A couple of accounts by Inspector John Sweeney about a swindler known variously as de Villiers , Weissenfeld, etc. Since this character claimed at times to be a medical doctor and had connections to the San Francisco area, I'll take a look at him but probably conclude he's not relevant after all.
The Strand, August, 1907, Pages 161-164
The Romance of Crime
The Experiences of Two Famous Scotland Yard Detectives
I. Mr. John Sweeney--A Chapter of Reminiscences
Pages 163-164
The connection of Roland de Villiers with the anarchists has never been absolutely cleared up yet; but I have many reasons for believing that he supplied them with funds, and that his wealth was freely drawn on for anarchist propaganda after being "earned" through extraordinary frauds—and worse. The romance of this man's life would fill volumes, and I can only here raise a corner of the curtain. He has been described as a man with a hundred aliases, and more than a hundred banking accounts. He swindled his shareholders out of millions before the Whitaker Wright case had taught the public the secret of fraudulent "limited companies." His ingenuity in baffling the police knew no bounds. His palatial residence at Wembley Park was honeycombed with secret exits. He maintained a staff of private detectives for the sole purpose of watching the police detectives and guarding his own safety. His disguises were so effectual that at a time when he was turned fifty years of age he passed for thirty-two, and made love to susceptible rich women, whom he married, robbed, and abandoned. He by no means broke the record in this direction, as bigamy was merely a small detail in his life of crime. He was undoubtedly guilty of arson in connection with the fire insurance scandals which created a sensation in 1886. Leaving less guilty agents behind to face the police, he disappeared only to break out in a new place where no one ever dreamt that the pious, well-dressed "Winter" was identical with "Mathieson," the Scotsman, whose arson was even then ringing in the ears of all. Winter obtained twenty thousand pounds a year for several years, ringing the changes on the owners of various high-sounding names who, he alleged, were directors of his companies. Simultaneously with these frauds he was actually perpetrating swindles in other parts of England by long-firm methods. He kept an album of signatures (now at Scotland Yard) to assist his own memory, for otherwise he could never have kept pace with his own aliases. His wife, who had no alternative but to carry out his mysterious orders, believed that he was an honest millionaire carrying on a secret political propaganda. In all innocence she posed as his sister, little knowing that he was trading on her innocence, and that the women who, from time to time, were introduced to her were being defrauded heartlessly and cruelly in the most ignoble manner a man can rob a woman. Her cup of bitterness, indeed, overflowed at last when circumstances betrayed some of his evil habits within her own circle of friends. I prefer to say little on this side of his character.
I first sought his acquaintance in connection with a number of anarchists who gathered at the Holborn Restaurant meetings of the Legitimation League in 1897. He dodged me out of the building, anxious not to let me see his face; for at that time we only knew him as De Villiers, the anarchist millionaire.
Later he entertained Lilian Harman, the famous and beautiful American free-lover anarchist, whose father, aged eighty, has just been released from prison. His audacity knew no bounds. Surrounded by his faithful detectives he avoided police, so that recognising him. The first person to connect De Villiers origin of his vast wealth was a solicitor named Wyatt Digby, whom this man was instrumental in ruining. Mr. Digby, in an unfortunate moment, had been instructed to defend a client towards whose defence De Villiers had contributed some money. De Villiers was deeply concerned in the case, but the solicitor recognised his duty only to the client he was defending, with the result that at the Old Bailey trial the prisoner was released and the judge made some scathing remarks against the real culprit, De Villiers. De Villiers, in revenge, succeeded by a plentiful supply of perjury in getting Digby struck off the rolls. Digby, in seeking for evidence against his enemy, found a clue which in our hands led us to identify De Villiers with a whole host of frauds and other crimes. He died within an hour of his sensational arrest in a secret passage of his baronial mansion in Cambridge, where he lived as Dr. Sinclair. Had he stood his trial, the evidence would have made the most famous criminal romance of our times. He was a Don Juan, Whitaker Wright, and Charles Peace in one. What romance lost by his death the world gained by being rid of a dangerous, although brilliant, scoundrel.
--end
New York Sun, July 16, 1905, Section 3, Page 8, Column 1
A MAN OF MANY ALIASES
CAREER OF ONE OF THE SHREWDEST OF ENGLISH SWINDLERS
Dr De Villiers's Peculations Cleared Him
$100,000 a Year--Fictitious Corporations
and Companies--Lived in Splendid
Debauchery--How He Was Caught
In tracing a clever villain there is always
a doubly pleasing interest. One feels at
once the keen ardor of the sportsman and
the knowledge that success means the removal
of one of societies terrors, writes
Detective Inspector Sweeney of Scotland
Yard, in the Cleveland Plain Dealer. I cannot
say who has been the most wicked criminal
I ever met--probably the worst is not
always the most interesting. A sordid
murder is never the entertaining spectacle
that morbid journalists try to depict. The
really fascinating criminal Is the man who
thinks, whose plans are clearly laid before
hand, whose crime is no mere episode, but
the result of a deliberate purpose. Such
men, although seldom violent In their misdeeds,
are an immense danger and society
owes much of it own safety to the fact that
its criminals are usually its least intelligent
members.
"Dr De Vllllers," to give him his best
known name was indeed a villain of parts.
A mere recital of his misdeeds would fill
a three volume novel. A list of his aliases
would look like a directory and supply a
dozen novelists with ready made sets of
characters for all the novels they
write. Whitaker Wright helped more people
to lose money, but Dr. De Vllllers was
more ubiquitous.
From the year 1880 to the time of his
arrest and death under tragic circumstances
in 1902. De Vllliers lived a life of the utmost
affluence. His mansions, parks and estates
in various parts of Great Britain were
baronial in their splendor. He had a retinue
of servants, horses, carriages and motors,
but he dressed simply and never
gave to any charity. He obtained
wealth by methods of swindling which
could only be practised in England and
America. He was a German and he had
not been in England long before he realIzed
how easily a swindler could live and
flourish there. After various more or less
successful bankruptcies which left his
creditors penniless while he lived luxuriously,
he found himself in a tight corner.
He was sent to prison for perjury and a
prosecution was commenced against him
for fraud. Having served his first sentence
of twelve months hard labor, he managed
to obtain ball in the second prosecution.
He escaped from England and his bail
was forfeited. He returned to England
almost Immediately and then commenced
the successful frauds from which It is estimated
he cleared no less than $100,000 a
year for several years. His method was
the same in the several companies which
be established. First he took an office,
invented seven names and addresses
which he registered as the first shareholders
in the company. The latter always had a
high sounding name such as the Brandy
Distillers Company, Limited; the University
Press, Limited; the Concentrated
Produce Company, Limited. &c.
The directors were always men whose
names sounded familiar and whose
addresses seemed to Indicate stability and
wealth, One company's directors were
Sir Stuart Wortley, Bart., of Kings Park,
Waltham Abbey; Lord Roland Owen, K.
C. I. of the Lodge, Whitbury, Suffolk;
Col. Laking-Webb of Aldershot, and A. A.
Gould Jr., 73 Fifth avenue, New York,
U. S. A. Needless to say not one of these
worthy men had any existence. The
Brandy Distillers Company, Limited, went
even further. The directors were boldly
announced under such names as Messrs.
