades in the Land Tax records, but number 36 is always referred to as Spratswill’s in advertisements and directories. That we are definitely talking about the same John Wade is proven by an Old Bailey Case of 1833 where Benjamin Wade gives evidence in a case of theft and where he says “I live on Holborn-hill; I carry on business under the name of Spratswell”.⁽⁴⁾ More on the Wades in a future post on number 57.

Punch used Spratswill’s as an example in depicting politicians ‘carrying other people’s bills’

In the tax records for 1866, number 36 still has the name of Wade as the proprietor, but also a note that the shop was empty. And not just number 36, but also numbers 34, 35 and 37. A year later, an advertisement in The Economist announces that Charles Meeking and Co have opened number 36 “for the sale of our new stock of mantles and cloaks”. The 1867 tax records do indeed show Meeking at numbers 34 to 36. Numbers 37-39 are in the possession of the City and vacant. The 1866 changes had all to do with the construction of Holborn Circus. Many shops were issued with a compulsory purchase order and moved out, but Charles Meeking saw an opportunity and bought up some of the empty properties. The October 1867 minutes of the proceedings of the Metropolitan Board show that surveyor Rawlinson Parkinson notified the Board that the three buildings at 34-36 Holborn Hill were to be altered under his supervision. Meeking seems to have bought up the whole block eventually and extended his own business, which had started at number 62, to more or less encompass all the shops from Holborn Circus to Fetter Lane. The store was later taken over by Thomas Wallis. More on them in a future post on number 62.

trade card. Do notice the window display continuing into the alley on the left-hand side of the building (Source: British Museum)

(1) The Examiner, 24 April 1824.
(2) PROB 11/1742/33 (William) and PROB 11/2144/90 (Mary).
(3) A Political Compendium, 18 December 1830.
(4) Old Bailey case t18330103-94.

Neighbours:

<– 37 Holborn Hill

35 Holborn Hill –>

Ebenezer Flint, hosier

Tags

clothing

Street View: 6
Address: 48 Ludgate Hill

Tallis lists Mr. Flint, according to the index a hosier and general outfitter, on the corner of Ludgate Hill and Farringdon Street, but as the elevation tells us, Flint had global ideas and described his shop as hosiery and shirt warehouse that outfitted to India. We will get back to Flint shortly, but an email from Jim Hunn mentioned a previous occupant of 48 Ludgate Hill and we will look at that shopkeeper first.

From 1802 to 1805, Christian August Gottlieb Göde (1774-1812), a lawyer, was attached to a legation that visited Britain. He wrote down his thoughts on what he saw during this visit in England, Wales, Irland und Schottland: Erinnerungen an Natur und Kunst aus einer Reise and in volume 1 he remarked that “in the vicinity of Ludgate-hill, the house of one S–, who has amassed a fortune of forty thousand pounds by selling razors, is daubed with large capitals three feet high, acquainting the public, that ‘the most excellent and superb patent razors are sold here'” (translation by Thomas Horne, 1821 edition). In the German original, however, we can read that “one S–” is in fact a mister Shrop. Something must have gone wrong when Göde’s diary was printed as no Shrop has come to light, but Charles Sharp did sell razors on Ludgate Hill at the time Göde was in London, so we can assume that is whom he meant.

Sharp used to have his shop at 131 Fleet Street and 67 Cornhill, but from 1794 onwards we find him at 48 Ludgate Hill.⁽¹⁾ Advertisements for Sharp in various newspapers promote his concave razors which were made from the very best steel and were so good that others attempted to pass inferior razors off as Sharp’s. Sharp warns the public that his razors are only sold from his shop and have the name Sharp stamped on the blade. But razors were not all he sold as all manner of perfumery articles, shaving cases and tooth brushes could be had in his shop.⁽²⁾ An advertisement of 1795 lists Sharp as one of the addresses where Dr. Daniel Johntenoco’s original Spanish Aromatic Dentifrice could be bought. This ‘dentifrice’ was a type of tooth powder that allegedly fastened loose teeth, cured gumboils, cleansed the mouth and breath, and only cost 1s. 2d.⁽³⁾ This last advertisement also reveals that Sharp was “Perfumer to His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales”, but he was more.

