Use pull down menus above to navigate the site.
|
|
Gildersome's Gentleman Burglar © Charles Soderlund 2017
|
In Shrewsbury, a dropped hat and black mask at the scene of a jewelry shop break-in led police to a public house where a gentleman had returned the previous evening without his hat. Immediately he became a suspect and his description led police to a suburb of London and a man called Robert Graham. A search of Graham's home revealed the following stolen items:
|
|
|
3 sets of jeweller's scales.
3 pairs of opera glasses. 12 lady's dress rings with gold. cases set with various stones. 13 gold cases set with various stones. 3 rings in cases. 11 empty jewel cases. 1 tankard, monogram "J.E.T. 1 childs metal mug. 1 large silver snuff box, Russian scene back and front. 1 lady's gold semi-hunter watch. 42 sets movements (watch & clock). 1 silver stop watch. 1 oxidized watch. 1 lady's gold demi-hunter. 1 lady's oxidized case & movements. A quantity of coins. 1 white metal spirit flask. 1 silver knife, fork and spoon. 1 gold bangle. Set nine rubies and pearls. 1 box containing a quantity of watch glasses and rims. 1 small box containing a quantity of stones, various. 3 enamelled photographs, miniatures. 3 metal pencil cases. 1 metal scent bottle. 1 cameo bracelet. 1 Jubilee souvenir, 1837. 1 gilt bracelet. 19 brooches, various. 1 steel chain bracelet (with coins) 1 metal muff chain. 1 locket, hair and photo inside. 8 scarf pins, various. 6 charms. 1 lady's white metal neck chain. 1 lady's gilt watch chain. 2 metal rings. |
1 charm, inscribed.
1 gold amber cigarette-holder. 1 metal smelling locket. 3 paste studs. 1 eyeglass chain. 1 book of Hall marks. 2 watchmaker's eyeglasses. 1 lady's dress ring, set 5 stones. 1 silver lever watch. 1 metal chain. 1 knife. 1 watchmaker's eyeglass. 1 watch key. 1 pair tweezers. 9 keys on rings. 1 envelope containing 35 coins. 2 lady's muff chains. 1 gold semi-hunter watch. 1 gold & platinum small link chain. 1 spade guinea. 1 pencil case. 1 cigarette-holder in case. 10 keys on ring. 1 massive diamond ring, set 3 stones. 1 single stone diamond ring, claw setting. 1 diamond horsehead ring. Also 52 pawntickets to the following items: A violin and 2 bows, in case. 1 small diamond & topaz spray. 1 gold albert, 3 chain pattern. 1 small gold pin set ruby & 4 pearls. 1 umbrella, hazel wood handle. 1 gold bar brooch, with small diamond in centre. 2 diamond marquise rings set sapphires and rubies. 1 gold keyless Geneva watch. |
1 gold double pattern curb
albert. 1 silver lever watch, open face. 1 silver bracelet. 1 small gold pencil case bloodstone at end. 1 boat shaped gold brooch. 1 gold albert. 1 silver open face lever. 1 silver keyless open face watch. 1 gold pin 4 diamond points, ruby in centre. 12 pocket knives Atkinson & Son. 3 horshoe pattern studs. 1 lady's small silver watch. 1 gold keyless watch. 1 gold albert albert, long links. 1 small oxidized watch. 1 black brooch attached 2 sapphires. 1 massive gold albert, curb pattern, gold seal with bloodstone. 1 lady's gold ring set 3 opals and 6 rose diamonds. 1 silver bracelet, 2 in. wide. 1 silver necklet and locket. 1 diamond and gold pin. 1 gold medal. 1 white silk figured neck wrap. 1 lady's half hoop ring set sapphires, 5 stones. 2 lady's gold chains. 1 silver match-box. 2 sapphires. 1 silver oval snuff box. 1 9-ct. gold double knot ring. 1 lady's open face silver watch. 1 lady's 18-ct. gold ring set 5 pearls. 1 fancy gold bar brooch. 1 silver lady's Geneva watch. 1 lady's gold link chain. ¹ |
Robert Graham was just an alias, one of many. In reality, this obsessed jewelry collector was Arthur Brook, born about 1868 in Gildersome. In his day, Brook became one of the best known of the so called "Gentleman Bandits" and a role model for the fictional sophisticated cat burglars to come.
Arthur's parents were William Brook, a joiner and cabinet maker from Gomersal, and Elizabeth White of Gildersome. For about 20 years the family lived in a house on Town Street, across from Peggy Tub Row. Later, around 1876, they moved to Leeds. It was there that Arthur, aged 9, had his first encounter with the law when he tried to sell a stolen a coat, this resulted in a month's imprisonment.² His lesson was apparently not learned because in November of 1880 he appeared in court again.
"AN EXTRAORDINARY JUVENILE OFFENDER
Arthur Brooke, a boy aged twelve years, who lives with his parents in Hartley Hill, North Street, was charged before Mr Bruce yesterday with stealing £15 10s. from the grocer shop of Mr Samuel Summer, in Ellerby Lane. On the 3rd and again on the 4th instant a little boy named Ibbotson said the prisoner climbed over the top of a house near the prosecutor's shop, and returned the same way. Each time the prisoner had some money in his possession when he returned, and he told Ibbotson that a woman had given it to him for his father. Afterwards Ibbotson saw the prisoner buy two watches at a shop in New Briggate -- one of which he gave 30s. and for the other 21s. One of these watches the prisoner smashed in pieces, "because he said, it was late." When apprehended and charged with the robbery by Detective-officer Joss, the prisoner, crying, said, "I did it, but if you would let me off this time I will never do it again." The officer received one of the watches from the boy's father. The prisoner, in reply to Mr Bruce said, "I only got £12." The Prisoner's father said he carried on business as a joiner in King's Arms Yard, Lowerhead Row, and that he had six children. Mr Bruce said that was one of the type of juvenile offenders with which magistrates sometimes had difficulties in dealing. But here was a boy who would be only thirteen years old next birthday who had broken into a shop on two successive days, had taken a lad younger than himself to watch him, and had given him part of the stolen property. That, the prisoner had evinced all the dexterity of an accomplished shopbreaker and thief. It might be quite wrong to send such a boy to prison, and to do so would probably do him no good; therefore he must be dealt with in such a way as would prevent him from going to gaol. Could anyone doubt that the prisoner had corrupted the other boy? He did not know of any practiced thief forty or fifty years old who could have committed a more daring robbery than that. He did not usually send a boy to the reformatory for a first offence, considering with what premeditation the prisoner had committed this robbery, together with all the circumstances, he could not do other that send him to prison for ten days, and afterwards to a certified reformatory school for five years." (Leeds Intelligencer 20 Nov 1880)
Arthur's parents were William Brook, a joiner and cabinet maker from Gomersal, and Elizabeth White of Gildersome. For about 20 years the family lived in a house on Town Street, across from Peggy Tub Row. Later, around 1876, they moved to Leeds. It was there that Arthur, aged 9, had his first encounter with the law when he tried to sell a stolen a coat, this resulted in a month's imprisonment.² His lesson was apparently not learned because in November of 1880 he appeared in court again.
"AN EXTRAORDINARY JUVENILE OFFENDER
Arthur Brooke, a boy aged twelve years, who lives with his parents in Hartley Hill, North Street, was charged before Mr Bruce yesterday with stealing £15 10s. from the grocer shop of Mr Samuel Summer, in Ellerby Lane. On the 3rd and again on the 4th instant a little boy named Ibbotson said the prisoner climbed over the top of a house near the prosecutor's shop, and returned the same way. Each time the prisoner had some money in his possession when he returned, and he told Ibbotson that a woman had given it to him for his father. Afterwards Ibbotson saw the prisoner buy two watches at a shop in New Briggate -- one of which he gave 30s. and for the other 21s. One of these watches the prisoner smashed in pieces, "because he said, it was late." When apprehended and charged with the robbery by Detective-officer Joss, the prisoner, crying, said, "I did it, but if you would let me off this time I will never do it again." The officer received one of the watches from the boy's father. The prisoner, in reply to Mr Bruce said, "I only got £12." The Prisoner's father said he carried on business as a joiner in King's Arms Yard, Lowerhead Row, and that he had six children. Mr Bruce said that was one of the type of juvenile offenders with which magistrates sometimes had difficulties in dealing. But here was a boy who would be only thirteen years old next birthday who had broken into a shop on two successive days, had taken a lad younger than himself to watch him, and had given him part of the stolen property. That, the prisoner had evinced all the dexterity of an accomplished shopbreaker and thief. It might be quite wrong to send such a boy to prison, and to do so would probably do him no good; therefore he must be dealt with in such a way as would prevent him from going to gaol. Could anyone doubt that the prisoner had corrupted the other boy? He did not know of any practiced thief forty or fifty years old who could have committed a more daring robbery than that. He did not usually send a boy to the reformatory for a first offence, considering with what premeditation the prisoner had committed this robbery, together with all the circumstances, he could not do other that send him to prison for ten days, and afterwards to a certified reformatory school for five years." (Leeds Intelligencer 20 Nov 1880)
It's safe to assume that Brook received the bulk of his education during his five year stretch at the reformatory school, where he learned the trade of joinery, like his father. His general education must have been of a fair quality, as we shall see later, but again, the one lesson he failed to learn was to stick to the straight and narrow. In August of 1887, Brook and two other lads were arrested for breaking into a pawnbroker's shop on Woodhouse Lane and stealing items of jewelry, "including three rings, two silver lever watches, a gold albert and a gold locket." ³ The miscreants had entered through a second storey window. The owner had been burgled in the past and was missing was over £100 of jewellery which included 35 watches, a number rings, gold chains and alberts etc. The trio were found guilty of breaking and entering and sentenced in October. The two accomplices received six months but Brook, clearly the ringleader, got nine months. ⁴ What happened to the missing loot? None can say.