Moët, Perrier and Mumm, and the prospectus
contained actual photographs of
veritable vineyards--some of the best in
France--labeled variously, "Our distillery
at Bordeaux," "View of the Company's
Limoges Vineyards," "Nimes and Montpelier
Branches," and all described as the
properties of the Brandy Distillers Company.
Not one of these companies ever had
any property or assets of any sort or kind.
Some of them existed for two years before
any attempt was ever made to obtain
money from the public. Meanwhile the
authorities were furnished with increasing
lists of alleged shareholders, consisting of
names and addresses taken from any
directory.
Reports were sent (and paid for) to be
inserted in numbers of newspapers of annual
meetings supposed to have been held
"at the offices of the company." Of course
no reputable newspaper would insert such
notices, but there are many newspapers
in England which are not above work of
this sordid character. The reports of
meetings invariably ended with announcements
of 8 or 10 per cent. dividends. After
one or two such reports had appeared the
public would be drawn into the net.
From various addresses circulars pretending
to come from a firm of stock and
share dealers would be sent to all the shareholders
in various well known concerns.
These circulars were skilfully drawn. No
mere advertisement of their real object,
but a clever letter was despatched giving
details of some excellent high class stocks
which were stated to be for sale or to be
purchased. As all the shares so mentioned
were to be sold or bought at the
market value there seemed no reason to
doubt the bona fides of the circular. But
the circular also included "about 250 Brandy
distillery shares, $25 each," with a footnote
to the effect that the prospectus copies of
the last two reports could be had on application
and that the company had already
paid dividends of 8 to 10 per cent.
Then the public began to bite the daintily
displayed bait. Year after year this dodge
was repeated, and actual dividends of 10
per cent. were paid--of course out of the
new victims' capital as there were no assets
of any kind. Then one fine day the
office was closed and no more was heard of
that particular fraud. The enormous success
of these company swindles is almost
incredible, and Dr. De Villiers found no
difficulty in continuing them. He lived
in regal style at Harrow, and besides houses
in London and other places in England
he had a beautiful residence in the Avenue
de l'Opera, Paris, and a chateau on the
Rhine
His morals were about as elevated as
his sense of honesty. He was vice-president
of the free love movement, a bigamist
or polygamist, and his household was the
most extraordinary it has over been
lot to see or dream of. His wife, who
lived with him, was variously represented
to be a countess, a famous authoress, the
wife of an eminent statesman, a Russian
princess--anything except his own wife.
He more frequently posed as his own wife's
brother, at times alleging her husband
to be a certain George Astor Singer, a
millionaire of New York. I have a long
descriptive article written by Dr. De Villiers
in the University Magazine, in which is
described a most wonderful orphanage,
built at a cost of many millions by the
munificent "Singer." Neither the millionaire
nor the orphanage had any existence,
but this fact did not prevent various
serious journals from commenting on the
article representing a valuable philanthropic
work. With so little knowledge is
the literary world governed.
From the commencement of the year
1898 some of the Scotland Yard staff, as
well as various local police forces, endeavored
to arrest this strange criminal.
I have only given hints of the crimes
with which the doctor has been publicly
charged. Justice demands my silence
as to the many crimes (some Involving
female accomplices still living) of which
Dr. De Villiers is believed to have been
guilty.
But if his crimes wore many and great,
never did criminal show greater ingenuity
in frustrating justice and evading pursuit.
For many years he employed a staff of
private detectives. Attempts were even
made to undermine the police officers, but
for the credit of the force I am glad to saY
that every such attempt was immediately
reported, and had he been a less skilful
villain he would have fallen Into one of
the many traps set for him.
Before "Dr. De Villiers" had been identified
as the notorious "Weissenfeld" he had
in the former name appeared In semi-public
connection with a band of freelovers who held
meetings at St. James's Hall, London. He
was expected to take the vice chair at a
dinner on one occasion, and I was present.
He learned that 1 was In the room and did
not appear. His spies were everywhere,
and I nave reason to believe that none of
the movements of his enemies ever passed
unobserved. Wealth cannot buy justice
in this country, but It is useful to a criminal
anxious to cover his trucks.
De Villiers not only bought detectives,
he also imitated historical conspirators.
His house at Harrow was a masterpiece of
secret passages. A tower commanded a
full view of every approach to the house.
Secret panels flew open and the estate was
undermined with tunnels leading to half a
dozen exits, some of them more than a mile
apart, owing to the road passing around two
houses and estates. It was an ideal spot
for a refugee and every "surprise visit"
to the house Was in vain.
Needless to say all companies came to
grief, and many were the complaints from
suffering shareholders. As, however, there
was never any sign that one of his companies
had any connection with any other of them,
no one complained so long as he received
his dividend, and as the office was closed
months before another dividend was
expected we could do nothing but search
and wait.
In January, 1902, the work which had
engaged the attention of some of the best
men at yard received its fruition. We
discovered that the "doctor" was lying in
Oriental splendor at a Cambridge mansion.
Two detective Inspectors were instructed
to make the final coup. Knowing the
slippery character of the man, they acted
with the tactics of a wisdom born of past
experience. Every possible exit was guarded
was the house was surrounded. Armed
and prepared for every possibility detectives
approached the house, arresting all
the inmates (various accomplices and others
were simultaneously arrested in London).
Dr. De Villiers, who was living here as
Roland Sinclair, with a loaded revolver,
escaped into one of the carefully prepared
secret passages. Our men, knowing all the
past history of the criminal, determined not
to leave without him. As they knew he could
not have got safely away, every wall and
floor was searched and sounded. The
secret entrance was found leading to the
passage which had been ingeniously built
in the wall. The game was up, and the
villain we had sought so long surrendered
without a struggle. Within an hour of
arrest he was dead. Was it poison or apoplexy?
In De Villlers's possession was found a
volume of signatures to remind him how to
sign his various aliases. Numbers of
bankbooks were found showing that he had
taken the most elaborate means to dispose
of his victims' checks. When the trial of
his accomplices took place it took some
days to hear the evidence of his various
bankers. If ever there was an undesirable
alien, I think this was the man.
--end
New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 11902, 1 March 1902, Page 2
TRAGEDY AT CAMBRIDGE.
ARREST AND DEATH OF A WEALTHY "DOCTOR."
-
Colin Wilson Intv in Vancouver Sun 1968
Colin Wilson told the Vancouver Sun about Stowell's story (w/o naming
Stowell) in 1968. There's also a claim (incorrect, I assume) that Lees "once
identified the Ripper as a member of the Royal Family."