As I said at the beginning of this post, Jim Hunn sent me information on Sharp as he owns a portable desk box that was supplied by Sharp. It has three different labels which show that Sharp was not just a perfumer who supplied razors, but was also a cutler and dealt in portable desks, dressing cases, cork screws, snuffers and pocket books. One of the labels is for M. Sharp, but what relation he or she was to Charles remains unclear. I am most grateful to Jim for sending me photographs of his desk and the attached labels.

With grateful thanks to Jim Hunn for the photographs

Sharp was certainly still at number 48 in 1811 when his address was used as the receiving office for replies to an advertisement of a young man looking for work in the brewery sector⁽⁴⁾, but he must have stopped his perfumery business soon after that, as from 1814 to 1816 Charles Wigley used the address for his music business.⁽⁵⁾ Kent’s Directory of 1823 and Pigot’s of 1825-26 have a George Longstaff, hosier, at number 48, but on an engraving by T.H. Shepherd of Ludgate Hill, which is dated 1830, we can see the premises on the corner with Farringdon Street, on the left-hand side of the picture, with the name of Palmer above the window.

T. Barber after T.H. Shepherd, Ludgate Hill, 1830 © British Museum

The side of the building in Farringdon Street was far more substantial than the front on Ludgate Hill as depicted in the elevation above this post. The Ludgate Hill side had only a width of one window, but the Farringdon side had five windows. The second edition of the Tallis Street Views, published in ±1847, shows both sides of the building and gives a far better idea of the size. It also shows that Flint was importing silk handkerchiefs from the East.

The Land Tax records of 1826 list a William Palmer at number 48 and he is still there in 1837, but in 1838, Ebenezer Flint is the one paying the tax. He must have moved in sometime in 1837, as we first find his name in that year when he appears as the owner of 63 yards of flannel, stolen from his shop on the corner of Ludgate Hill, which must be number 48.⁽⁶⁾ In an advertisement that Flint had in the Tallis Street View booklet he claims that his business had been established for 40 years, but that must have been at another address and with another proprietor. When Ebenezer acquired the freedom of the City in 1841 by redemption (that is, by paying a fine for not following the usual course of an apprenticeship) his father is named as Thomas Flint of Cambridge Street, Westminster, house painter, so whoever had the hosiery business before Ebenezer, it was unlikely to have been his father. And Ebenezer was only born in 1813, so was certainly not the one to start the business and even if we count the other hosiers that came before him (Palmer and Longstaff), the years still do not add up to forty.

Advertisement in Tallis’s Street View

In 1839 The Charter takes issue with an advertisement Flint had apparently put in the newspapers for ‘a young man of religious habits to take the lead of a hosiery and outfitting business’. The Charter had a problem with the word ‘religious’ and wonders what Flint means.⁽⁷⁾ Did he mean a precise religion, or would any religion do? It is a bit of silly stop-gap journalism by The Charter, but at least it gives us an idea of Flint’s values.

Advertisement in The Era, 30 July 1848

Unfortunately, Flint got into financial difficulties and a bankruptcy case was started against him in 1840.⁽⁸⁾ He managed to hang on, though, and could be found at number 48 in the 1841 census. In the 1851 census, he is residing at 39 Kings Road, Brighton, with his wife Harriet. And the Post Office Directory of 1852 shows him at both Brighton and Ludgate Hill as hosier. The 1851 Land Tax records for Ludgate Hill still show his name, but in early 1853, he can be found with his wife and their three children on the Ganges which left Dartmouth on the 23 of March, bound for Melbourne. They arrived there on 22 June and Flint’s was one of the names under an advertisement in the Australian Argus in which captain Robert Deas of the Ganges is heartily thanked for his kindness. There is reference to Deas’s ‘delicate position’, but what they mean by that is not made clear. What is clear, however, is that the Flints chose a new life on the other side of the world.