|
1899, the year of the arrest mentioned at the top of the page, marked the beginning of Brook's nationwide notoriety. Before that, between the 1887 conviction and 1899, he began by working with gangs, mostly in Yorkshire or its surroundings but later his territory spread to include Wales, the Midlands and eventually all of England. During this period he was in and out of gaol or prison but seemed to regard it as an occupational hazard and took it in stride. Over time he polished his technique and hit only jewellers or pawnbrokers, restricting his take to the highly priced gold and gems. When it came to acrobatic agility and climbing skills, there appeared to be no equal. There was no roof he couldn't access or upper floor window he couldn't enter. Brook earned the nick-name 'Sipder' after a fictional character of the same ilk. As he matured, he cultivated his public persona and eventually became adept at projecting the manners and air of a gentleman. Brook gave up working with gangs and worked alone or with one assistant, this lessened the chance of arrest caused by bungling or talkative accomplices. No one knows how much wealth he accumulated during this era but it's estimated that over his 40 year career only 20% of his ill-gotten gains were recovered by the police. By the time 1899 rolled around he was 'wanted' at Swansea, Cardiff, Northampton and Leeds.⁵ and police suspected him of dozens of other robberies but lacked direct evidence. Despite whatever alias he happened to be using at the moment, the police recognized a robbery committed by Arthur Brook because of its familiar, yet specific, modus operandi.
|
The Police Gazette 15 Mar 1895
|
The aforementioned 1899 arrest happened in Shrewsbury but at the time Brook, alias Robert Graham, lived with a wife and three children in a well to do neighborhood of Holloway, north of London proper. Newspaper reports regarding the incident caused such a stir throughout the country that Robert Graham's name (Brook) was in every newspaper and on everybody's lips. The following is one of those 1899 newspaper accounts and describes Brook's double life and professional methods at the height of his career:
"By day, "Robert Graham, Esq." of 8 Highbury Crescent, was a dapper good looking little gentleman, whose aquaintance his neighbors were honored to make. He was to all outward appearances a highly prosperous "something in the city," a regular attendant at church, the owner of a carriage and pair, a leader in local charities, kept most excellent cigars and good wines, and was most hospitable withal. His establishment was kept up in a style which betokened a full purse and the local tradesmen were well content to get their bills paid once a month. By night, Graham was a bold and skillful cracksman. He despised the large suburban residence and the country seat, and confined his operations to 'well stocked jewellers' shops, where in a few minutes he could bag trifles worth thousands, which were not only easily concealed about his person or carried in a small bag, but could be placed beyond all possibility of identification by being dropped into the melting-pot or broken up and re-set by an assistant Graham employed for this sort of work. Graham's method of working was daring and effective. He would travel down to a town which he had selected as a suitable field for his enterprise in a first class carriage. On arrival he lunched at one of the best hotels, and then he would saunter out for a smoke. He paid particular attention to the shops, and having found out the situations of the jeweller's premises, would take rooms at the nearest hotel to the shop he considered the most accessable. Adopting an assumed name, he lost no time in acquainting himself with the habits and customs of the owner of the jeweller's shop he had marked. Sometimes he would spend a week or so closely watching the movements of all the people connected with the place. At the hotel he occupied the best rooms, In the smoke-room he was the best of company, having an inexhaustible fund of anecdotes.
Having effected his purpose, Graham never hurried away from the scene of his exploit, but apparently made it a rule to leave behind him whatever he had to use. He at any rate never used the same implements twice. But there was one article of his burglarious kit to which he was superstitiously attached, and that was a small mask, consisting of a piece of black cloth. This mask he regarded as his talisman, and so it was. He was most aesthete in his taste, buying the very best articles, whilst in order to avoid injuring his hands, which are remarkably white and well-shapen, he always worked in old kid gloves which he perserved for the purpose." (The Weekly Dispatch April 1899)
Having effected his purpose, Graham never hurried away from the scene of his exploit, but apparently made it a rule to leave behind him whatever he had to use. He at any rate never used the same implements twice. But there was one article of his burglarious kit to which he was superstitiously attached, and that was a small mask, consisting of a piece of black cloth. This mask he regarded as his talisman, and so it was. He was most aesthete in his taste, buying the very best articles, whilst in order to avoid injuring his hands, which are remarkably white and well-shapen, he always worked in old kid gloves which he perserved for the purpose." (The Weekly Dispatch April 1899)
Timeline Starting with 1888:
1888 : Around September in Leeds: Brook was recently released from prison and perhaps low on funds. He and another young man are caught stealing collars and pocket handkerchiefs from a draper, their value was £2 5s. The article doesn't mention any sentencing, nor could I find a follow up but it seems they served little or no time because Brook was soon at it again. (Leeds Times 29 Sep 1888)
1888-1889 : In late 1888, Leeds had been plagued by an epidemic of break-ins perpetrated by a clever gang of thieves, probably led by Brook. Brook and many of the gang of "housebreakers" were finally arrested and brought before the magistrate at the Leeds Town Hall. They were charged with the following crimes: Dec 14, breaking into a shop on Upperhead Row through a skylight and getting away with 120 silk handkerchiefs, a woolen shirt and £12 16s. Dec 25, entering a tobacconist shop on Round-hay Rd. and taking nine boxes of cigars, 12 pipes and 3 packets of cigarettes. Jan, 5th & 7th, twice breaking in to a clothing warehouse on Chorley Ln. and taking £35 worth of clothing. Detectives suspected Brook immediately and followed him to an upper floor of a dye works, there he tried to jump out the window but was caught by the leg and dragged back into the room. By this time, Brook was quite well known to the magistrate, Mr Bruce, as he had appeared before him in every instance since 1877. The gang received either gaol time or fines, except for Brook who got a prison stint of six months to a year as the gang's leader.
(Leeds Times 19 Jan 1889) (Leeds Times 26 Jan 1889)
1890-1891 : In the winter of 1990, several Jewellery shops in Leeds were burgled resulting in a large amount of stolen items. Though the police had some good leads on the culprits, they were clever and the loot vanished quickly. The local receivers, or 'fences,' were detained and their properties searched but nothing was found. In the meantime word came round that there had been a similar robbery in Hartlepool and the police immediately went to Clarence Rd, Hunslet to the house of their number one suspect, Arthur Brook. Police surrounded the house but Brook jumped through a window and eluded his pursuers. Upon entering the house they found an 18 year old young lady named Jennie Fairweather who lived with Brook, she lied and told the detectives that she was Brook's wife. A thorough search of the rooms turned up a hidden trove of watches that were immediately identified as recently stolen at Hartlepool. Jennie was arrested and charged with receiving stolen goods and then shipped to Durham where she was sentenced at the Durham Quarter Sessions on the 6th of April to 14 days in prison.
In the meantime the search for Brook intensified. No word of a sighting reached the police for several weeks but then in the second week of January, 1891, a jeweller in Newcastle lost £500 in a similar style robbery. From the descriptions of witnesses who saw a man loitering about the place, it was quickly concluded that Brook had been responsible. Later it was found out that Brook went from there to Durham with an accomplice having the intention of meeting up with Jennie when she was released from prison. Brook sent his associate to the prison only to find out that the girl's father had been there first and had taken her home to Leeds. Durham detectives, following up on a tip, saw Brook walking along a road, Brook saw them too and bolted. One detective tackled him from a moving carriage and Brook cracked the man on the skull with a stick. A struggle ensued but being two against one, Brook was overpowered. A search revealed that he carried a valuable diamond ring and other jewellery valued at £50. He was later removed to Hartlepool under a strong police escort where he was to be put on trial. A newspaper account describes Brook as "a good looking and well dressed young man who afterwards said he never meant to be taken alive."
After his arrest, Brook volunteered to divulge the location of his ill gotten gains saying that it was buried quite close to where he was arrested. Handcuffed to an officer, Brook was taken to the spot where they found freshly turned earth and a pick nearby. After hours of digging, the police abandoned the search and Brook was returned to his cell.
