Primrose League

[lynn cates]

Mr. Wynne

Hello All. Wynne too. Nice to know he was generous.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

good luck

Hello Maria. Good luck.

Cheers.
LC

[mariab]

Hello Lynn,
I'm still alive, I'm not partying widly in Paris, I'm “grounded“ and slavin' it on my article on deadline. Tomorrow I'm going to the Archives Nationales for spy reports, and I'll email you about any findings (particularly on Schwartz) when back.

[lynn cates]

Mrs. Wynne

Hello All. Nice to see a familiar name. Already found 1 coroner in the league, now Wynne's woman.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Q; What are you doing in England? A: Mind your own beez-uh-ness.

Hello All. So, the French had a Primrose League shadow? Hope they had an out-raj-ous occent-uh with which to taunt the English. (eg, your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries.)

Cheers.
LC

[mariab]

Right, I briefly forgot that Le Grand fired his attorney and represented himself (like the idiot Bundy, about a century later).
Thank you so much for all the information, Debs and Tom. Good to know that only 1 month lapsed between the Marlborough Magistrates Court and the Old Bailey hearings. I also wasn't aware that Le Grand was in prison so long, from 1877 to 1884.
By the way, starting next Wednesday I'll be looking up the criminal archives in Paris, in the hope of finding something on Le Grand (and Ostrog), supposing that Le Grand was ever arrested in Paris. I'll keep my eyes open for any “Colonels“ and for all crimes pertaining to forgery, track bets, pimping, and extortion. If anyone has any clues pertaining to Le Grand's activities and fellow criminals in Calais or elsewhere by the French “boarder“, I'd be most grateful for any information.

Quote Debra Arif:
What you have to bear in mind is that all this info comes from brief trial transcripts and the papers, so the whole story is not known, like I said before, we have no idea what questions were asked exactly.
Yes, I'm very aware of this. I hope we might end up finding more clues (in the newspapers and in the lit) to figure it out.

[Debra A]

This is also a question for Debs (when she turns up here). I'm still completely ignorant about the procedural rules in the Malborough Magistrates Courts and the Old Bailey hearings, but wouldn't the defendants have a sollicitor? Wouldn't Le Grand's sollicitor try to “subpoena“ (or whatever they called it in Victorian jargon) the evidence so insistently mentioned by his client?

Yes,but Grandy sacked his solicitor halfway through his 89 Old Bailey trial like Tom says.
The magistrates court hearing was to establish if there was enough evidence to send Le Grand to trial for blackmailing Dr Morris, the fact Le Grand mentioned he knew Lewis and worked for him was bound to be something that was looked into. That is probably whyMr Frith, who was originally Le Grand's defence solicitor at the later Old Bailey trial ( a month between the two hearings, to answer your preious question) questioned George Lewis about whether he knew [if] Le Grand had been employed by Soames. Lewis denied any knowledge.
What you have to bear in mind is that all this info comes from brief trial transcripts and the papers, so the whole story is not known, like I said before, we have no idea what questions were asked exactly.

re the betting scam. The scam was that Le Grand and whoever else was involved used forged cheques (in the name of a real person) to place bets in that man's name. After one race they would cancel the rest of the bets and claim the balance of the cheque back in cash.

[Tom_Wescott]

Maria,

I believe by that point Le Grand had fired his representatives and was representing himself. Yes, Clarke had made a specialty of uncovering race track fraud, etc. However, keep in mind that Le Grand was in prison from 1877 to 1884, and Clarke retired sometime around then, so I don't know that Clarke would have known Le Grand from the tracks. And while Le Grand was certain involved in horse track betting, I'm not sure to what extent or that he bet illegally. We just know that the money he used to bet was obtained illegally.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

Hi Maria. The Clarke episode described in my book takes place in the 1877s, so doesn't tell us much.

And when you referred to the “horse track“, did you mean betting etc.? Tom, was Le Grand at all involved in betting at the horse races as well?

I don't think Le Grand was at all bluffing about his papers. He was ready to produce them but was not asked to. No doubt Lewis and the magistrate were not eager to have such a thing discussed.

