new evidence: Ostrog's Banstead admission and release records at the LMA

[Rob Clack]

My only suggestion previously was the case files, and I believe Rob has checked them.

Hi Chris,

These were case files I checked:

H22/BAN/B/11/001

I don't think there are any others.

Rob

[mariab]

My only suggestion previously was the case files, and I believe Rob has checked them.

I was planning to check the case files tomorrow, but I'll email Rob and see if he has checked them all in their entirety. Plus I see that in your post #4 you mention “checking a photo of the page that Rob kindly sent me {to Chris} a few months ago“, about which I assume it's the files I “found“ today and about which I had NO idea that Rob already had shot them! We really need to communicate better, cuz it's kinda hilarious. We were sitting for hours looking at the flies in the wall at that pub the other night, and noone thought of discussing the sources. :-)
Anyway, I'll email Rob the pics and you guys will know if they are posted somewhere else already.

[mariab]

I already have them.

OK, less work for me then. Are the pics posted anywhere on casebook?

Quote mariab:
the microfilm reference today is X113/104

I think you will find I told you that as well.

Absolutely NOT, you told me to go locate microfilm X/20/65 as mentioned my Sugden. But never mind.

These were case files I checked: H22/BAN/B/11/001 I don't think there are any others.

Thank you so much for the information. I assume nothing of interest was in these case files?

[Tom_Wescott]

Has Rob been slacking again in his responsibilities to let us all know what has and hasn't been researched? Should we replace him or assign him an assistant?

Also, Maria, you should find a doppleganger, ala Dr. Cream, to attend all your conferences for you. Or at least you could split them up. You take Mon, Wed, and Friday, and your look-alike could take Tue, Thur, and the weekends.

I'm just trying to find solutions here.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

I'm just trying to find solutions here.

Very helpful, thanx.

[Debra A]

By the by, I'm about to email Debra Arif and ask her for the data pertaining to Le Grand's Malborough Courts/Guidhall convictions to look them up in the LMA, so if anyone has already researched those at the LMA it would be nice if they came forward. I don't mind the trouble of re-starting from scratch, but I really wish I hadn't put “new evidence“ on the title of this thread! (At least the pics would be new, if Rob posts them, as far as I know...)

Maria, as I said in my email this morning, but thought it wise to clarify publicly. The reference number I gave you ages ago for the Malborough Street Police Court, from the LMA, was to illustrate that there doesn't appear to be any other records for the correct dates covering the 1887 Tyrell, Le Grand, Pasquier case, just the run I referenced.
The ref. I gave you was the only one I could find in the catalogue relating to Malborough Street, and the start date was 1896.
Perhaps I just missed an earlier reference in the catalogue, if so, someone else may be able to find one in the catalogue for you.

[mariab]

No problem, Debs, and thank you again so much for the reference.
I'm not trying to “correct“ anybody, I just happen to be here and was curious to check some things. In my perception, we're all in this together, and every small new find, however insignificant, advances the case.

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello Maria. Thanks for posting this.

Cheers.
LC

[Rob Clack]

Quote mariab:
the microfilm reference today is X113/104

Absolutely NOT, you told me to go locate microfilm X/20/65 as mentioned my Sugden. But never mind.

I think you will find that I told you the reference X/20/65 applied to St Giles Workhouse and would have a different reference number now. It's clear enough in Sugden's book what it applies to. I didn't tell you you should look for it as since it was from the St Giles Workhouse it wouldn't contain Macnaghten's letter.

Rob

[Chris]

admitted on May 7, 1891 (NOT on May 4th, as claimed by Philip Sugden) under the admission nr. 3.684: Michael Ostrog.
Age: 58, marital status: not known, previous occupation: not known
previous place of abode: St. Giles Workhouse, Union/County/Borough to which chargeable: Strand Union {corrected} County of London {added in red ink}
Sent by whose authority: G. T.{?} Greville on May 4th 1891 {this is possible where from Sugden got his date of admission}

Actually, Sugden does say correctly that he was admitted to the asylum on 7 May [p. xviii]. He gives the date 4 May for his examination by Dr Sheard at the workhouse.

[mariab]

Actually, Sugden does say correctly that he was admitted to the asylum on 7 May [p. xviii]. He gives the date 4 May for his examination by Dr Sheard at the workhouse.

The Banstead records mention that Ostrog was sent over by authority of “G. {T? F?} Greville“ on May 4 1891, while there is no date for his examination having taken place by Dr. Shead, but I assume that the most plausible date to be understood for his examination is also May 4.
The daily admissions and discharges book {H22/BAN/B/01/012} DOESN'T feature ANY new admissions on May 4, but one new admission on May 6th (if I'm not mistaken, I haven't taken notes for May 6) and one admission on May 7. The descriptions book {H22/BAN/A/06/002} features Ostrog's admission date as May 7 1891.
What interests me much more than the exact day of his admission is, obviously, the Macnaghten letter.
I'm just back from the LMA and, out of pure curiosity, had a look into Rob's case files {H22/BAN/B/11/001}. Despite the book spotting “males“ on the cover, it consists entirely of files for female Banstead patients.

Chris, would you allow me to PM you pertaining to the books/boxes with the reference nr. H22/BAN/A/01/001 and H22/BAN/A/01/001A about which I'm still not clear if you or anyone else have/has looked into them already in 2008? Right now they are considered “unfit for consultation“, but I've ordered them for around October 14, and the librarians promised that at the worst case they will look inside themselves for any letters to Banstead from SY.

Plus I have another question pertaining to the London Westminster Archives and for a possibility I might have found for researching financial records for the London Westminster Bank – about which both I also need to consult Debs, and will do so in an email, if it's OK.

[Chris]

Chris, would you allow me to PM you...

Yes, no need to ask.

[mariab]

Thank you so much for the PM, Chris. I'm checking through the stuff right now, esp. the City petty sessions.

[mariab]

last 2 Banstead boxes contain NO Macnaghten letter

Pertaining to the books/boxes with the reference nr. H22/BAN/A/01/001 and H22/BAN/A/01/001A at the LMA (resolutions of Banstead Hospital Committee) which until now were unfit to consult and were NOT consulted by Chris Phillips in 2008: I've just received an email from the conservator at the LMA, who has just checked the above volumes, and they appear to contain only resolutions from the committee (i.e., resolutions that the cook be paid 2 shillings more, etc.), and therefore they do not contain any correspondence.
Thus it's safe to say that the Macnaghten letter to the Banstead superintendent is NOT anymore available at the LMA. The librarians told me that it's very possible that the letter in question has been discarded years ago due to shortage of space.

Would anybody be interested in contacting Philip Sugden, in case he has any old notes on the case? Perhaps Chris Phillips would be interested in attempting this?

[tji]

Perhaps he wouldn't either Maria - there is nothing like putting someone on the spot!!! Have you thought to ask him privately or even do something for yourself?!

Tracy