On the 29th of June, 1891, Brook appeared before the magistrates of the Duram Midsummer Quarter Sessions at Shire Hall and was sentenced to twelve months' hard labor.
(Yorkshire Evening Post 24 Mar 1891) (Durham County Advertiser 24 Apr 1891) (Leeds Mercury 30 Jun 1891)
In July of 1892 in Durham, soon after Brook was released from prison, he and Jennie Fairweather were married.⁶ After that, it didn't take long for Brook, now aided by his new bride, to start where he had left off.
1888 : Around September in Leeds: Brook was recently released from prison and perhaps low on funds. He and another young man are caught stealing collars and pocket handkerchiefs from a draper, their value was £2 5s. The article doesn't mention any sentencing, nor could I find a follow up but it seems they served little or no time because Brook was soon at it again. (Leeds Times 29 Sep 1888)
1888-1889 : In late 1888, Leeds had been plagued by an epidemic of break-ins perpetrated by a clever gang of thieves, probably led by Brook. Brook and many of the gang of "housebreakers" were finally arrested and brought before the magistrate at the Leeds Town Hall. They were charged with the following crimes: Dec 14, breaking into a shop on Upperhead Row through a skylight and getting away with 120 silk handkerchiefs, a woolen shirt and £12 16s. Dec 25, entering a tobacconist shop on Round-hay Rd. and taking nine boxes of cigars, 12 pipes and 3 packets of cigarettes. Jan, 5th & 7th, twice breaking in to a clothing warehouse on Chorley Ln. and taking £35 worth of clothing. Detectives suspected Brook immediately and followed him to an upper floor of a dye works, there he tried to jump out the window but was caught by the leg and dragged back into the room. By this time, Brook was quite well known to the magistrate, Mr Bruce, as he had appeared before him in every instance since 1877. The gang received either gaol time or fines, except for Brook who got a prison stint of six months to a year as the gang's leader.
(Leeds Times 19 Jan 1889) (Leeds Times 26 Jan 1889)
1890-1891 : In the winter of 1990, several Jewellery shops in Leeds were burgled resulting in a large amount of stolen items. Though the police had some good leads on the culprits, they were clever and the loot vanished quickly. The local receivers, or 'fences,' were detained and their properties searched but nothing was found. In the meantime word came round that there had been a similar robbery in Hartlepool and the police immediately went to Clarence Rd, Hunslet to the house of their number one suspect, Arthur Brook. Police surrounded the house but Brook jumped through a window and eluded his pursuers. Upon entering the house they found an 18 year old young lady named Jennie Fairweather who lived with Brook, she lied and told the detectives that she was Brook's wife. A thorough search of the rooms turned up a hidden trove of watches that were immediately identified as recently stolen at Hartlepool. Jennie was arrested and charged with receiving stolen goods and then shipped to Durham where she was sentenced at the Durham Quarter Sessions on the 6th of April to 14 days in prison.
In the meantime the search for Brook intensified. No word of a sighting reached the police for several weeks but then in the second week of January, 1891, a jeweller in Newcastle lost £500 in a similar style robbery. From the descriptions of witnesses who saw a man loitering about the place, it was quickly concluded that Brook had been responsible. Later it was found out that Brook went from there to Durham with an accomplice having the intention of meeting up with Jennie when she was released from prison. Brook sent his associate to the prison only to find out that the girl's father had been there first and had taken her home to Leeds. Durham detectives, following up on a tip, saw Brook walking along a road, Brook saw them too and bolted. One detective tackled him from a moving carriage and Brook cracked the man on the skull with a stick. A struggle ensued but being two against one, Brook was overpowered. A search revealed that he carried a valuable diamond ring and other jewellery valued at £50. He was later removed to Hartlepool under a strong police escort where he was to be put on trial. A newspaper account describes Brook as "a good looking and well dressed young man who afterwards said he never meant to be taken alive."
After his arrest, Brook volunteered to divulge the location of his ill gotten gains saying that it was buried quite close to where he was arrested. Handcuffed to an officer, Brook was taken to the spot where they found freshly turned earth and a pick nearby. After hours of digging, the police abandoned the search and Brook was returned to his cell.
On the 29th of June, 1891, Brook appeared before the magistrates of the Duram Midsummer Quarter Sessions at Shire Hall and was sentenced to twelve months' hard labor.
(Yorkshire Evening Post 24 Mar 1891) (Durham County Advertiser 24 Apr 1891) (Leeds Mercury 30 Jun 1891)
In July of 1892 in Durham, soon after Brook was released from prison, he and Jennie Fairweather were married.⁶ After that, it didn't take long for Brook, now aided by his new bride, to start where he had left off.
Could Brook have acted the clown as shown in this 1882 poster?
(click to enlarge)
1893 : In July, A Leeds police detective, walking along Meadow Rd, spied Arthur Brook and his wife Jenny. Suddenly recalling that both were wanted for a robbery near Durham, the officer grabbed Brook and a violent fight ensued with Brook causing severe injury by gnawing on one of the detective’s hands. Brook was ultimately subdued and taken to the Town Hall where he was handed over to the Durham County Police for stealing £23 from a home in Wittan Gilbert. Before the transfer, he was fined 23s. at the Leeds Police Court.
(Leeds Times 29 Jul 1893)
1893 : In Scarborough in September, a jeweller’s shop was invaded but nothing was stolen due to some barriers that prevented access to the shop where the jewellery was kept. Brook and Jenny were arrested after witnesses identified them as loiterers in the vicinity. After that, the shop owner recognized the pair as having visited the shop before the robbery and recalled that Brook seemed particularly interested in the shop’s doors. Both were remanded into custody but Jenny was allowed bail in the amount of £10. ⁷ On the 13th of October the couple were found not guilty due to lack of evidence and released.⁸
1894 : On the 11th of April, after a big jewellery robbery at Newcastle-on-Tyne that had all the hallmarks of an Arthur Brook’s job, police decided to pay a call to his home in Leeds on Pontefract Ln. Their door knocking proved unsuccessful but looking up they saw a man on the roof who crossed to another roof and dropped through the skylight. Obtaining permission to search the house next door, they discovered Brook hiding under one of the beds in an upstairs bedroom. Brook didn’t go quietly, again put up a fruitless struggle and in the end he was arrested. Brook had a gold watch and diamond ring upon his person and stolen property from the Newcastle job was found in his home. When brought before the courts, he was sentenced to five months under the Prevention of Crime Act. (Yorkshire Evening Press 12 Apr 1894)
Pre 1895 : The Police Gazette article from March of 1895 (shown above) points out that one of Brook’s aliases was Alska and also that Brook himself had claimed to be a comic gymnast. As it happens, during the first half of the 1890s, Fossett’s Grand Circus featured a comic acrobatic clown called Alska and a team called 'The Brother’s Alska' who performed a triple bar act. It's intriguing to think that Brook could have been traveling from town to town with the circus and whether he left a trail of robberies in his wake?
Between 1894 to 1899, Brook enjoyed five uninterrupted years of freedom. Except for his childhood, this was the longest period in his life in which he remained un-institutionalized.
(Leeds Times 29 Jul 1893)
1893 : In Scarborough in September, a jeweller’s shop was invaded but nothing was stolen due to some barriers that prevented access to the shop where the jewellery was kept. Brook and Jenny were arrested after witnesses identified them as loiterers in the vicinity. After that, the shop owner recognized the pair as having visited the shop before the robbery and recalled that Brook seemed particularly interested in the shop’s doors. Both were remanded into custody but Jenny was allowed bail in the amount of £10. ⁷ On the 13th of October the couple were found not guilty due to lack of evidence and released.⁸
1894 : On the 11th of April, after a big jewellery robbery at Newcastle-on-Tyne that had all the hallmarks of an Arthur Brook’s job, police decided to pay a call to his home in Leeds on Pontefract Ln. Their door knocking proved unsuccessful but looking up they saw a man on the roof who crossed to another roof and dropped through the skylight. Obtaining permission to search the house next door, they discovered Brook hiding under one of the beds in an upstairs bedroom. Brook didn’t go quietly, again put up a fruitless struggle and in the end he was arrested. Brook had a gold watch and diamond ring upon his person and stolen property from the Newcastle job was found in his home. When brought before the courts, he was sentenced to five months under the Prevention of Crime Act. (Yorkshire Evening Press 12 Apr 1894)
Pre 1895 : The Police Gazette article from March of 1895 (shown above) points out that one of Brook’s aliases was Alska and also that Brook himself had claimed to be a comic gymnast. As it happens, during the first half of the 1890s, Fossett’s Grand Circus featured a comic acrobatic clown called Alska and a team called 'The Brother’s Alska' who performed a triple bar act. It's intriguing to think that Brook could have been traveling from town to town with the circus and whether he left a trail of robberies in his wake?