Vancouver Sun, January 30, 1968, Page 21
Writer Raises Question
Was Duke of Clarence Really the Ripper?Leave a comment:
-
Dr. Benjamin Howard attended an 1882 meeting about his ambulance proposal which Sir William Gull and Timothy Holmes, chief surgeon of the Metropolitan Police, also attended:
Medical Times and Gazette, February 11, 1882, Pages 146-147
THE PROPOSED HORSE AMBULANCE SERVICE FOR THE METROPOLIS. The Duke of Cambridge last week presided at a meeting held at the Royal United Service Institution, to consider a proposal to organise a hospital and accident ambulance service for tho metropolis. Amongst the large and influential gathering assembled were the treasurers, chairmen of committees, and other representatives of many of the metropolitan hospitals, Lord Templetown, Sir William Gull, the Chief Commissioner of Police, and Mr. T. Holmes, their chief surgeon, and several other members of the medical profession, including Dr. B. Howard, of New York.. The proceedings were, of course, of a purely formal nature, that is, they were confined to the passing of a general resolution declaring that such an institution was, in the opinion of the meeting, desirable ; and of the election of a committee, the names of which were, we believe, published, but which we were not fortunate enough to see, and which is intended to include representatives from each of the large hospitals, as well as some who will be able to represent the police force, and others. The Duke of Cambridge introduced the proceedings in a few words full of common sense, and was particularly anxious that the subject of the conveyance from place to place of persons suffering from contagious diseases should not be left out of consideration. This gave the cue, in some sort, to the remarks of Sir William Gull, who proposed the first resolution, as follows:—"That, in the opinion of this meeting, it is desirable to form a Hospital and Accident Ambulance Service for London." He suggested the omission of the words "hospital and accident," because this service would not be limited to the conveyance of persons to hospital. Mr. Buxton, the chairman of the London Hospital, gave expression to some remarks, in the course of his speech as seconder of this resolution, to which we can give our cordial assent, and which, indeed, in substance, we took the opportunity of pointing out in commenting upon the meeting held at the office of the St. John Association a week or two ago. We mean, that it will be useless to aim at having these ambulance arrangements at every hospital, but that in a great overgrown city like London, where the hospitals are not evenly distributed by any means, far more good will be attained if they are placed at police-stations, railway-stations, perhaps even large factories, and so on. Independently of the advantages of the latter plan, however, it will not do to lose sight of the fact that the funds of hospitals cannot be expected to run to the large expense which the other plan would entail. Of course, it might happen, as Sir Sydney Waterlow said, that if one hospital started such an ambulance the others would be obliged to follow suit—as, indeed, actually was the case in New York, where it was found that the Bellevue Hospital was receiving all the accidents of the city, and, accordingly, the others were obliged, in self-defence, to start similar arrangements. We hope that no such action with this object in view will be taken in London; but that if at any time tie plan should commend itself to the citizens as essential, they will look the question fairly in the face, and make up their minds to have the support of it borne by the local rates.
We have not space to refer to all the speeches that were made, and must therefore be content with saying that Dr. Howard briefly described the main points in the construction of the ambulances, the full details of which we published last week; and Mr. T. Holmes, from his long experience as Surgeon-General of the Police Force, drew attention to some of the practical difficulties which, owing to the magnitude of the metropolis and the great number of accidents continually occurring, would have to be met. He further assured the meeting of the desire of the Chief Commissioner of Police, and of those working with him, to render whatever help they could. The motion was duly carried, as was also a proposition of Mr. J. H. Crossman for the nomination of a representative committee.
Sir Edward Hay Currie mentioned that a complete ambulance has been at work for some time in the East-end for the conveyance of infectious cases.
We think it was unfortunate that none of the authorities of the Association of St. John were seen upon the platform, seeing that this society had been, in a way, the first to move in the matter. Sir Edward Lechmere and his colleagues occupied some benches in the body of the meeting; in the course of his remarks he said that he and the St. John Association would be willing, and indeed pleased, to co-operate in any way they could with the movement; it is therefore to be regretted that neither he nor Major Duncan thought they could spare sufficient time to allow them to serve on the committee. We hope that one or other of these gentlemen or one of their colleagues will allow their names to be added to the list. We fancied, we hope wrongly, that some gentlemen were feeling, perhaps ever so slightly, something of the unpleasant sensation of having been left out in the cold, and there was perhaps a little too much of the London Hospital about all the proceedings. It is much to be hoped that all who are interested in the subject will work heartily together; there is, we believe, a good work to be done, but unless all pull in the same direction it is to be feared that the present movement will end in failure.
--end
Holmes' appointment in 1865:
British Medical Journal, August 12, 1865, Page 151
Mr. Timothy Holmes has been appointed Surgeon-in-Chief of the Metropolitan Police in the place of Sir John Fisher, who lately resigned the office. The salary is £800 a year. Private practice is not permitted to the holder of this appointment; but he may retain hospital appointments.
--end
Holmes' replacement in 1885:
The Medical Press , August 19, 1885, Page 174
The lucrative appointment of Chief Surgeon to the Metropolitan Police having become vacant by the resignation of Mr. Timothy Holmes, F.R.C.S., Mr. MacKellar, of St. Thomas's Hospital, has been elected thereto.
--end
Holmes' obit:
The Medical Press and Circular, Volume 135, September 11, 1907, Page 287
HE death of Mr. Timothy Holmes, F.R.C.S., will form a matter of regret to all old Cambridge and St. George's men, as well as to a large circle of other members of the profession. Mr. Holmes, who was over eighty years of age, graduated as Bachelor of Arts, at Cambridge, as far back as 1847, and afterwards entered as a student at St. George's. He became a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons in 1853, and was soon afterwards appointed assistant surgeon to the hospital, He was for a long period full surgeon. and on retirement he was appointed consulting surgeon and joint-treasurer. For many years he was chief surgeon to the Metropolitan Police, and he had been president of the Royal Medical and Chirurgicai and of the Pathological Society, as also vice-president of the Royal College of Surgeons, and Hunterian Professor of Surgery and Pathology to the College. His surgical writings have been numerous and valuable, including, besides many detached papers and articles. Important contributions to a “System of Surgery,” of which he was editor.
--end
Holmes toasts Sir Charles Warren in 1888. Warren complains about "anonymous writers."
The Lancet, November 10, 1888, Page 925
THE METROPOLITAN POLICE SURGEONS'
ASSOCIATION.
This Association, which was founded last year to promote he interests of the divisional surgeons of the Metropolitan police, held its second annual dinner at the Criterion on Wednesday last. The chairman of the dinner was Mr. A. O. Mackellar, the popular chief surgeon. About seventy members of the Association were present, and amongst the guests were Sir Charles Warren, Sir Thomas Crawford, Mr. J. Gordon Brown, surgeon to the City Police, and others. After the usual loyal toast, Mr. Mackellar proposed "The United Services," to which Sir Thomas Crawford replied, making special reference to the services of members of the profession in the medical branch of the army during recent years. Mr. T. Bond, in proposing "The Association," coupled with the name of the president, acknowledged the debt which the divisional surgeons owe to him for his uniform kindness, courtesy, and consideration. Mr. Mackellar, in reply, traced the origin of the Association, mentioned the difficulties with which it had had to contend, and congratulated the members on the progress made, a large majority of the divisional surgeons having joined it. Mr. Timothy Holmes proposed "The Guests," and referred in apt terms to the qualities which had rendered Sir Charles Warren so conspicuously fitted for the post which he occupied—qualities which, while they were justly admired by the good, made him intensely disliked by the bad in the large area over which he exercised authority. Sir Charles Warren, who was enthusiastically received, after thanking the members for their reception, referred to several changes which had been made, and which it was proposed to make in the facilities given for carrying on the duties of the divisional surgeons. He also referred to the statements which were made in certain papers a few weeks ago as to alleged differences between himself and the medical service of the police as represented by the President of the Association, assuring the members that such differences had never existed excepting in the mind of the anonymous writers. Mr. Nelson Hardy proposed "The Medical Press, as represented by THE LANCET and British Medical Journal." Mr. Battle, who drew attention to the immense material at the command of members of such on association for the advancement of medico-legal knowledge, replied for the former, and Mr. Hart for the latter. Mr. Buckell proposed "The Chairman," who ably responded. During the evening songs were given by Dr. Yarrow and Mr. Spurgin, Dr. Forsyth giving a humorous recitation.Leave a comment:
-
A Conan Doyle story, published in 1898, which contains a description of madness similar to that found in the Dr. Howard story. SPOILERS, I suppose.