Flint’s name appears in Clara Aspinall’s Three Years in Melbourne as the secretary of the Mechanics’ Institute, whom she describes as “the right man in the right place” and “nothing can exceed the unwearied diligence with which he calls, and calls, and calls again, once, twice, and thrice in the day, if necessary, on any gentleman whom he has made up his mind is the fit and proper person to deliver the next lecture”. I am sure the inhabitants of Melbourne sometimes preferred to be ‘not at home’ on occasion, but Flint apparently did his best for the institute. Sometime before 1881 Ebenezer and Harriet returned to England and at the time of the 1881 census could be found at Stoney Lane, Lewisham. Ebenezer died in 1889 and when probate was granted, Harriet could be found in Brighton once again.⁽⁹⁾

(1) The Directory of London, Westminster & Southwark, 1794.
(2) The Times, 14 May 1785.
(3) The Morning Chronicle, 28 March 1795.
(4) The Morning Chronicle, 9 February 1811.
(5) C. Humphries and W.C. Smith, Music Publishing in the British Isles, 1970.
(6) Old Bailey case t18371127-9.
(7) The Charter, 10 March 1839.
(8) The London Gazette, 27 March 1840.
(9) England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1889. Estate valued at £284.

Neighbours:

<– 1 Farringdon Street

47 Ludgate Hill –>

Richard Nelson Reeve, mercer

Tags

clothing

Street View: 43
Address: 1 Skinner Street

The West India Merchants and Planters had established a coffee outlet for their produce at 2 Skinner Street with William Deacon as the proprietor, and the establishment was hence called Deacon & Co’s Coffee Mart. William died in 1815, but other Deacons continued the business. Next door, at number 1, the Colonial Coffee House had been established as part of the Coffee Mart. A critical article in The Scourge, or, Monthly Expositor of Imposture and Folly (volume 3, 1811), suggesting improper behaviour at coffee houses such as the Colonial, quoted an advertisement for the coffee house in which it was said to be “handsomely fitted up, for the accommodation of the public, and also with the view of promoting the welfare of the British coffee and sugar plantations”. Coffee &c for breakfast was to cost 1s and a single cup 6d. Newspapers were to be provided and a subscription room upstairs was to be opened “liberally supplied with magazines, reviews, gazettes, papers, Lloyd’s list, price current, shipping intelligence, etc”. The ladies were provided with a separate sitting room. The “vile insinuations” that the coffee house was only established to “promote vice and immorality” were strongly objected to by “a subscriber” in the next instalment of the magazine and no more was heard of the allegations.

The Morning Chronicle, 21 January 1820.

When Samuel Deacon applied for a wine licence for his ‘hotel’ in 1828, a recommendation was filed “testifying to the respectability of Mr. Deacon’s character, to the perfect correctness of the manner in which the house had been hitherto conducted and the utility of such a house in the neighbourhood”.⁽¹⁾ So the “vile insinuations” of before seemed to have been just that, insinuations. The wine licence was, however, denied, not on moral grounds, but on bureaucratic ones: the absence of required signatures and for following the wrong procedure. Whether Deacon was fed up with having his licence refused or whether it was for other reasons, the fact is that in late 1831, he announced that he was removing the establishment to Walbrook, near the Mansion House.⁽²⁾

Trade card c. 1812 (Source: British Museum)