Between 1894 to 1899, Brook enjoyed five uninterrupted years of freedom. Except for his childhood, this was the longest period in his life in which he remained un-institutionalized.
1899 : Shrewsbury, 11:15 p.m. on the night of Monday the 20th of February, while making his usual rounds, Police-constable Hartop, found a side door ajar in a narrow alley off a main thoroughfare. On the ground in front of the door lay a gold scarf pin and two gold watches. The door belonged to Mesers. Phillip’s provision shop and, suspecting foul play, he summoned help, including the shop’s manager. Together with another constable and the manager they began a search of the premises. They found that, rather then being the scene of the crime, the shop had only been used to make a get away out to the street, using a hole in the roof and down to the side door. It didn’t take the police long to realize that the actual target of the break-in had been Mr. Evan Jones’ jewellery shop, 30 or so yards away, connected by adjoining roofs. When Mr. Jones arrived, and the front door was opened, the signs of thievery were clearly evident. The shop contents were strewn about in "great confusion and the display windows were completely ransacked." When a search turned up no sign of any thieves, an inventory of missing items began. Jones found that the stolen jewellery consisted of "watches, chains, bracelets, brooches, rings, studs, sleeve links, scarf pins, etc." It was supposed that the perpetrators were "expert in their profession" for only the highest grade gold items were taken. Happily, Jones had the most valuable articles stashed in a strong box which showed no signs of trespass. Unhappily for Mr. Jones, the total value of the missing jewellery was estimated to be between £600 to £700, all of which was not insured.
The robbery occurred between eight o’clock, when the shop closed, and quarter past eleven with the discovery of the open door. The intersection where the crime took place was Pride-hill and High Street, one of the busiest in Shrewsbury. The street and foot traffic at the time had been considerable. No one seems to have seen or heard anything and even though the gas lighting in the shop was on, the burglars were so brazen they ransacked the display windows. Police surmised that at least two burglars were involved and that somehow one of the burglars reached the roof and entered the jewellery shop through a skylight. Found abandoned in the jewellery shop, was a cap, containing the label of a Dublin maker, and a "well worn half-domino" (masquerade mask), both of which were probably forgotten in the excitement of the moment. Also found was an assortment of well chosen tools, consisting of a splendidly manufactured "jemmy, a large augur, a large screw driver, a file, small saw, etc." Once the booty was collected, the thief or thieves proceeded back up to the roof through the skylight, across several roofs to the hole in the provision shop roof and "once inside he prized open the ground level door to the alley from the inside, thus making good his escape. A string was found in the alley hanging from Phillip’s upper window down to the ground near the alley door, perhaps for an accomplice to signal the presence of the law."
The police lost no time in moving to capture the perpetrators; "information was at once telegraphed to the different constabulary headquarters in the country, and other precautions were taken in case the culprits had not left the town. During the night and next day a large number of “plain clothes” officers were engaged in making inquiries, and a number of cyclists were dispatched to outlying railway stations to obtain any information." Suspicion soon fell upon two young men, "well supplied with money," who had been lodging at a local public house for more than a week. The day of the crime, around six p.m., they settled their account with the landlady and said that they were off to "catch a train, taking with them three heavy travelling bags." Around 7:30, the landlady was surprised to find one of the recent lodgers in her sitting room. He said that they had missed their train and would take another later that evening. He left soon thereafter but about ten o’clock he returned, "hatless this time," saying that his hat had blown off and landed in the river, and since all the shops were closed, could he have one of her husband’s hats which he would gladly pay for or return by post. Thanking the landlady, he left in a hurry. Soon after that, two men, matching the description of the wanted fugitives, appeared at the railway station and bought two tickets to Woodchurch. Later, police came to the conclusion that this was a dodge and that the pair actually, used tickets purchased earlier to board a train bound for Stafford and London which left the station shortly after the Woodchurch train.
The police released the following to the press:"— Suspicion attached to two men of the following description: — 1st. Age 25 to 30 years, height 5ft. 4 or 5in., slight build, fair complexion, light brown hair and mustache, inclined to be sandy: dress, brown plaid suit, brown overcoat, patent leather boots which have been blacked, a diamond ring on 3rd and 4th finger of the left hand. 2nd. Age 30 to 35 years, height 5ft. 9in., proportionate build, sallow complexion, dark brown hair and mustache, inclined to be curly, good looking: dress, dark clothes, dark blue overcoat with velvet collar, Have in their possession a brown kit bag, 23in. long, and a brown dress suit case, rather old, 24in. by 15in. the above two men have been staying at a public-house in Shrewsbury during the past fortnight and signed the visitors’ book as “John Harding” and “W. Leonard.”
On March 4, Shrewsbury police received a telegram from their counterparts in London announcing that they had arrested two men who matched the descriptions of the wanted fugitives. Furthermore they were in possession of many items of jewellery, some of which matched the list from the Jones robbery. Shrewsbury police lost no time and dispatched Sargt. Binnall and P.C. Hartop along with Evan Jones and a man who had struck up an acquaintance with the two suspects while they were in Shrewsbury. After arriving at the Bow Street Police Station, Jones identified 152 items as coming from his shop and the suspect, Robert Graham, was identified as the man having been in Shrewsbury on the date in question.
According to reports Robert Graham, age 28, lived with a wife and three children in a "handsomely-furnished residence" on Highbury Crescent N. in Holloway. A search of his home turned up a large quantity of items, many of which are listed at the top of the page. Some of the items were identified as stolen from robberies in other towns. A couple of days after the robbery, he apparently made a deposit at two of his bankers, one for £30 and the other £60. Graham told police that he was from Leeds and had formerly practiced the trade of a carpenter. Apparently he loved horses and racing and was, "well known on the turf and at Tattersalls, and had been the friend of several owners of race horses." He was popular in the community and those who knew him were surprised to find out that he was a "professional house-breaker." Police found that he had been wanted in the north of England for some years, but for some reason the name of Arthur Brook hadn’t surfaced in the press at that time.
Graham’s accomplice was a man named Peter Staunton, age 43, a ne’er do well ex jeweller. He lived near Graham in a "more unpretentious abode." When arrested, he was in possession of a few pieces from the Shrewsbury heist. He was also suspected by police as having an expertise in altering and removing identifying marks from jewellery.
Both prisoners were removed under guard to Shrewsbury where a crowd of hundreds waited to catch a glimpse of the two notorious criminals. During the rail journey, Graham (Brook) confessed, in startling detail, to the crime. The following is what was reported to the press: "He said he got into Messers. Phillips’ stores on the night of the theft before the shop was locked up, and hid in the storeroom upstairs. A window in this room overlooks the passage at the side of the shop, and when the employees left the establishment a “pal” gave him a sign that he was free to proceed. He then broke a hole in Messrs. Phillips’ roof, and climbing over adjoining shops reached the flat roof of the building wherein he stole the property. Here he sat for some time, looking over the parapet into the street and waiting for a sign from his accomplice that the shop was locked up. Within five minutes from the time he got the “tip” he was at work, rifling the windows, not withstanding the fact that numbers of people were passing along the street only a few feet from where he was stooping. He forgot to bring his cap away with him and he admits that it was a very great mistake to leave it in the shop. In returning over the roofs to Messrs. Phillips’ passage a hard hat which he had placed on his head caught the guide rope attached to the telephone standards, and was blown into the street. When he got to the passage his “pal” had disappeared at the time he was most wanted, and when he (Graham) was lowering a bag containing the jewellery to the ground the string he was using broke, and the articles fell in a heap, and were considerably damaged. Having dropped the plunder, he got through the roof, and descended to the door in the passage, which he forced open with a nail drawer he found in the shop, and thus gained access to the street. He was only occupied about three quarters of an hour in perpetrating the robbery. The watches and scarf-pin afterwards found in the passage must have fallen out of the bundle when the string broke. He next went to the public-house where he had been staying and borrowed a hat from the landlady, He immediately proceeded to the railway station, and booked to Crewe and then got into the London train. He arrived at Euston about five o’clock the next morning, and after having drank a glass of whiskey and soda water, managed to reach his home in time for breakfast. Graham was in a jolly mood during nearly the whole of the journey, but seemed very distressed when he occasionally spoke of his wife and children, about whom he expressed much concern. When shown a copy of the description of himself and the other man who was suspected of committing the robbery he seemed thunderstruck, and involuntarily paid a high compliment to the astuteness of the local force, for he exclaimed, “What the ____ is the good of me denying it! They have got me even to the three rings on my finger; I would not have thought it; what the ___ is a fellow to do when he is handicapped like that!"