The Strand Magazine, Volume 15, June 1898, Pages 602-612
The Story of the Beetle Hunter
by A. Conan Doyle
Page 612
My poor brother-in-law is one of the best fellows upon earth, a loving husband and an estimable father, but he comes from a stock which is deeply tainted with insanity. He has more than once had homicidal outbreaks, which are the more painful because his inclination is always to attack the very person to whom he is most attached. His son was sent away to school to avoid this danger, and then came an attempt upon my sister, his wife, from which she escaped with injuries that you may have observed when you met her in London. You understand that he knows nothing of the matter when he is in his sound senses, and would ridicule the suggestion that he could under any circumstances injure those whom he loves so dearly. It is often, as you know, a characteristic of such maladies that it is absolutely impossible to convince the man who suffers from them of their existence.
--end
Another link to the story.Leave a comment:
-
Thanks for posting the info about Guiteau and the anecdote about your mother and Hammond's son, Jeff.
Here's a bit from one of Hammond's British counterparts, George H. Savage:
Fortnightly Review, October 1, 1888, Pages 448-463
HOMICIDAL MANIA
by George H. Savage
Page 463
After all this I suppose I shall be expected to sum up in some sort of way on the Whitechapel murders; but I feel much more inclined to say, the facts are before you, judge for yourselves. Yet I may suggest a few points of special interest. First, the murders may not have all been committed by one man. There is a fashion in murder, or rather, there are epidemics of similar crimes; or, again, the imitative action may have come into play. I do not think that any epileptic or drunken maniac would have so cunningly selected his victims and avoided detection, and the failure to identify any one is in favour of there being only one agent. A mere lust for blood would not have been satisfied by the selection of victims. The skill with which the murders were perpetrated, and the skill of the mutilation point to someone with some anatomical knowledge. This might be possessed by a butcher or someone who had had medical knowledge; but there are so many now-a-days with mechanical knowledge of the body, in the form of post-mortem room and anatomy room porters, that to suppose the murders to be the work of a medical man, is to my thinking, going too far. The cunning of the evasion, the ferocity of the crimes, the special selection of the victims, seem to me to depend either on a fiendishly criminal revenge, or else upon some fully organised delusion of persecution or world regeneration.Leave a comment:
-
Hi TradeName,Originally posted by TradeName View Post
1) When Dr. Hammond refers to his November 1882 article ["A Problem for Sociologist" in the North American Review] he is referring in that article to the biggest case on the insanity defence then occupying the United States. That was the trial of Charles Julius Guiteau for the assassination of President James Garfield in the fall and winter of 1881, resulting in the verdict of guilty in the first degree, and Guiteau's hanging in late June 1882. The trial judge was Judge Cox in the District of Columbia. The fact that Guiteau was insane is now taken for granted, but he had shot Garfield for refusing to give him a political appointment (either Minister to Austria or Counsel at the Paris Embassy). His antics (and personal rejection of the insanity plea) basically told against him. At the time most of the U.S. would have supported Hammond's viewpoint that given the danger of possibly releasing a murderous lunatic to kill again meant that hanging the lunatic was a better course.
A good study on the insanity defence in 1882 is Charles Rosenberg's "The Trial of the Assassin Guiteau".
2) Personal note: My grandmother Anna Silverstein used Dr. Hammond's son as a physician in the 1930s, and on at least one occasion took my mother Jean with her. Dr. Hammond's son (after examining my grandmother) picked up my mother (she was about 8 at the time) and sitting her on his knee told her that when he was a boy he sat on the knee of President Abraham Lincoln in a carriage where he, the President, and his father (the Surgeon General, remember) watched the Army of the Potomac on parade. Dr. Hammond's son died in 1941.
JeffLeave a comment:
-
William A. Hammond on JtR
William A. Hammond was an American doctor of "diseases of the mind." Here's a biographical sketch:
Appletons' Annual Cyclopaedia and Register of Important Events 1900 (New York: D. Appleton, 1901), Pages 477-478
Hammond, William Alexander, surgeon, born in Annapolis, Md., Aug. 28, 1828; died in Washington, D. C, Jan. 5, 1900. He was graduated at the medical department of the University of New York in 1848, after which he attended a course of clinics in the Pennsylvania Hospital in Philadelphia. July 3, 1849. he entered the army of the United States as assistant surgeon general with the rank of lieutenant, which rank was raised to captain, June 29, 1854. He did duty at various forts and military posts, and acted as medical director of the Sioux expedition and as surgeon to the troops engaged in laying out a road through the Rocky mountains. Oct. 31, 1860, he resigned from the army to become Professor of Anatomy and Physiology in the University of Maryland. At the beginning of the civil war he resigned his chair and re-entered the army. He was appointed assistant surgeon May 28, 1861, and promoted April 25, 1862, to surgeon general with the rank of brigadier general. He instituted many reforms, but became involved in a controversy, was tried by court-martial, and was dismissed from the service Aug. 18, 1864. In 1868 he was appointed Professor of Diseases of the Mind and the Nervous System in the College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York City; subsequently he filled similar chairs in Bellevue Hospital Medical College and in the University of the City of New York. In 1882 he was one of the founders of the New York Post-Graduate Medical School, in which he held the professorship of Diseases of the Mind for years. In the meantime the President and the Secretary of War had been authorized to review the proceedings of the court-martial that had removed him from the army, and on Aug. 27. 1879, he was, after fifteen years of suspension, restored to his former place on the rolls of the army as surgeon general and brigadier general on the retired list. In February, 1888, he abandoned his practice in New York and removed to Washington. He wrote many books on nervous complaints and other medical topics, as well as some novels. His published works are Physiological Memoirs (Philadelphia, 1863); Treatise on Hygiene (1863); lectures on Venereal Diseases (1864); A Chapter on Sleep (1865); Insanitv in its Medico-Legal Relations (New York, 1866); Robert Severne: His Friends and his Enemies (Philadelphia. I860); Medico-Legal Study of the Case of Daniel McFarland (New York,' 1867); Sleep and its Derangements (Philadelphia, 1869); Physics and Physiology of Spiritualism (New York, 1S70); Clinical Lectures on Diseases of the Nervous System (1871); Treatise on Diseases of the Nervous System (1871); Insanity in its Relation to Crime (1873); Spiritualism and Allied Causes and Conditions of Nervous Derangement (1870); Cerebral Hyperemia (1878) ; Fasting Girls (1879); Neurological Contributions of Studies and Case Records (1870); On Certain Conditions of Nervous Derangement: Somnambulism, Hypnotism, Hysteria, Hysteroid Affections (1881); Dr. Grattan (1884); Lai (1884); A Strong-minded Woman (1885); Mr. Oldmixon (1885); On the Susquehanna (1887); Sexual Impotence in the Male (18S(i); Sexual Impotence in Male and Female (Detroit, 1887); Spinal Irritation (1888); The Son of Perdition (Chicago, 1898); and with Clara Lanza, Tales of Eccentric Life (New York, 1886).