After the removal of Deacon & Co, the premises were once again used as two separate houses and Tallis found George Hodson, a woollen draper, at number 2 and Richard Nelson Reeve, “mans [sic] mercer” at number 1. Tallis is one of the few references I found for Reeve as a mercer; in most other sources he is listed as a woollen draper. In February 1838, Richard Nelson Reeve acquired the freedom of the City of London by redemption (that is, by paying for the privilege rather than through a 7-year apprenticeship) and on the registration papers he is said to be the 32-year old son of William Reeve, of Epsom, Surrey, a deceased victualler. His address is given as 1 Skinner Street, but he had been at that address well before he obtained his Freedom of the City. He could be found there at least as early as May 1837 when he took out an insurance policy for the premises with the Sun Fire Office. The 1841 census finds Richard, his wife Emma, and two female servants on the premises.⁽³⁾ Not all servants lived above the shop as one Richard Andrew Tackley testifies in an Old Bailey case that he is in the employ of Reeve, but he is not listed in the census for Skinner Street.⁽⁴⁾

Another Old Bailey case tells us a bit more about Reeve’s business and how fortunes can change. In 1843, one Henry Wilson is indicted for embezzlement. Reeve testifies that Wilson had been in his employ as “country traveller” and was supposed to enter the money received into the cash book and hand the money to Reeve. One Elbourn, a draper from Amersham, Bucks, had paid Wilson three lots of money (£5, £10, and £10), but Wilson had only accounted to Reeve for £4, £5 and £5. When cross-examined, Reeve said that in the past Wilson had traded on his own account in Sun Street, Bishopsgate, and that Reeve had been one of this employees. But after a robbery in which Wilson lost a lot of money, he had been obliged to go into service. He had been with Reeve for the past six years and had been paid £200 a year + travelling expenses. Reeve also says that his own business “is now very extensive”. Wilson received a good character and was recommended for mercy. He was confined for four months, which was indeed fairly lenient, considering that other thieves were condemned to death or transported to the colonies for having stolen far less.⁽⁵⁾

Richard Nelson’s business may have been “very extensive” in 1843, it was not to last. He is declared a bankrupt in 1848 and then described as of Clerkenwell Green, licensed victualler, trader, dealer and chapman.⁽⁶⁾ He did receive a licence and could continue trading. The 1848 Post Office Directory still lists him as woollen draper at 1 Skinner Street and as the proprietor of the Crown tavern on Clerkenwell Green, but a subsequent notice in The London Gazette of 19 October 1849, gives him as formerly of the Crown tavern, then of 25 Peyton Place, Walworth (out of business), and now of 6 High Street, Newington Butts, town traveller. In other words, what happened to his former employer Wilson, now happened to him. Reeve tried to re-establish his business, but in September 1851 he had to assign all his property to two trustees who were to satisfy the creditors with the proceeds.⁽⁷⁾ The 1851 census finds Richard and Emma in Islington. Richard is described as woollen traveller.

Daily News, 6 September 1876

In 1876, Richard’s name comes up as a witness in a case of fraud where a man and a woman had pretended to be running a tailor’s business. After paying one small order promptly at Reeve’s employers, Messrs. Powell and Caton of 13 Newgate Street, no doubt just to establish their credibility, the thieves ordered several larger lots which were never paid for and when Reeve went to their shop, it was empty and the culprits had absconded.⁽⁸⁾ In the 1881 census, Reeve, by then a widower, is listed as “retired merchant” and living at the almshouse at Stanstead College, Idsworth, on the Hampshire/Sussex border.⁽⁹⁾ He died in 1892.

————————–
(1) The Morning Chronicle, 13 December 1828.
(2) The Athenaeum, 17 December 1831.
(3) Richard had married Emma Kentfield on 16 May 1829 at St. Nicholas, Brighton.
(4) Old Bailey case t18411025-2737.
(5) Old Bailey case t18430821-2357.
(6) The London Gazette, 4 January 1848.
(7) The London Gazette, 21 November 1851.
(8) Daily News, 6 September 1876.
(9) From A History of the County of Hampshire, Volume 3. (Originally published by Victoria County History, London, 1908): Stanstead College, was founded by Mr. Charles Dixon, of Stanstead Park (Suss.), by deed 1852, for the support and benefit of decayed merchants of London, Liverpool, or Bristol, being members of the Church of England.

Neighbours:

<– 2 Skinner Street

1 Farringdon Street –>