Court proceedings were scheduled for the morning of the 7th of March. Excited crowds lined all the likely routes the prisoners might take to the court, hoping to catch a glimpse of Graham and Staunton as they were led under guard and handcuffed together. Once before the magistrates. Graham was charged with jewellery theft and Staunton with receiving stolen property. Neither defendant denied the charge or any of the events. The prisoners were remanded pending trial. (Shrewsbury Chronicle 24 Feb 1899 & 10 Mar 1899)
At the Shrewsbury Quarter Sessions, Monday the 8th of April, Graham pled guilty to stealing £230 worth of property from Mr. Jones’ jewellery shop on the night of the 20th of February. It’s worth noting that the total value of the goods stolen was nearer to £700 which begs the question, what happened to the remainder? Peter Staunton plead not guilty. Graham made a statement before sentencing, the gist of which ran similar to his previous confession. As in his confession, and perhaps a gesture of loyalty, he was careful to avoid naming his accomplice. "Graham was sentenced to five years penal servitude and seven years’ police supervision, and Staunton to three years’ penal servitude." (Lincolnshire Chronicle April 14, 1899)
The robbery occurred between eight o’clock, when the shop closed, and quarter past eleven with the discovery of the open door. The intersection where the crime took place was Pride-hill and High Street, one of the busiest in Shrewsbury. The street and foot traffic at the time had been considerable. No one seems to have seen or heard anything and even though the gas lighting in the shop was on, the burglars were so brazen they ransacked the display windows. Police surmised that at least two burglars were involved and that somehow one of the burglars reached the roof and entered the jewellery shop through a skylight. Found abandoned in the jewellery shop, was a cap, containing the label of a Dublin maker, and a "well worn half-domino" (masquerade mask), both of which were probably forgotten in the excitement of the moment. Also found was an assortment of well chosen tools, consisting of a splendidly manufactured "jemmy, a large augur, a large screw driver, a file, small saw, etc." Once the booty was collected, the thief or thieves proceeded back up to the roof through the skylight, across several roofs to the hole in the provision shop roof and "once inside he prized open the ground level door to the alley from the inside, thus making good his escape. A string was found in the alley hanging from Phillip’s upper window down to the ground near the alley door, perhaps for an accomplice to signal the presence of the law."
The police lost no time in moving to capture the perpetrators; "information was at once telegraphed to the different constabulary headquarters in the country, and other precautions were taken in case the culprits had not left the town. During the night and next day a large number of “plain clothes” officers were engaged in making inquiries, and a number of cyclists were dispatched to outlying railway stations to obtain any information." Suspicion soon fell upon two young men, "well supplied with money," who had been lodging at a local public house for more than a week. The day of the crime, around six p.m., they settled their account with the landlady and said that they were off to "catch a train, taking with them three heavy travelling bags." Around 7:30, the landlady was surprised to find one of the recent lodgers in her sitting room. He said that they had missed their train and would take another later that evening. He left soon thereafter but about ten o’clock he returned, "hatless this time," saying that his hat had blown off and landed in the river, and since all the shops were closed, could he have one of her husband’s hats which he would gladly pay for or return by post. Thanking the landlady, he left in a hurry. Soon after that, two men, matching the description of the wanted fugitives, appeared at the railway station and bought two tickets to Woodchurch. Later, police came to the conclusion that this was a dodge and that the pair actually, used tickets purchased earlier to board a train bound for Stafford and London which left the station shortly after the Woodchurch train.
The police released the following to the press:"— Suspicion attached to two men of the following description: — 1st. Age 25 to 30 years, height 5ft. 4 or 5in., slight build, fair complexion, light brown hair and mustache, inclined to be sandy: dress, brown plaid suit, brown overcoat, patent leather boots which have been blacked, a diamond ring on 3rd and 4th finger of the left hand. 2nd. Age 30 to 35 years, height 5ft. 9in., proportionate build, sallow complexion, dark brown hair and mustache, inclined to be curly, good looking: dress, dark clothes, dark blue overcoat with velvet collar, Have in their possession a brown kit bag, 23in. long, and a brown dress suit case, rather old, 24in. by 15in. the above two men have been staying at a public-house in Shrewsbury during the past fortnight and signed the visitors’ book as “John Harding” and “W. Leonard.”
On March 4, Shrewsbury police received a telegram from their counterparts in London announcing that they had arrested two men who matched the descriptions of the wanted fugitives. Furthermore they were in possession of many items of jewellery, some of which matched the list from the Jones robbery. Shrewsbury police lost no time and dispatched Sargt. Binnall and P.C. Hartop along with Evan Jones and a man who had struck up an acquaintance with the two suspects while they were in Shrewsbury. After arriving at the Bow Street Police Station, Jones identified 152 items as coming from his shop and the suspect, Robert Graham, was identified as the man having been in Shrewsbury on the date in question.
According to reports Robert Graham, age 28, lived with a wife and three children in a "handsomely-furnished residence" on Highbury Crescent N. in Holloway. A search of his home turned up a large quantity of items, many of which are listed at the top of the page. Some of the items were identified as stolen from robberies in other towns. A couple of days after the robbery, he apparently made a deposit at two of his bankers, one for £30 and the other £60. Graham told police that he was from Leeds and had formerly practiced the trade of a carpenter. Apparently he loved horses and racing and was, "well known on the turf and at Tattersalls, and had been the friend of several owners of race horses." He was popular in the community and those who knew him were surprised to find out that he was a "professional house-breaker." Police found that he had been wanted in the north of England for some years, but for some reason the name of Arthur Brook hadn’t surfaced in the press at that time.
Graham’s accomplice was a man named Peter Staunton, age 43, a ne’er do well ex jeweller. He lived near Graham in a "more unpretentious abode." When arrested, he was in possession of a few pieces from the Shrewsbury heist. He was also suspected by police as having an expertise in altering and removing identifying marks from jewellery.
Both prisoners were removed under guard to Shrewsbury where a crowd of hundreds waited to catch a glimpse of the two notorious criminals. During the rail journey, Graham (Brook) confessed, in startling detail, to the crime. The following is what was reported to the press: "He said he got into Messers. Phillips’ stores on the night of the theft before the shop was locked up, and hid in the storeroom upstairs. A window in this room overlooks the passage at the side of the shop, and when the employees left the establishment a “pal” gave him a sign that he was free to proceed. He then broke a hole in Messrs. Phillips’ roof, and climbing over adjoining shops reached the flat roof of the building wherein he stole the property. Here he sat for some time, looking over the parapet into the street and waiting for a sign from his accomplice that the shop was locked up. Within five minutes from the time he got the “tip” he was at work, rifling the windows, not withstanding the fact that numbers of people were passing along the street only a few feet from where he was stooping. He forgot to bring his cap away with him and he admits that it was a very great mistake to leave it in the shop. In returning over the roofs to Messrs. Phillips’ passage a hard hat which he had placed on his head caught the guide rope attached to the telephone standards, and was blown into the street. When he got to the passage his “pal” had disappeared at the time he was most wanted, and when he (Graham) was lowering a bag containing the jewellery to the ground the string he was using broke, and the articles fell in a heap, and were considerably damaged. Having dropped the plunder, he got through the roof, and descended to the door in the passage, which he forced open with a nail drawer he found in the shop, and thus gained access to the street. He was only occupied about three quarters of an hour in perpetrating the robbery. The watches and scarf-pin afterwards found in the passage must have fallen out of the bundle when the string broke. He next went to the public-house where he had been staying and borrowed a hat from the landlady, He immediately proceeded to the railway station, and booked to Crewe and then got into the London train. He arrived at Euston about five o’clock the next morning, and after having drank a glass of whiskey and soda water, managed to reach his home in time for breakfast. Graham was in a jolly mood during nearly the whole of the journey, but seemed very distressed when he occasionally spoke of his wife and children, about whom he expressed much concern. When shown a copy of the description of himself and the other man who was suspected of committing the robbery he seemed thunderstruck, and involuntarily paid a high compliment to the astuteness of the local force, for he exclaimed, “What the ____ is the good of me denying it! They have got me even to the three rings on my finger; I would not have thought it; what the ___ is a fellow to do when he is handicapped like that!"
Court proceedings were scheduled for the morning of the 7th of March. Excited crowds lined all the likely routes the prisoners might take to the court, hoping to catch a glimpse of Graham and Staunton as they were led under guard and handcuffed together. Once before the magistrates. Graham was charged with jewellery theft and Staunton with receiving stolen property. Neither defendant denied the charge or any of the events. The prisoners were remanded pending trial. (Shrewsbury Chronicle 24 Feb 1899 & 10 Mar 1899)
At the Shrewsbury Quarter Sessions, Monday the 8th of April, Graham pled guilty to stealing £230 worth of property from Mr. Jones’ jewellery shop on the night of the 20th of February. It’s worth noting that the total value of the goods stolen was nearer to £700 which begs the question, what happened to the remainder? Peter Staunton plead not guilty. Graham made a statement before sentencing, the gist of which ran similar to his previous confession. As in his confession, and perhaps a gesture of loyalty, he was careful to avoid naming his accomplice. "Graham was sentenced to five years penal servitude and seven years’ police supervision, and Staunton to three years’ penal servitude." (Lincolnshire Chronicle April 14, 1899)
1901 : While Arthur Brook was languishing in prison, according to the UK Census, Jennie Brook, nee Fairweather, and her three children were living in Highbury in the civil Parish of Islington at No. 68 Aberdeen Road. She was registered as "Jeanie G. Brooke, married, 28, Boarding House Keeper on own account, at Home, born in Leeds, Yorkshire." Her children were: "Sidney G, Brooke, 5, born in Burgess Hill, Sussex, England. -- Doris M. (Mabel) Brooke, 3, born in Islington, Middlesex. -- Douglas A. Brook, 2, born in Islington, Middlesex." Jennie had a live-in maid, a male visitor and four male lodgers, all under 30. The lodgers were two brothers from Spain, one a Shipping Agent and the other a Brewing Engineer.