--end
Hammond was Surgeon General of the U.S. Army during the Civil War at the time Dr. Benjamin Howard was an Army surgeon. Later they served together on a committee in New York City.
Medical Record, Volume 8, July 15, 1873, Page 352
Life-saving Society Of New York.—A society of this character has recently been inaugurated in New York city, to promote the rescue of persons in peril from drowning, from fire, and from other accidents. The medical officers are as follows: Vice-President. Dr. E. R. Peaslee; Corresponding Secretary. Dr. Benjamin Howard; Executive Committee, Drs. Frank H. Hamilton and Alfred C. Post; Board of Directors, Drs. B. Howard, A. C. Post, T. G. Thomas, E. R. Peaslee, Marion Sims, C. R. Agnew, Wm. A. Hammond, A. Flint, Jr., F. H. Hamilton, and Fordyce Barker. Prof. Theo. W. Dwight, President.
--end
The North American Review, Volume 147, December, 1888, Page 626-637
Madness and Murder
by William A. Hammond
Pages 633-637
[...]
A few months ago a murder of a peculiarly atrocious character was committed in the district known as Whitechapel, London. The victim was a woman of the lowest class of that particularly low section of the metropolis. Not content with simply killing the woman, the murderer had mutilated the corpse and had inflicted wounds altogether unnecessary for the accomplishment of his object. Three or four months afterwards another woman of the same class was found dead with over thirty stab wounds in her body, and in quick succession other similar crimes were committed, until now the number amounts to nine. The efforts of the police to discover the perpetrator or perpetrators have up to this time been utterly fruitless, and every supposed clew that has been followed up has proved to be without foundation. All kinds of theories have been indulged in by the police, professional and amateur, and by legal and medical experts, who appear to have exhausted their ingenuity in devising the most strained hypotheses in their attempts to account for these murderous crimes. In the foregoing remarks relative to madness and murder I have brought forward examples in illustration of several forms of mental derangement, any one of which may have been the predominating motive which has been the starting point of the crimes in question.
Thus they may have been committed by a person who kills merely for the love of killing, and who has selected a particular class from which to choose his victims, for the reason that being of very little importance in the social world, they could be killed with a minimum amount of risk of detection. The fact that unnecessary wounds and mutilation were inflicted gives additional support to this theory. The more hacking and cutting the more delight would be experienced.
They may be the result of a morbid impulse which the perpetrator feels himself unable to resist, and which, after he had yielded to its power, is followed by the most acute anguish of mind. It may be said against this view that if such were the fact the murderer would, in his moments of mental agony and. repentance, surrender himself to the authorities; but in answer I think it may be properly alleged that fear for his own safety would prevent him doing an act which he might feel to be right, but which he would know would lead to his speedy execution. To test the correctness of this hypothesis it would be necessary to offer him free and unconditional pardon. If he is the subject of a morbid impulse which he cannot resist, he will give himself up if immunity be promised him.
The murders may have been committed by one who is acting under the principle of suggestion. He may have recently heard or read of similar crimes (for such murders have been committed before) and has been impelled thereby to go and do likewise, until after the first two or three murders he has acquired a love for the act of killing, and for the excitement attendant on the risk which he runs. This last incentive is a very powerful one, with certain morbidly constituted minds, and has apparently been the chief motive in some notable series of crimes.
Again, they may have been committed by several persons acting under the influence of the power of imitation. This force, owing to the extensive publication of reports of crimes through the newspapers, is much more influential at present than at any other period in the history of the world. The more ferocious the murder the more likelihood that it will be imitated. It is not at all unreasonable to suppose that there may have been as many murderers of these women as there are murders.
I am inclined, however, to think that the perpetrator is a reasoning maniac, one who has received or imagines he has received some injury from the class of women upon which his crimes are committed, or who has assumed the role of the reformer, and who thinks he can annihilate them one by one or strike such terror into those that remain that they will hasten to abandon their vicious mode of life. He is probably a person whose insanity is not suspected even by those who are in constant association with him. He may be a clergyman, a lawyer, a physician, or even a member of the titled aristocracy; a cashier in a bank, a shopkeeper, an officer of the army or navy. All apparently motiveless crimes are exceedingly difficult of detection. It is quite conceivable that this man may leave the dinner-table or the ball-room and pass a dozen policemen on his way towards the accomplishment of his purpose. The higher he appeared to be in the social scale the less he would be liable to suspicion. He may be for a man some such person as Hélène Jégado was for a woman. This wretch, between the years of 1853 and 1857, killed twenty-eight persons by poison, besides making several unsuccessful attempts. In none of her murders was any cause alleged or discovered, though undoubtedly the pleasure derived from the perpetration of crime was the chief factor. Her victims were her masters and mistresses, her fellow servants, her friends, and several nuns, for whom in their lest moments she displayed the utmost tenderness and care. The plea of monomania was set up in her defense, but no evidence of insanity was brought forward by her counsel save the apparent want of motive for her crimes. It was shown, however, that she had begun her career when only seventeen years old by attempting to poison her confessor; that she had, while perpetrating her wholesale murders, affected the greatest piety and was for a time an inmate of a convent; that she had committed over thirty thefts; that she had maliciously cut and burned various articles of clothing placed in her charge; that when asked why she had stolen things that were of no use to her she had replied: "I always steal when I am angry;" that she was subject to alternate periods of great mental depression, and excessive and unreasonable gaiety; that she was affected with pains in the head and vertigo; that when she was angry she vomited blood; and that while in prison awaiting trial she was constantly laughing and joking about indifferent subjects. She was found guilty, and on being asked if she had anything to say why sentence of death should not be pronounced, made answer, "No, your Honor, I am innocent. I am resigned to all that may happen. I would rather die innocent than live guilty. You have judged me, but God will judge you." Her last words on the scaffold were directed to accusing a woman as her instigator and accomplice, whose name was not even mentioned during the trial, and who, upon inquiry, was found to be an old paralytic whose whole life had been of the most exemplary character.
If this woman had stopped after killing twenty-seven persons she would probably never have been detected. If the perpetrator of the so-called Whitechapel murders were to cease now his career of crime, there is no reason to suppose that he would ever be discovered. But it is not at all likely that he will fail to go on in the course which has now become second nature to him. His love for murder has become overpowering, and immunity has rendered him bold. Little by little he will become less cautious, and eventually he will be caught.