This is also a question for Debs (when she turns up here). I'm still completely ignorant about the procedural rules in the Malborough Magistrates Courts and the Old Bailey hearings, but wouldn't the defendants have a sollicitor? Wouldn't Le Grand's sollicitor try to “subpoena“ (or whatever they called it in Victorian jargon) the evidence so insistently mentioned by his client?

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Maria. The Clarke episode described in my book takes place in the 1877s, so doesn't tell us much.

I don't think Le Grand was at all bluffing about his papers. He was ready to produce them but was not asked to. No doubt Lewis and the magistrate were not eager to have such a thing discussed.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

Since Clarke's expertise was the horse track, it's hard to imagine Lewis used him as a key investigator, but who knows.

The horse track as in “playing the poneys“, as in Ascot, Newmarket etc.? Does your book Lewis and Lewis say anything else of interest about Clarke, Tom?

What I'm interested to know pertaining to Debs' attachment in her post #84 is, since Le Grand claimed during the hearing that he had papers “in his pocket“ to prove that he had worked for Lewis pertaining to the Parnell commission, did the magistrates discussed these papers/evidence at all as next in the hearing?
Or was Le Grand simply bluffing?

[Tom_Wescott]

Lewis said Le Grand and Scanlan visited him and mentioned Le Grand visited him just before Pigott gave evidence, Feb last [speaking in June 89]

I'm eating crow. I read that part of my essay when I got home Friday, and indeed, Le Grand did claim to have worked for Lewis. However, it looked to me as though Le Grand had visited Lewis alone prior to February 1889, and PRIOR TO THIS Le Grand and Scanlan visited, though Le Grand just hung in the background. Lewis hired a myriad of investigators. Since Clarke's expertise was the horse track, it's hard to imagine Lewis used him as a key investigator, but who knows. He certainly wasn't the only one. Le Grand probably was hired by Soames and would have stalked Lewis' good friend, Labouchere. If Le Grand was subsequently employed in any way by Lewis, it was probably only in the capacity of getting paid for information.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

the ex-inspector hired by George Lewis to protect Dr. Morris and investigate Le Grand was a fellow named Clarke.

So Clarke was following Le Grand, who was following Labouchere, who was following Pigott, who was following Parnell. Cracks me up.

PS.: Debs, pertaining to the attachment in your post #64, since Le Grand allegedly had papers “in his pocket“ to prove that he had worked for Lewis pertaining to the Parnell commission, did they discussed these papers/evidence at all as next in that hearing?

[mariab]

Hmm. Why doesn't Lewis' sudden, late “recall“ that Le Grand (with Scanlan) had come to him TWICE to seek work strike me as genuine?
Before reading up on the stuff, Debs, might I inquire how much time run between the (Dr. Morris) case went from the Malborough Magistrates Courts to the Old Bailey?

As for Clarke's employment by Lewis in the Parnell inquiry, since Clarke is the focus of an entire chapter in the book Tom's reading (Lewis and Lewis), maybe it'll be cool if Tom told us anything of relevance on Clarke's detective work pertaining to Parnell on Monday. Did Clarke too stalked Pigott/Labouchere/etc.?
(By the way, I really hope to have finished with my darn article by Monday, for which I can't pretend I'm terribly motivated.)

PS.: The attachment in your post #61, Debs, says that Soames' detectives had followed up Pigott to Labouchere's house. Possibly, if this was known, this is the reason why it was asked if Le Grand was the detective in question.

[Debra A]

My take is, Grandy appeared at Malborough on charges of blackmail, GH Lewis was defending Morris so Grandy brought up the fact he had worked for Lewis as a detective on the Parnell Inquiry and said he had the proof of this.

Lewis denied this. The case went to the Old Bailey and Lewis when questioned at this trial remembered that Grandy and Scanlan had tried to get work from him, and later Grandy had come alone to get work, but Lewis's detective of choice on the Parnell Inquiry was Clarke.

Then, for whatever reason, Lewis was asked about Grandy working for Soames [maybe it was a perhaps question...could he have] and Lewis denied any knowledge.

...but what the feck do I know eh?