The Western Times 24 Aug 1903
1902 : In prison, Brook worked in the carpenter shop and was said to be a model prisoner. While there, a prisoner went berserk and ran amuck with a chisel, threatening guards and fellow prisoners. Brook grabbed the man from behind and held on until guards were able to subdue him. On December 6th, after serving about two and one half years of his sentence, for good conduct Brook received a "ticket-of-leave"; a supervised early release.⁹
1903 : It’s no surprise that soon after his release, Brooks was at it again. While an inmate, Brooks met 35 year old Henry Moffat. Moffat, born in Glasgow, had a list of incarcerations almost equal to that of Brooks. They decided to team up and since Moffat was familiar with the Cardiff area, they chose Cardiff as the place to start. In February, a pawnshop was burgled, the thieves took only high value jewellery and gold items. Though the culprits were never found, Brook’s technique makes him a likely candidate. Later, on the 8th of June, the pair travelled to Cardiff and were seen there by numerous people. On the 10th, a jewellery shop belonging to Henry Crouch was discovered having been burgled the previous night with around £1,000 worth of the usual Brook’s favorites were missing. Entry was gained through a skylight in the roof and by cutting a hole in the floor above the shop. ⁹ The burglar left the same way he came and made his way across the roofs to a tailor shop where he descended through a skylight and out a side door. While in the shop, the burglar decided to switch his old suit for a new one off the rack, leaving the old suit behind. ¹⁰ Police found a London label in the suit which led them to their old friend Brook. On the 13th of June, Brook and Moffat were arrested, not without some resistance, and a search of their persons and homes yielded some of the missing articles. ¹¹ Both prisoners denied the allegations and after some testimony, were charged and remanded on the 17th. ¹² In early July, Brook and Moffat appeared in court. Moffat pleaded guilty but Brook concocted a wild story that involved his wife, Jenny. She appeared in the witness box to corroborate her husband’s story but the tale fell apart when her string of previous arrests and convictions were detailed to the jury. On the 7th of July, Brook was sentenced to seven years hard labor. ⁹
Before being sent to Dartmoor where he was to serve out his seven years, Brook (alias Graham) was removed for a preliminary period to the Devon County Gaol at Exeter. Having received reports of Brook’s good conduct while incarcerated, the gaol staff allowed him almost unsupervised use of the carpenter’s shop knowing that cabinet making was his supposed trade. On Saturday August 22nd, it seems that he was left pretty much to himself in the shop with only frequent visits by the duty warder. Each time the warder appeared, Brook was busily engaged on what seemed to be a complicated project. What the warder didn’t suspect was that every time he left, Brook was using a chisel to remove the mortar from the bricks of the shop wall. There must have been enough noise to alert Brook, for every time the guard approached he would cover up the hole with some of the shop’s materials, and quickly return to work industriously on his project. Eventually the hole was large enough to crawl through and using a ladder he had whipped-up out of scraps, he climbed through the shop wall and on to the top of the prison’s perimeter wall. Using his makeshift ladder he crossed from the wall to the roof of the Governor’s house, spied a skylight and let himself in. Fortunately for Brook, though it’s possible that he knew, Mr. Northey, the Governor, was away at the time, so he took advantage of the absence to help himself to clothing and other items he thought useful. The clothing included Mr. Northey’s mackintosh, a bowler hat, and a pair of "white cricketing trousers." he then entered the drawing room and with "a remarkable air of composure—for he was actually seen to do this by persons whose suspicions were not then aroused—he opened the shutters and then the window, and stepped out on the balcony". The drive and gate to the house was unguarded however they were visible from the windows of the Devon Constabulary headquarters nearby, but by summoning his usual bravado and nonchalance, he walked through the gate without a challenge.
Brook had a 30 minute start before the alarm was raised but they didn't yet know about his disguise so initially police were searching for a man in prison garb. Immediately the report, including Brook's description, was telegraphed throughout the region. Roads were scoured and villages and train stations were watched and searched. The authorities were aware that Brook was highly intelligent and resourceful and that if they didn't catch him soon he would slip their grasp and disappear. Back then, "The County Prison, to one who knows his way about, is within a few minutes walk of green fields, narrow lanes, and main roads." He was seen walking east and later his prison clothes were found near Hillsborough Avenue so it was thought by police that he a gone in a northerly direction. Reports soon came in that he was seen in Stoke Woods to the north and Exton to the south, both east of of the River Exe. The police were baffled and issued a £5 reward for information leading to a capture.
Brook knew Exeter and its surrounds, he had pulled off at least one other robbery there and, prior to that, had familiarized himself with the territory. In reality, Brook made a loop to the south, crossed the River Exe at Lower Weir and made his way south and west in the direction of Newton Abbot. He walked all night and hid most of Sunday but in the evening he was spotted near Newton Abbot by a resident of who immediately informed police. A police constable soon cornered Brook but he gave him the slip and ran right into the arms of Sargt. Creach who made the collar. (The Western Times 24 & 28 August 1903)
On the 6th of November: "At Cardiff Friday Jennie Graham, of Blandford-square, London, wife of Robert Graham, now undergoing penal servitude, was charged with receiving stolen goods, the proceeds of a robbery of Mr. Crouch, jeweller, Cardiff. The, defence contended it was not criminal offence for a wife to receive stolen goods from her husband. The prisoner was discharged." (Exeter and Plymouth Gazette - Monday 09 November 1903)
1903 : It’s no surprise that soon after his release, Brooks was at it again. While an inmate, Brooks met 35 year old Henry Moffat. Moffat, born in Glasgow, had a list of incarcerations almost equal to that of Brooks. They decided to team up and since Moffat was familiar with the Cardiff area, they chose Cardiff as the place to start. In February, a pawnshop was burgled, the thieves took only high value jewellery and gold items. Though the culprits were never found, Brook’s technique makes him a likely candidate. Later, on the 8th of June, the pair travelled to Cardiff and were seen there by numerous people. On the 10th, a jewellery shop belonging to Henry Crouch was discovered having been burgled the previous night with around £1,000 worth of the usual Brook’s favorites were missing. Entry was gained through a skylight in the roof and by cutting a hole in the floor above the shop. ⁹ The burglar left the same way he came and made his way across the roofs to a tailor shop where he descended through a skylight and out a side door. While in the shop, the burglar decided to switch his old suit for a new one off the rack, leaving the old suit behind. ¹⁰ Police found a London label in the suit which led them to their old friend Brook. On the 13th of June, Brook and Moffat were arrested, not without some resistance, and a search of their persons and homes yielded some of the missing articles. ¹¹ Both prisoners denied the allegations and after some testimony, were charged and remanded on the 17th. ¹² In early July, Brook and Moffat appeared in court. Moffat pleaded guilty but Brook concocted a wild story that involved his wife, Jenny. She appeared in the witness box to corroborate her husband’s story but the tale fell apart when her string of previous arrests and convictions were detailed to the jury. On the 7th of July, Brook was sentenced to seven years hard labor. ⁹
Before being sent to Dartmoor where he was to serve out his seven years, Brook (alias Graham) was removed for a preliminary period to the Devon County Gaol at Exeter. Having received reports of Brook’s good conduct while incarcerated, the gaol staff allowed him almost unsupervised use of the carpenter’s shop knowing that cabinet making was his supposed trade. On Saturday August 22nd, it seems that he was left pretty much to himself in the shop with only frequent visits by the duty warder. Each time the warder appeared, Brook was busily engaged on what seemed to be a complicated project. What the warder didn’t suspect was that every time he left, Brook was using a chisel to remove the mortar from the bricks of the shop wall. There must have been enough noise to alert Brook, for every time the guard approached he would cover up the hole with some of the shop’s materials, and quickly return to work industriously on his project. Eventually the hole was large enough to crawl through and using a ladder he had whipped-up out of scraps, he climbed through the shop wall and on to the top of the prison’s perimeter wall. Using his makeshift ladder he crossed from the wall to the roof of the Governor’s house, spied a skylight and let himself in. Fortunately for Brook, though it’s possible that he knew, Mr. Northey, the Governor, was away at the time, so he took advantage of the absence to help himself to clothing and other items he thought useful. The clothing included Mr. Northey’s mackintosh, a bowler hat, and a pair of "white cricketing trousers." he then entered the drawing room and with "a remarkable air of composure—for he was actually seen to do this by persons whose suspicions were not then aroused—he opened the shutters and then the window, and stepped out on the balcony". The drive and gate to the house was unguarded however they were visible from the windows of the Devon Constabulary headquarters nearby, but by summoning his usual bravado and nonchalance, he walked through the gate without a challenge.