When arrested the question of how to dispose of him will arise. In what I have said I have assumed him to be a lunatic of some kind. If a certain degree of maudlin sentimentality should prevail he will be placed in a lunatic asylum and in the course of a few years may be discharged as cured. But such insanity as his is never cured. Doubtless while an inmate of the asylum his conduct will be of the most exemplary character. He will dissemble for years and will deceive the very elect among experts in insanity. Superintendents and clergymen and various other high personages will unite in testifying to his thorough change of heart and Christian bearing, and when he is discharged with the blessings of all with whom he has been associated he will begin to commit another series of murders fully as atrocious as those for which he has been sequestrated.
There is but one way to deal with a person like this Whitechapel murderer, and that is, to hang him as soon as he is caught. He is an enemy of society and is entitled to no more consideration than a wild beast which follows his instinct to kill. Laws are not made for the purpose of enforcing the principles of abstract justice; they are enacted solely for the protection of society. Some fifteen years ago, in a little book entitled "Insanity in its Relations to Crime," I urged that certain of the insane are properly as much amenable to punishment as though in full possession of all their mental faculties unimpaired. In a paper published in the North American Review for November, 1882, entitled "A Problem for Sociologists," I said:
"A man with murderous tendencies which he is unable to restrain is as much an enemy to society as a ferocious tiger or a mad dog, and ought to be dealt with in quite as summary a manner as we deal with these animals. It is all very well to talk of the inhumanity of such a proceeding, and to urge sequestration in a lunatic asylum as amply meeting the requirements of the case. But experience teaches us that, though it may be very difficult for a sane person improperly committed to get out of an asylum, it is the easiest thing in the world for a lunatic who has committed a crime to walk out of its doors with the full consent of the superintendent. Till these things are changed, the law, as recently laid down by Judge Noah Davis, of the Supreme Court of this State, and by Judge Cox, of the District of Columbia, and as almost universally held by the English judges, that every one is responsible who knows the nature and consequence of his act, is no more than sufficient for protection, the prime object of every law.
WILLIAM A. HAMMONDLeave a comment:
-
Billy,
I think the information about Winslow changing the date comes from Jack The Ripper: Letters From Hell by Stewart P. Evans and Keith Skinner. I notice that there's an 1889 newspaper article on this site about Winslow's letter:
Port Philip Herald (Australia), 26 November 1889, link
THE LATEST "JACK THE RIPPER" LETTER
ANOTHER MURDER EXPECTED
--
My working hypothesis is that Dr. Howard may have seen the Winslow interview in the news and then told the story in San Francisco, perhaps hinting that he had personal knowledge.
Thanks for the offer to photograph Dr. Phillips' grave.Last edited by TradeName; 06-20-2013, 11:47 PM.Leave a comment:
-
OK, I think I follow. I agree with you that it looks like the SF Call version is derivative. But, hope always springs high that we will find a separately sourced story for our research interest. Since wives have always suspected the worst of their husbands, I see no grounds for disagreement. Winslow, well, he is a different kettle of fish isn't he. Can you point me to something that describes his changing the dates on the purported communication from JtR?Originally posted by TradeName View Post
Best of wishes,
Billy
P.S. I live in the Kansas City area so I'll try to find and take a snapshot of the doctor's grave for you.Leave a comment:
-
If we're talking about the Dr. Howard story, then the question I have is: Does the San Francisco Call version derive from the Forbes Winslow interview or is it an independent account of the same alleged events? I 'm inclined to believe that the Call version is derivative, but I can't prove that. The other question is whether there is any truth to the story. I don't think it's implausible that some doctor's wife might have suspected him of being JtR, but I don't have any proof that this happened. The attribution of the story to Forbes Winslow does not exactly inspire confidence. Of course, even if it is true that a woman suspected her husband, it doesn't mean that the guy was actually JtR.Leave a comment:
-
My apologies, it appears I haven't been away as long as I thought!
BillyLeave a comment:
-
Where are we gong?
Trade, I've been away from JtR studies for at least seven years. I want to congratulate you on the enormous amount of research you've done. That being said, what is the purpose of your research? Forgive me for forgetting much of the minutia of JtR but seriously, in this case I'm totally confused on what the subject is or where you're headed with the research. Perhaps a prrimer for we less knowledgeable?
Respectfully yours,
BillyLeave a comment:
-
Brief mention of JtR in a Word War II-era article about French killer, Dr. Marcel Petiot.
The Telegraph-Herald (Dubuque, Iowa), March 16, 1944, Page 11
Deny Policies of Bluebeard
Slayings Unconnected with War, Officials Say
London(U.P.)
[...]
The Scotland Yard spokesman
said the only comparable British
case was that of "Jack the Ripper,"
who operated in London's East end
at the close of the last century but
never was apprehended. The Ripper
also was a doctor who specialized
in murdering women when
periodic madness overcame him,
but he never was credited with
more than six victims.Leave a comment:
-
Some background on Herbert Percy Freund, former medical student and religious fanatic, and his family. There's a mention of Freund in the Rumblelow book.
The Medical times and Gazette, March 31, 1883, Page 374
St. Thomas.—It is said that the Herbert P. E. Freund charged with being disorderly in front of St. Paul's Cathedral, and sent to prison for a month, was formerly a student at your Hospital, and a son of the late Dr. Freund, physician to, and founder of, the German Hospital. The unfortunate man had escaped, as the Alderman said, from a lunatic asylum.
The Medical times and Gazette, November 10, 1883, Page 564
T. W. G., St. Thomas' Hospital.—The unfortunate gentleman, Herbert Percy Freund, who has been so frequently charged at the Mansion House with "brawling" in St. Paul's Cathedral, and at last consigned by the Lord Mayor to the City Lunatic Asylum, is a son of the late Dr. Freund, the founder of, and for many years Physician to, the German Hospital.
The Lancet, February 20, 1886, Page 368
A LUNATIC IMPRISONED AGAIN.
Why do the City Fathers persist in imprisoning Herbert Percy Freund, seeing that he is certainly "a person of unsound mind"? Is it that they deem it less costly to keep him one-third of his time in gaol than to maintain him altogether in an asylum? The question of humanity ought to have some little weight as against the question of economy. Besides which, it may one day happen that this lunatic will no longer be contented with declaiming against St. Paul's Cathedral as "that house of idols over there." He may turn iconoclast on his own account; or, instead of predicting the downfall of the City, he may do something towards the fulfilment of his prophecies. The policy of the City magistrates is neither sound nor safe, and it is certainly anything but benevolent.
February 27, 1886, Page 430
THE CASE OF H. P. FREUND.
To the Editor of The Lancet.
