Pompadour Cosmetics, 17 Upper Baker Street

[E.J.H.]

An acquaintance perhaps, Tom. I can't recall or find his name at the moment though. It definitely wasn't Stephenson himself, his whereabouts in the 1891 census has been well documented by various researchers.

Hi. As I have difficulties to trace D'Onston in the 1891 and 1901 census I would appreciate more infos. Thanks by advance

[Rob Clack]

Thanks Howard, I was going by memory there.

Rob

[Howard Brown]

Yes he did Rob.

Cremers lived on the third floor.

Luca lived on the 2nd floor above Suzanne Vega.

[Rob Clack]

Thanks Rob, yeah that's how I sort of imagined the set up to be; send payment to the address on the advert or ring the upstairs doorbell for supplies of your favourite 'Pompadour stain' and not a shop front as such. They only seemed to have three products for sale after all, and one of those was dropped from the adverts later in 1891.

Hi Debs,

Yeah all they would have needed was a single room, I think Donston was alleged to have had a backroom there as well if I remember correctly.

Rob

[Mike Covell]

Lets not forget it was common practice for more than one business to operate from 1 location, and we don't know how big the property was.

I did some research on the buildings of the Hull News, the same company that recieved the Hull Ripper letter, and discovered that although the company owned the building, they only used the ground floor.

Seven other companies were crammed into the three floored building!

Another building, Orial Chambers, had different companies in every room of the building, and a young family were registered as residing in the loft space!

[Robert]

Bluck seems to have ceased trading and was going through bankruptcy procedures.

[Robert]

Searching for "17 Upper Baker Street" in the online directories (a hit and miss affair) threw up another name : Arthur Bluck, tailor (1891).

[Debra A]

Hi Debs, How

The directories as far as I know were published at the beginning of the year (Druitt is listed in the 1889 to give you some idea). I checked the directories at the LMA from 89 to 94 and there was no 'Popmadour Cosmetiques Company' listed, but we know it was there at some point because of the advert Debs found. My impression from what was written in the O'Donnell manuscript is that the company didn't occupy a shop but offices above the shop. I don't think it was compulsory to appear in a trade directory but we do know the Pompadour Company was there between August 1890 and September 1891 so maybe not.

Rob

Thanks Rob, yeah that's how I sort of imagined the set up to be; send payment to the address on the advert or ring the upstairs doorbell for supplies of your favourite 'Pompadour stain' and not a shop front as such. They only seemed to have three products for sale after all, and one of those was dropped from the adverts later in 1891.

[Mike Covell]

I beleive that trade directories would be complied in the later part of any year in order that they could be printed and published early in the year following.

Rgds
John

I agree with John on this matter, Robert D'Onston Stephenson appeared in the trade directories in Hull a year after he was fired from the Hull Customs, and his father, Richard Stephenson Snr, was listed as residing on Arlington-street, Hull, a year after his death!

[John Savage]

Hi Howard,

Just because Collins claims to have sold her shares in the cosmetics company in May does not mean that this is the date the company was dissolved. Collins could have sold her shares to Cremers or Donston and perhapsit was they who dissolved the company at a later date around September.

From what I recall of the court case I also got the feeling that Collins may have been a little "economical" with the truth.

I beleive that trade directories would be complied in the later part of any year in order that they could be printed and published early in the year following.

Rgds
John

[Rob Clack]

Hi Debs, How

The directories as far as I know were published at the beginning of the year (Druitt is listed in the 1889 to give you some idea). I checked the directories at the LMA from 89 to 94 and there was no 'Popmadour Cosmetiques Company' listed, but we know it was there at some point because of the advert Debs found. My impression from what was written in the O'Donnell manuscript is that the company didn't occupy a shop but offices above the shop. I don't think it was compulsory to appear in a trade directory but we do know the Pompadour Company was there between August 1890 and September 1891 so maybe not.

Rob

[Debra A]

Hi How, it does my head in too!

We also have the 1891 census taken April 1891..midway between the first and last adverts, yet none of these people, two of whom supposedly lived at Upper Baker Street appear on that at this address either!

But, and maybe Rob can clarify this, as I'm not entirely certain, but isn't it also the case that the 'Popmadour Cosmetiques Company' at Regent Street, formed in October 1891 and subject of those company papers doesn't seem to appear in any directories either?


Was it compulsary to appear in a trade directory or was there a fee involved for insertion, and an entry might depend on whether a company could afford the fees or not?

[Howard Brown]

Thank you for the rapid reply, Rob.

Here's why I asked you what I did:

This is from Debra's first post at the beginning of this thread:

"This Pompadour Cosmetics advert appeared weekly in the 'Women's Penny Paper' and monthly in 'The Ladies' Monthly Magazine, Le Monde Élégant, or the World of Fashion, etc.'
The first insertion I could find was on August 16th 1890 and the last one, September 1st 1891.
The address used for the company in the September 1891 advert was still 17 Upper Baker Street."- D.Arif
_________________________

You stated in the last post:

I think Harriett Bridge was there in 1891 when I checked the directories at the London Metropolitan Archives.-R.Clack

__________________________

My question would be... when did the directories for 1891 get published ? If they were published before the September 1891 advertisement that Debs found...earlier in the year...then doesn't that seem a little odd that the advertisement for a dissolved partnership would be found in a newspaper at that point in time ?

The directories are probably going to be found published after the Sept. 1st advertisement....but I'm curious nevertheless.

Sincerely,

Nosey in NE USA


P.S. I almost forgot.

In order to confuse the matter as much as possible, let me add what Debra mentioned earlier in the thread some time back:

In fact, if what Collins said at her May 1891 court case about having a share in a cosmetic company does relate to to the Pompadour, then she sold her share before May 1891.

We have Collins mentioning the above in May of 1891
We have the group of men signing papers in October...and don't have them fixed up at Baker Street ( Unless I've been asleep and missed something )

...and in between these two events....the dissolution of the Cremers/D'onston/Collins partnership....and the new ownership.....we have the September ad.

In the next life, I'm going to choose an easier suspect...like Conan Doyle's midwife....to tackle.

[Rob Clack]

Hi Howard,

The directories near to that period I have are 1895 and 1899. In 1895 It was Mrs Harriett Bridge, Confectioners and in 1899 nothing is listed. I think Harriett Bridge was there in 1891 when I checked the directories at the London Metropolitan Archives.

Rob

[Howard Brown]

Dear Rob Clack, not Linford...

Thats a nice job finding that photo.

Is there a way for you to find out for how long that business that is in that building... in the picture... in 1898... had been there ?