Brook had a 30 minute start before the alarm was raised but they didn't yet know about his disguise so initially police were searching for a man in prison garb. Immediately the report, including Brook's description, was telegraphed throughout the region. Roads were scoured and villages and train stations were watched and searched. The authorities were aware that Brook was highly intelligent and resourceful and that if they didn't catch him soon he would slip their grasp and disappear. Back then, "The County Prison, to one who knows his way about, is within a few minutes walk of green fields, narrow lanes, and main roads." He was seen walking east and later his prison clothes were found near Hillsborough Avenue so it was thought by police that he a gone in a northerly direction. Reports soon came in that he was seen in Stoke Woods to the north and Exton to the south, both east of of the River Exe. The police were baffled and issued a £5 reward for information leading to a capture.
Brook knew Exeter and its surrounds, he had pulled off at least one other robbery there and, prior to that, had familiarized himself with the territory. In reality, Brook made a loop to the south, crossed the River Exe at Lower Weir and made his way south and west in the direction of Newton Abbot. He walked all night and hid most of Sunday but in the evening he was spotted near Newton Abbot by a resident of who immediately informed police. A police constable soon cornered Brook but he gave him the slip and ran right into the arms of Sargt. Creach who made the collar. (The Western Times 24 & 28 August 1903)
On the 6th of November: "At Cardiff Friday Jennie Graham, of Blandford-square, London, wife of Robert Graham, now undergoing penal servitude, was charged with receiving stolen goods, the proceeds of a robbery of Mr. Crouch, jeweller, Cardiff. The, defence contended it was not criminal offence for a wife to receive stolen goods from her husband. The prisoner was discharged." (Exeter and Plymouth Gazette - Monday 09 November 1903)
1905 : In early March, Jennie Brook (29) of 34 Blandford Street was admitted to St. Mary's Hospital for having drank laudanum by accident.
1910 : Brook would have been scheduled for release from prison, possibly the mid or near the end of the year. Perhaps, due to his escape, his release was pushed back to a date in 1911.
1910 : Brook would have been scheduled for release from prison, possibly the mid or near the end of the year. Perhaps, due to his escape, his release was pushed back to a date in 1911.
1911 : On the morning of October 3rd, Mr. Cottell of Cottell Bros. Jewellers of Regent Street in Swindon, opened his shop in the morning and found it had been burgled. The burglar had used some outbuildings behind the shop as a stairway to the roof. Once there, the roof tiles were lifted and a hole was cut large enough to admit a man. Mr. Cottell found that only the "gold portion" of the shop window had been cleared out, the estimated value being £700 to £800. The thief then left the way he came. Once again police were baffled until a woman came forward telling police that she went to dinner at the County Hotel on the night of the burglary and saw a man fumbling with a handkerchief containing a quantity of gold watches, and when he slipped the mass into his pocket, he dropped one on to the floor unnoticed. This led to the arrest of Robert Wilson and Florence Spurway who were seen together in the hotel at the same time. Wilson, known to the police as Arthur Brook, had come to town some months earlier accompanied by his fiancee, Florence Spurway (25) from Colyton. The couple arranged to stay in Swindon with Spurway's sister, Mrs. Gerturde Speller. ¹³ Wilson announced to the Spellers that he was a horse buyer for the British Army. Throughout his stay in Swindon, Wilson would come and go saying that business had called him away.
Wilson was arrested in Oxford after a struggle with police. Though he said that he was engaged to Spurway, it was known by the authorities that he was already married. The press called Spurway "Baby Floss" but portrayed her sympathetically, believing her to have been deceived. During the trial, this letter was given into evidence, it was from Wilson to Spurway, written from Oxford at a time when the police were searching for them both : "My Dear, I have just received your letter, and needless to say how delighted I am to hear from you. After reading your letter I never loved one more in all my life. The expressions were great mugs (lies), etc. They are mugs, darling, judging by the questions they asked. But I am sorry, sorry indeed, that they should have heard of us being at the County (the hotel mentioned above). But never fear Baby, I shall not make another mistake. I have been longing, oh! you don't know how much, to come this afternoon to see you, but I allow discretion to influence me. God knows how much I miss you, but it is for your sake that I shall not. On Saturday night, when I left you I walked for miles until my feet were terribly sore, thinking of you all the time, and every now and again saying to myself. "My poor little Girlie" for I do love you, kiddie, and, as I have said so many times before, you are too good for me. There is one thing I want to say more than another. Dearie, do not make yourself miserable, Cheer up. Baby: I must say good-bye. Good-bye, dearie, many kisses from one who loves you more than he loves his own life. Good-bye and God bless you. I leave here tonight. Many times I have kissed your dear letter but it is not like yourself."
In early November Brook was found guilty of breaking and entering. His full arrest and conviction record was brought up as testimony against him. It was decided that his past actions had turned him into an habitual offender and he was sentenced to 10 years on that basis. When asked why he had led on Miss Spurway with promises of marriage, he replied that he had not heard from Jennie Brook, his wife, for 10 years. Florence Spurway was found not guilty and was released.
1921 and Beyond : It's unknown whether or not Brook was released in 1921. If he was released he would have been at or near his mid 50s. Outside, he would have encountered a new post-war world in which his game had shifted in favor of the police, where burglar alarms and other sophisticated crime deterrent and detecting measures were in regular use. At the present, the fate of one of England's most notorious burglars remains a mystery. Did he have hidden wealth somewhere and disappeared to that fabled beach, sipping gin and tonics and soaking up the sun, did he resume his former illicit trade or did he merely fade away?
Wilson was arrested in Oxford after a struggle with police. Though he said that he was engaged to Spurway, it was known by the authorities that he was already married. The press called Spurway "Baby Floss" but portrayed her sympathetically, believing her to have been deceived. During the trial, this letter was given into evidence, it was from Wilson to Spurway, written from Oxford at a time when the police were searching for them both : "My Dear, I have just received your letter, and needless to say how delighted I am to hear from you. After reading your letter I never loved one more in all my life. The expressions were great mugs (lies), etc. They are mugs, darling, judging by the questions they asked. But I am sorry, sorry indeed, that they should have heard of us being at the County (the hotel mentioned above). But never fear Baby, I shall not make another mistake. I have been longing, oh! you don't know how much, to come this afternoon to see you, but I allow discretion to influence me. God knows how much I miss you, but it is for your sake that I shall not. On Saturday night, when I left you I walked for miles until my feet were terribly sore, thinking of you all the time, and every now and again saying to myself. "My poor little Girlie" for I do love you, kiddie, and, as I have said so many times before, you are too good for me. There is one thing I want to say more than another. Dearie, do not make yourself miserable, Cheer up. Baby: I must say good-bye. Good-bye, dearie, many kisses from one who loves you more than he loves his own life. Good-bye and God bless you. I leave here tonight. Many times I have kissed your dear letter but it is not like yourself."
In early November Brook was found guilty of breaking and entering. His full arrest and conviction record was brought up as testimony against him. It was decided that his past actions had turned him into an habitual offender and he was sentenced to 10 years on that basis. When asked why he had led on Miss Spurway with promises of marriage, he replied that he had not heard from Jennie Brook, his wife, for 10 years. Florence Spurway was found not guilty and was released.
1921 and Beyond : It's unknown whether or not Brook was released in 1921. If he was released he would have been at or near his mid 50s. Outside, he would have encountered a new post-war world in which his game had shifted in favor of the police, where burglar alarms and other sophisticated crime deterrent and detecting measures were in regular use. At the present, the fate of one of England's most notorious burglars remains a mystery. Did he have hidden wealth somewhere and disappeared to that fabled beach, sipping gin and tonics and soaking up the sun, did he resume his former illicit trade or did he merely fade away?
The Prince of Burglars
Arthur Brook or Robert Graham has had many nicknames and aliases over the years, Alska, Mark Pollard, the Spider, Raffles and the Prince of Burglars, to name a few. Many people regard his career as inspiration for the famous literary character A. J. Raffles by E.W. Hornung, whose collection of short stories were also immortalized in plays and movies. The following anecdotes and opinions were taken from contemporary accounts, which whether true or not, provide insights into Brook's character and the public's perception of him.