Sir,—The case of Herbert Percy Freund has on several occasions been alluded to in The Lancet, and once more is specially mentioned in an annotation in your issue of the 20th inst. It may not be generally known that this unfortunate man, who has been repeatedly brought before the London magistrates for religious monomania, and has been by them sentenced to various terms of imprisonment, owes his breakdown to overstrain whilst working for the Bachelorship in Medicine of the London University. At the City of London School, where he was a schoolfellow of mine, he was remarkable for his jovial good humour and geniality. Whilst holding a good position in the sixth form he won the St. Thomas's Hospital Scholarship, which covered the cost of the fees of his medical curriculum on the condition of his successfully passing his examination when due. He was consequently most anxious not to fail from the fear that he might thus lose his scholarship. The fact that in spite of his anxiety he passed the First M.B. Lond. in 1874 within a year and three-quarters of the date of the commencement of his medical study was sufficient proof of his ability, more especially as he secured Honours in the Preliminary Scientific Examination at the end of his first year. The strain, however, told, and shortly after the First M.B. Examination he became eccentric and depressed, took to ascetic habits and a solitary life, aud was unable to continue study, becoming later on a confirmed religious monomaniac. May I ask whether something could not be done for him, at least, by old members of the City School (I believe he belonged to the "John Carpenter Club") or of St. Thomas's Hospital, if only in the way of placing him in an asylum, so as to prevent the scandal of his frequent appearance in the police courts. I for one would be very glad to help or to hear of others similarly disposed. I am, Sir, yours faithfully,
W. P. Mears, M.D.
University of Durham College of Medicine, Newcastle-on-Tyne, Feb. 20th, 1886.
--end
His brother?
History of the American Pianoforte: Its Technical Development and the Trade (New York: Spillane, 1890), Pages 355-359
by Daniel Spillane
Mr. John C. Freund, at present one of the editors of the American Musician, is another remarkable figure in this sphere of recent pianoforte and musical history. His connection with this department of journalism dates back to 1875, when he founded the Music Trade Review, referred to elsewhere, the first weekly with a distinctive title published in this country devoted to the music trades. Mr. Freund's early tendencies were literary and musical to a large degree. Constant association with the pianoforte as a student, besides a knowledge of mechanics and natural philosophy acquired in his college days, made the literature of the instrument and its manufacture a labor of love, while these acquirements have been eminent qualifications in his professional career as a music trade editor, apart from the standard reputation he enjoys as a critic and feuilletonist.
Mr. Freund's principal fault is said to have hitherto been a magnanimous spirit of lavishness, which all his journalistic ventures have indicated in their general getup and contents. This is a pardonable thing, and at times commendable. The worst sufferer, however, by over-generosity or philanthropy of that unproductive nature is the philanthropist usually. John C. Freund, whose distinguished face graces these pages, was born in London in 1848 of German parents. His father, a most eminent physician, and an authority of note in scientific and medical lines, was an Austrian, who settled in London, where he built up a large practice among the titled classes and aristocracy. He was professionally a philanthropist, for through his personal efforts he raised money to establish the great German Hospital in London, which Germans in London remember as a great deed. At the Crimean War he was one of the principal medical officers in the service of the allied armies. Throughout his life he enjoyed the friendship of many of the most eminent people in Europe. Mr. J. C. Freund's mother, a distinguished lady, whose recent death in 1887 will be remembered, came to London very young, being adopted by her uncle, a noted scholar and linguist in the service of the Foreign Office. This gentleman, Mr. Freund's granduncle, is said to have spoken and written fifteen languages with perfect ease. He was deputed to accompany Lord Macartney's first embassy to China as interpreter, so as to facilitate intercourse with the natives. Mrs. Amelia Lewis Freund, Mr. Freund's mother, inherited much of the linguistic genius of her uncle, and was known as a lady of extraordinary accomplishments—which included science—and great strength of character. In music she equally excelled.
Mr. Freund was a favored mortal in the sense that he was born, unlike so many others of the race, under the most favorable conditions, and with the figurative silver spoon in his mouth, for his father enjoyed a splendid income from his practice. It is no surprise hence to know that he received an unexceptionable education. He is a graduate of Oxford and London universities. In his college days and after he was known as an athlete. He studied painting under good masters, and became a lawyer. The step from law to journalism is very brief, as many of the leading London newspaper men are notably lawyers; so it is we find Mr. Freund enjoying an early reputation as editor of the Oxford University magazine, the Dark Blue, in 1870, 1871, and 1873. Tom Hughes, of "Tom Brown's Schoolboy Days" fame; Gilbert, the librettist and satirist; Charles Reade, and Rossetti were among the contributors during this period. As a dramatist Mr. Freund is well known. Mr. Henry Labouchere, of Truth, brought out "The Undergraduate," Mr. Freund's first play, in 1871, at the Queens Theatre, London, which the press received very warmly.
In 1872 he arrived in New York, and contributed subsequently to several leading journals and magazines. He bought out the Arcadian in 1873, and engaged a brilliant staff of specialists, such as Mr. Stephen Fiske, A. C. Wheeler, Montague Marks, and others. The paper had a great circulation, but in 1875 Mr. Freund sold it to Mr. George Butler, a nephew of General Butler. Mr. Freund became known in 1875 as a music trade editor. In this year he started the Music Trade Review, devoted to the art, its literature, and the trades. Mr. Louis Engel, at present of Yates' London World, a celebrated musical critic, was engaged on this journal for some time. In 1878 this became the Musical Times; then it developed into the Musical and Dramatic Times. In 1880 Mr. Freund, in consequence of overwork, withdrew, but in 1881 he had recovered, and was in the field again with Music, which presently became Music and Drama. In 1884 Freund's Weekly appeared, which subsequently became Music and Drama. Being by instinct a dramatist, and possessing a fine elocutionary, backed up by vocal training, Mr. Freund was induced to go on the stage. He opened McVicker's Theatre in Chicago with a new play, " True Nobility," in which he made his debut in a star part in 1885. Meanwhile, he was on the stage for two years, playing leading parts with Mayo and Madame Janish. As a lecturer, Mr. Freund also shone. In 1886 we find that his lecture " Before and Behind the Footlights," delivered in Boston, secured no less than sixteen columns of press notices in that city alone. After this temporary absence from journalism Mr. Freund returned to the field in 1887, when he became an editor of the American Musician, which position he has held up to the present time with significant results.
Apart from the foregoing, Mr. Freund has enjoyed a distinguished connection with music trade history, and has a large circle of friends.