Perhaps the most daring piece of work of Graham was on the occasion of his visit a few years ago to Newport, in Monmouthshire, where he put up at a well known hotel near the centre of the town. Graham stayed a fortnight, his affable manners and powers as a raconteur making him quite a favourite. Suddenly the town was startled by the discovery that a jeweller's shop which actually stood next door to a police station, had been entered by burglars and robbed of between £3,000 and £4,000 worth of stock. An examination revealed the fact that the burglar must have been a most daring expert criminal, seeing that he had cut, his way from the roof to the shop below. But what was still more daring, in order to obtain access to the premises, it was necessary to pass over two high walls separating the police station from the jeweller's shop. To have climbed over the walls would have meant. detection, and therefore the burglar chose the daring and almost unheard-of method of burrowing under the wall, making a perfect little tunnel through which he and his assistants crawled with their tools and which, of course, gave them free access to the rear of the jeweller's shop. ....... Graham did not dispose of his "swag" as the ordinary burglar does, to a receiver of stolen property, who, having regard to the risk he runs, demands a big profit, and of course pays as little as he can to the burglar, but in another part of London, Graham had a perfect factory, where diamonds were reset, watch cases altered, and their contents changed, the settings in bracelets and other jewellery being quickly rendered unrecognizable by their owners. At this factory a number of assistants were employed, and under the direction of another member of the gang, men posing as jewellers' travellers, disposed of a considerable quantity of the proceeds of these burglaries to small jewellers in provincial towns. The most, up-to-date arrangements were made for quickly melting gold and silver, and so skilful were the men at the factory that they could with a few scratches of an engraving tool prevent a most expert jeweller from recognising his own private mark. (When speaking about the 1899 Shrewsbury break-in Brook said) : "I did not think much of Jones's stuff alhough he valued it between £700 and £1,000. If I had known I would not have wasted time over the job. I never really liked it, and I am very sorry I touched it, for it has brought me bad luck, as I lost my mask." (Carmarthen Weekly Rerporter 28 Aug 1903)
In 1896 he was at Exeter for a week with a companion, and where he lodged the police have to this day have been unable to discover. Of atheletic tastes, he went in for cycling, and from Exeter one day rode out to White Cross, on the Sidmouth-road. He took a piece of bar iron with him, and deluded the local blacksmith to turn it into a first-class jemmy. He stood by while the work was being done, gave minute directions to the guileless son of Vulcan, and said he required an implement of such strange design for opening fish boxes. But after the work was done, delivered and paid for, and Graham had gone, the brawny smith was struck with the idea that there might be something wrong. He told the local constable of his strange visitor, and what he made for him. The constable pondered, and next morning went to Exeter, only to find that during the night there had been a big burglary at Trimble's, the pawnbrokers, in Fore-street, and that the burglars had got away with the whole of the plunder. Access to the premises had been gained by forcing a heavy door in the mint, close to the main street, and afterwards Graham and his companion left the city without leaving the least useful trail..........The cool way in which some of the "Spiders" crimes have been committed is marvelous. At Bristol some years ago. he took a bedroom in a hotel which was next to a large jeweller's shop. One evening he was enjoying a cigar in the smoking-room when he excused himself from the company, saying he would be back in a moment. He then went upstairs, swung himself out of his bedroom window, and got on the roof of the jeweller's. To gain access was child's play to him, and he soon filled his bags with the choicest of the stock. Returning, he placed the loot in his bedroom, and resumed his cigar in the smoking-room. Next morning he had caught an early train, and was miles away with the booty and safe from detection before the burglary had been discovered. In London he does things in style, and his residence, at which his wife lives, is rented at £50 a year. There he led such an apparently blameless life, and was regarded as such an exemplary member of society, that he was elected to the eminently respected office of church warden of his adopted parish!
(The Western Times 24 August 1903)
Perhaps the most daring piece of work of Graham was on the occasion of his visit a few years ago to Newport, in Monmouthshire, where he put up at a well known hotel near the centre of the town. Graham stayed a fortnight, his affable manners and powers as a raconteur making him quite a favourite. Suddenly the town was startled by the discovery that a jeweller's shop which actually stood next door to a police station, had been entered by burglars and robbed of between £3,000 and £4,000 worth of stock. An examination revealed the fact that the burglar must have been a most daring expert criminal, seeing that he had cut, his way from the roof to the shop below. But what was still more daring, in order to obtain access to the premises, it was necessary to pass over two high walls separating the police station from the jeweller's shop. To have climbed over the walls would have meant. detection, and therefore the burglar chose the daring and almost unheard-of method of burrowing under the wall, making a perfect little tunnel through which he and his assistants crawled with their tools and which, of course, gave them free access to the rear of the jeweller's shop. ....... Graham did not dispose of his "swag" as the ordinary burglar does, to a receiver of stolen property, who, having regard to the risk he runs, demands a big profit, and of course pays as little as he can to the burglar, but in another part of London, Graham had a perfect factory, where diamonds were reset, watch cases altered, and their contents changed, the settings in bracelets and other jewellery being quickly rendered unrecognizable by their owners. At this factory a number of assistants were employed, and under the direction of another member of the gang, men posing as jewellers' travellers, disposed of a considerable quantity of the proceeds of these burglaries to small jewellers in provincial towns. The most, up-to-date arrangements were made for quickly melting gold and silver, and so skilful were the men at the factory that they could with a few scratches of an engraving tool prevent a most expert jeweller from recognising his own private mark. (When speaking about the 1899 Shrewsbury break-in Brook said) : "I did not think much of Jones's stuff alhough he valued it between £700 and £1,000. If I had known I would not have wasted time over the job. I never really liked it, and I am very sorry I touched it, for it has brought me bad luck, as I lost my mask." (Carmarthen Weekly Rerporter 28 Aug 1903)
In 1896 he was at Exeter for a week with a companion, and where he lodged the police have to this day have been unable to discover. Of atheletic tastes, he went in for cycling, and from Exeter one day rode out to White Cross, on the Sidmouth-road. He took a piece of bar iron with him, and deluded the local blacksmith to turn it into a first-class jemmy. He stood by while the work was being done, gave minute directions to the guileless son of Vulcan, and said he required an implement of such strange design for opening fish boxes. But after the work was done, delivered and paid for, and Graham had gone, the brawny smith was struck with the idea that there might be something wrong. He told the local constable of his strange visitor, and what he made for him. The constable pondered, and next morning went to Exeter, only to find that during the night there had been a big burglary at Trimble's, the pawnbrokers, in Fore-street, and that the burglars had got away with the whole of the plunder. Access to the premises had been gained by forcing a heavy door in the mint, close to the main street, and afterwards Graham and his companion left the city without leaving the least useful trail..........The cool way in which some of the "Spiders" crimes have been committed is marvelous. At Bristol some years ago. he took a bedroom in a hotel which was next to a large jeweller's shop. One evening he was enjoying a cigar in the smoking-room when he excused himself from the company, saying he would be back in a moment. He then went upstairs, swung himself out of his bedroom window, and got on the roof of the jeweller's. To gain access was child's play to him, and he soon filled his bags with the choicest of the stock. Returning, he placed the loot in his bedroom, and resumed his cigar in the smoking-room. Next morning he had caught an early train, and was miles away with the booty and safe from detection before the burglary had been discovered. In London he does things in style, and his residence, at which his wife lives, is rented at £50 a year. There he led such an apparently blameless life, and was regarded as such an exemplary member of society, that he was elected to the eminently respected office of church warden of his adopted parish!
(The Western Times 24 August 1903)
Sources
1] The Police Gazette 17 Mar 1899
2] The Leeds Times 13 Jan 1877
3] The Leeds Intellengecer 31 Aug 1887
4] The Leeds Times 29 Oct 1877
5] The Shields Daily Gazette 12 Apr 1899
6] Ancestry.com - England & Wales, BMD Marriage Index: 1837-1915
7] The Leeds Intellengecer 21 Sep 1893
8] The Yorkshire Herald 14 Oct 1893
9] 'Whitechapel's Sherlock Holmes' by Dick Kirby pg: 93 - 97
10] South Wales Daily Post 12 Jun 1903
11] South Wales Daily News - Tuesday 16 June 1903
12] South Wales Daily News - Tuesday 18 June 1903
13] The Faringdon Advertiser - 4 Nov 1911
1] The Police Gazette 17 Mar 1899
2] The Leeds Times 13 Jan 1877
3] The Leeds Intellengecer 31 Aug 1887
4] The Leeds Times 29 Oct 1877
5] The Shields Daily Gazette 12 Apr 1899
6] Ancestry.com - England & Wales, BMD Marriage Index: 1837-1915
7] The Leeds Intellengecer 21 Sep 1893
8] The Yorkshire Herald 14 Oct 1893
9] 'Whitechapel's Sherlock Holmes' by Dick Kirby pg: 93 - 97
10] South Wales Daily Post 12 Jun 1903
11] South Wales Daily News - Tuesday 16 June 1903
12] South Wales Daily News - Tuesday 18 June 1903
13] The Faringdon Advertiser - 4 Nov 1911