--end
Men and Women of America: a Biographical Dictionary of Contemporaries (New York: L. R. Hamersly, 1910), Pages 659-660
FREUND, John C:
Musical editor and publisher, dramatist and writer on Social Economics; born London, England, Nov. 22, 1848, where his father, Dr. Jonas Charles Hermann Freund, was the leading foreign physician for many years; Deputy Inspector of Hospitals during the Crimean War, Surgeon in the British Army, founder and first directing physician of the German Hospital, Dalston, London, and author of a number of leading medical works. His mother, Amelia Louisa (Rudiger) Freund, was the niece and companion of Christian Huettner, a noted linguist, who, as secretary and interpreter, accompanied Lord Macartney's first English Embassy to China. Under the nom-de-plume, Amelia Lewis, she gained an international reputation as a writer on Social Economics. Mr. Freund went to Oxford University with the Times (London) and Carpenter Scholarships, won in open competition. Remained at the University three years, but before finishing the full course came to the United States. While at Oxford, and before he was twenty-two, started and edited the Dark Blue Magazine, to which the Rossettis, Swinbourue and William Morris, the poets, Professors Blackie, Dowden and Sylvester, Rev. J. G. Wood, the naturalist, Thomas Hughes and other distinguished writers contributed. He produced his first play. The Under-Graduate, at the Queen's Theatre, London, in 1870, in which Miss Hodson, now the wife of Henri Labouchere, the Radical leader, editor of Truth (London) played the leading role. Mr. Freund came to the United States in 1871 and became connected with trade journalism in New York City, first on staff of the Wine and Spirit Gazette, and then as proprietor of the Hat, Cap and Fur Trade Review, which he started. He later purchased and conducted the Arcadian, a critical weekly. One of the pioneers in musical, and dramatic and music trade journalism in the United States. Was the first to start a musical and music trade paper in the English language, in New York, in 1873. Later developed from it the Musical and Dramatic Times, which was sold. Then, after a year in Colorado and New Mexico, he returned to New York and established a weekly called Music, which later became Music and Drama, which was developed into a daily and was very successful for a time. In 188o he produced his second play, True Nobility, at McVicker's Theatre, Chicago, in which, with Viola Allen and Robert B. Mantell, he played the leading character part. Was after that in Frank Mayo's company, and later played leading character parts with Mme. Janish and Henry Miller. Mr. Freund returned to journalism in 1887 as editor of the American Musician, until 1890. He then established the Music Trades and he edited the Dolgeville Herald, from 1801 to 1893. Since then, editor of the Music Trades, and president and director of the Music Trades Co. Also editor of Musical America, which he established in 1898, and president and director of the Musical America Co., and editor of the annual. The Piano and Organ Purchaser's Guide. He is a member of the National Civic Federation, the National Geographic Society, the West End Association. St. John's Guild, and other societies. His favorite recreations art those of out door life. He has traveled and visited many countries. He is a member of the Pleiades Club of New York City. Mr. Freund married, in 1887. Florence Smith (now deceased) by whom he had one daughter, Florence Louise, born in 1889. He again married, in 1890, Anna C. Hughes, and of that union there are two daughters: Annette, born in 1896, and Marjorie, born in 1904. Residence: 760 West End Avenue, New York City. Address: 135 Fifth Avenue, New York City.
--end
Herbert disrupts a synagogue with a penny trumpet:
Timaru Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 4097, 25 November 1887, Page 4
BRAWLING IN A SYNAGOGUELeave a comment:
-
Forbes Winslow lends his presence to a demonstration of mesmerism given by the illusionist Professor Charles Morritt, who later sold some of his illusions to Houdini.
Alexandra and Yea Standard, Gobur, Thornton and Acheron Express, April 26, 1895, Page 3
HYPNOTISM.
At half-past seven on Friday night, March 1st, Henry Nelan, 32 years of age, a native of Limerick, placed himself in the hands of Professor Morritt and a casket of glass, and in just one minute and three-quarters was placed in a hypnotic sleep. Mr. Morritt then informed his audience, which included the redoubtable Dr. Forbes Winslow, that the man would remain in his trance state for eight days, when he would wake him in his normal state of health. The experiment is the more interesting from the fact that the subject originally chosen failed to come up to the scratch at the last moment, and Mr. Morrit had to scour the metropolis for the man who is now undergoing the test. Prior to the sleep, Dr. Winslow announced the pulse register as 78 and somewhat weak. In the cataleptic state the pulse rose to 96, and was very firm. The usual tests with lights etc., were made, and the subject was declared to be quite unconcious [sic]. The application of a needle to the hands produced not the slightest movement of the muscles. Medical and Press men will keep watch day and night as gurantee [sic] to the public that the exhibition is a genuine one an [sic] Dr. Forbes Winslow has expressed his intention.to drop in at all unexpected hours. The feat is an unprecedented one, and Mr. Morritt is confident of a successful result.
--end
Evening News (Sydney, NSW), March 30, 1895, Page 2S
SIX DAYS' SLEEP.
Remarkable Experiment.
The latest novelty at the Aquarium (says a London paper of February 17) has been the placing of a man in a trance for six days. The man came out of the trance between half-past 10 and 11 o'clock last night, and asked about his dinner. He was placed under the hypnotic influence, or, rather, an artificial sleep, at 2 o'clock on Monday week. His body-— Saturday's exhibition induces one to write of the man in this manner-—was placed in a heavy glass frame, a sort of glass coffin. In this the man laid for a week, in one of the rooms of the aquarium, the hypnotiser, Professor Morritt, twice a day moistening hie lips with liquid food, and three times during the week turning him over from one side on to the other. This was what Mr. Morritt was understood to explain to the audience who assembled in the aquarium on Saturday night. During the week numbers of medical men visited the place and made various experiments with a view to test the genuineness of Morrit's experiment. Morritt is a showman, and a clever one, and when—-after something like a funeral procession had brought the glass coffin into the theatre and tilted it in an inclined position across the orchestra-—Mr. Ritchie 'orated' to the crowded audience, and explained what had been done to the man in the glass case, there was a feeling among the people that the 'subject' had merely been doing the fasting trick for a week with showman's paraphernalia surrounding him. However, time arrived for taking off the rug which covered the glass coffin, and Morritt disclosed the face of the man therein, and proceeded to revivify his man. The bringing back was a physical effort, but lasted only a few moments. Morrit turned the man on to his back, and while lifting the eyelids with his thumbs, passed a finger of each hand, with considerable- pressure across the temples of the man. The effect was to gradually cause the man to awaken. The awakening was exactly the same as seen when a person has been mesmerised for a short space of time. Morritt shouted at the man, who rose in the glass coffin and struggled violently. When he quite regained consciousness he perspired profusely. Eventually he was calmer. Then he sat up and looked at the audience in wonderment. Questions were thrown at him from all parts of the audience. What he had to say for himself was that 'an hour ago I had my dinner, and now I can do with & drink.' A draught was brought to him, after taking which he conversed freely. He refused io believe that he had been in a trance fox six days. 'I had my dinner two hours ago,' he persisted in saying. What day was it? he was asked, 'Monday,' he maintained, but, said. he, 'the look of the place shows me it's not daylight.' The man seemed none the worse for the curious experience. A coat was brought to him: and he dressed himself; in. the coffin, and rose and walked. The apparent result of the experiment was to show that a man may be mesmerised and remain under the mesmeric influence for a more or less indefinite period.
--end
Who's Who in the Theatre (London: Sir Issac Pitman & Sons, 1916), Page 58
compliled and edited by John Parker
MORRITT, Charles, illusionist; b. Saxton, Yorks., 13 ]une, 1860; s. of William Morritt and his wife Maria; e. Higher Grade School, Leeds; was a music-hall proprietor, previous to making his first appearance in a thought transmission entertainment, at the Prince's Hall, Piccadilly, 5 Aug., 1886; has since appeared at the old Aquarium, Egyptian Hall, St. ]ames's Hall, Crystal Palace, St. George's Hall, Polytechnic, Empire, London Pavilion, Oxford, Tivoli, and all the leading halls in London and the provinces, playing all the principal tours and circuits; has also toured in the United States and Australia; during 1915, appeared at the Polytechnic. Recreations: Billiards, cricket, driving, and sketching. Club: Magicians. Address: Polytechnic, Regent Street, W.
--end
Relatively recent articles about Morritt:
Halifax Courier
Daily MailLeave a comment:
Leave a comment: