The Brooks' Journey to Jersey

A week's holiday in the delightful Channel Island of Jersey recently allowed us to do some on-site family research. John and Elizabeth Brooks appear to have moved from London to Jersey during the 1830's. The reason for this move are far from clear. Was John's radical printing press getting him into hot water? Was it a commercial decision as John turned more to wholesale stationary? Or was it to aid the convalescence of their daughter Harriet?

The notes made from Elizabeth Brooks’ diary show that she was visiting Jersey from the middle of the eighteen thirties. This period also ties in roughly with the time we stop finding books printed by her husband John Brooks from his Oxford Street premises. The census of 1841 shows John, Elizabeth, daughter Harriet and their son Vincent’s first wife Mary all living in the High Street of St. Aubins in the south west of Jersey. Elizabeth’s diary tells us that Harriet was christened on 13th May 1841 in St. Aubins although we could find no official record of this event.

The next diary entry of note refers to ‘taking Millbrook Cottage Xmas 1845’. Millbrook is on the south coast of Jersey just outside St.Helier. A librarian at the Société Jersiasie informed me that, at this time, the Millbrook area was just starting to develop with fashionable houses set amongst the sand dunes. This move closer to St.Helier links in with John Brooks’ purchase of some property in the Caledonia Place area of St.Helier, down on the dock side. The descriptions found in the Jersey Almanacs change over the years but list John Brooks as either a Wholesale Stationer, Paper Merchant or a Paper Bag Manufacturer, but always in Caledonia Place (pictured below). His son-in-law Samuel Buttfield is also listed as a Merchant operating from two doors down the street.

The Brooks’ then made a move into St.Helier itself and in the 1851 census we find them at King’s Cliff. Again, according to the librarian, a very smart and very English part of town. We know that they lived at number eight but on our brief visit we were unable to locate which house this was. However the picture below should give you an idea of the area.

At 5.30 am on 11th January 1855 Elizabeth Brooks passed away at the age of 66. She was buried at the Almorah Cemetery a short distance from the house. One of the first places we visited was this cemetery but our grave hunt proved fruitless. Two days later the ever-helpful librarian at the Société Jersiaise searched her records and found a cemetery map and grid reference. That afternoon, crawling on all fours, we uncovered Elizabeth's headstone hidden engulfed by a holly bush. The picture shows us taking a rubbing of the headstone once we had given the tree a good trim.

1861 finds John Brooks living with his daughter Harriet’s family in Buckingham Lodge, Duhamel Place, which is pictured below.
John Brooks made it to 84 years and 9 months before passing away at mid-day 12th January 1867. He joined his wife’s side, in Almorah and we hoped to see his named carved below that of his wife. Unfortunately the lower part of the headstone was too badly worn to read anything.

When John died he was living at 16 Regent Road and had been there with Harriet’s family since at least 1865 when he wrote his Will. With Regent road running in the shadow of St. Helier’s Regent Fort the house at first appears nothing special. However, reading a plaque on a neighbouring building describing the views of open country across to the coast that such properties enjoyed back in the eighteen century made us realise that this was the back of the house. Walking through an archway away from the road we viewed the house in it’s fully glory (trying to imagine it without the car park and secondary flats that have been build on the back garden). In it's day it must of been one of the finest houses in St.Helier.

On John’s death the business passed to his son Frederick. Records from the Jersey archive hint at trouble in 1875. These legal documents are handwritten in eighteen century French legal jargon and have been a pain to translate. From what we can just about comprehend in 1875 the business was in debt and all the Brooks children, Vincent, Frederick, Harriet and Thomas, renounced their inheritance to escape the effects of bankruptcy.

Of John and Elizabeth's four children, Vincent stayed in London carrying on the printing business that later turned into Vincent Brooks, day and Son. Frederick, who had previously been out in Quebec, settled down in St.Helier to run a boarding house first at number 6 and then at number 3 Elizabeth Place. Harriet’s husband Samuel Buttfield died at the age of 43 and she returned to London to be mentioned in Frederick Vincent Brooks’ biography who wrote “it is a joy to know [she] is still living as Mrs Buttfield at Bush Hill Park, Enfield.” We have no trace of Thomas except from an old family tree which has him married to a ‘Kitty’.

What's my name?

The extent of our author's mistaken belief regarding his own name has been discovered on obtaining a copy of his marriage certificate. In the autobiography he writes:

"The records of the Parish Church, St. Ann’s, Soho, bear witness that a little later the label “Frederick Vincent” was attached to me in solemn form, and certain promises were made on my behalf in which Miss Castell, a girl friend of my mother, took part: for a long time I thought that her name had been added to the others.

At school I was always known as “F.V.C. Brooks”, which my schoolfellows used to suggest savoured of a redundance not wanting in other directions : but on going to the Church Registry many years after I found that the extra name was a myth."

Just how long the erroneous middle name persists after Frederick's school years, he fails to mention but long enough for him to spell it out for eternity on his wedding day.

Vincent Brooks, Day & Son call it a day

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
CHANCERY DIVISION
COMPANIES COURT

NO. 0062 OF 1940

MR. JUSTICE SIMONDS
IN THE MATTER OF VINCENT BROOKS, DAY & SON, LIMITED
AND
IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1229
SUMMARY OF THE STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS
As at 25th January, 1940, the date of the appointment of a receiver for the debenture holder Submitted by Wilfred Vincent Brooks, a director on the 4th day of March 1940

OBSERVATIONS

1. The Winding-up Order was made on 5th February, 1940, upon a creditor’s petition to the Court on 24th January, 1940.

2. The Company was incorporated on 14th May, 1898, under the Companies Acts, 1862 to 1893, with a nominal capital of £10,000 in £1 shares and was formed to acquire and take over as a going concern the business carried on at 48, Parker Street under the style of Vincent Brooks, Day & Son and to carry on the business of printers, lithographers, etc. By special resolution confirmed on 17th June, 1908, the company became a private company.

3. The issued capital is £10,000 consisting of 7,000 shares issued as fully paid and 3,000 shares issued for cash.

4. The Company’s registered office has throughout been at 48, Parker Street, Kingsway, W.C.2. and its business has been conducted from these premises.

5. At the date of the Winding-Up Order the directors of the company were Wilfred Vincent Brooks, who was appointed on 18th August , 1920, Mrs. Marjorie Mary Brooks, who was elected on 25th July 1935, and Douglas John Helme Coulson, who joined the board on 30th January, 1936. The qualifications for directorship was the holding of shares in the Company to the nominal valve of £100.

6. Under the Articles of Association the remuneration of the directors was fixed at the sum of £2. 2. 0 a piece for each attendance at a board meeting. On 26th October, 1922, Wilfred Vincent Brooks and Frederick Allan Brooks were appointed joint managing directors at the salaries of £1000 each per annum after the death of their father, who had been the managing director from September 1898. F. A. Brooks’ appointment as managing director was terminated in October, 1928. He was then engaged as Manager of the photo-litho department at a salary of £750, his brother’s salary being increased to £1250 as sole managing director, with an allowance of £500 for expenses. F. A. Brooks became the assistant managing director in 1928 and in 1930 his salary was again increased to £1,000 per annum. In 1932 the board suspended the assistant managing director as 28th February, 1933, and removed him from that position and from the board. W.V.Brooks has returned himself as a creditor for £2,654. 8. 10 in respect of indrawn salary. Coulson has been the Company’s secretary since 7th January 1932.

7. By an agreement dated 17th May, 1898 between F. G. Bowen (vendor) and the Company, the latter acquired the goodwill and all other assets of the business of Vincent Brooks, Day & Son, which business is said to have started in 1823. The consideration was fixed at £9,880 and was satisfied by the payment of £2,880 in cash and the balance by the allotment to the vendor and his nominees of 7,000 £1 shares in the Company as fully paid.

8. Annual accounts of the business have been prepared and audited regularly. These disclose fluctuating results until 1919 and then a general upward trend in turnover with an average of over £1,000 per annum net profit until 1927. Dividends at the rate of 10% per annum, free of tax, were paid for each of the eight years to 30th June, 1927. Dividends for the four following years were as follows:- 1928, 5%; 1929, 7 ½%; 1930, 10% and 1931, 5%. No dividends were paid after that year. From 1932 to date profits were earned in only two years namely, 1937, £256 and 1938, £551.

9. It appears that the original lease of the premises at 48 Parker Street was surrendered and that a new lease was granted to the Company for a term of 28 years from 29th September, 1902, at a rental of £215 per annum for the first 14 years and £230 per annum for the remainder of the term. During 1920 the Company acquired the freehold of these premises for approximately £5,000. Additions and improvements have been made to the premises from time to time, the balance on the asset account as at 30th June, 1934, being £17,141. 8. 3. In accordance with a valuation obtained on 30th May 1935, the freehold premises account was appreciated to £22,500. On 29thJune, 1939, the Company disposed of the freehold for £21,000 out of which the mortgage debt of £14,425 and various other commitments including a bank overdraft of £5,000 were discharged. The balance of the purchase money was retained by the purchasers against the rent payable under a 44 years lease of the premises which was granted to the Company at an annual rental of £1,450.

10. In January, 1936, the Company agreed to the terms of a resolution passed at a conference of certain creditors under which they were prepared to grant a moratorium of three months from 29th January, 1936, in respect of liabilities as at 31st December, 1935, provided Mr. A. Granville White was appointed financial supervisor and that all the Companies cheques were countersigned by him. The moratorium was extended from time to time in order to give the Company an opportunity of finding new working capital. Several financial schemes were arranged but they could not be satisfactorily completed. Eventually the Company entered into negotiations for obtaining an advance of £7,000. Pending completion of these negotiations overdraft facilities were arranged on the understanding that the overdraft would be discharged immediately the advance was received by the Company.

11. On 29th June, 1939, the Company issued a debenture charging its undertaking and all other property and assets with the payment of all moneys due or to become due to the Bank.

12. W. V. Brooks states that the returns of sales for the last three months of the year 1939 did not average more than £600 a month as against a normal turnover of £1,400 or £1,500 a month; that the Company had practically no orders on hand for January and that, therefore, he decided not to accept the advance.

13. On 10th October, 1939, a creditor for £186. 3. 1 obtained judgment against the Company in that sum and costs. Leave to proceed to the enforcement of the judgment was suspended provided the Company paid a sum of £50 within 4 days of the Order and the balance by installments of £50 a month. The Company paid £50 on 21st November, 1939, but the cheque for the second installment was dishonored on presentation. No further payment was made by the Company and the creditor presented the petition on which the Winding-Up Order was made. In the meantime, on 25th January, 1940 the debenture holder appointed Mr. A. Granville White of 73, Cheapside, E.C. as Receiver.

14. W. V. Brooks and Coulson attribute the failure to the outbreak of the war.

15. The Receiver for the debenture holder is continuing the business in the hopes of disposing of it as a going concern, but he states that having regard to the specialised and somewhat ancient type of plant he doubts whether the assets will realise sufficient to discharge the debenture liability, particularly bearing in mind the somewhat heavy claims of the preferential creditors.

16. As a result of the statutory meetings of creditors and contributories held on 14th March, 1940, the Official Receiver remains the Liquidator of the Company.

Dated this 24th day of June 1940

H. P. Naunton,
Official Receiver.

33, Carey Street,
Lincoln’s Inn,
London, W.C.2.

Stagoll, Robinson and the Devil's Chaplain

In the previous post we saw that Elizabeth Stagoll's marriage record was witnessed by Harriet Robinson. To strengthen our theory that this 1808 wedding of John Brooks and Elizabeth Stagoll is the one relating to our family tree we now turn to examine Miss Robinson.


Our first reference to Harriet Robinson came from Elizabeth's copied diary entries:

"Mrs Robinson was married to Mr Taylor Jan 17 1834"

A subsequent entry tells us that Mr. Taylor died in 1844. Both these dates tie in with the Rev. Robert Taylor, a radical free-thinker and anti-clericalist nick-named 'the devil's chaplain'. In 1829 John Brooks published Taylor's 'Diegesis; Being a Discovery of the Origin, Evidences, and Early History of Christianity' and both Brooks and Taylor were acquaintances with Richard Carlile and Julian Hibbert.

It is interesting to note that John Brooks was an executor in Hibbert's will. When the non-animal-eating Hibbert died suddenly in 1834 (also recorded in the diary) a sum of money left to Robert Taylor was 'revoked by a codicil, in consquence, as he states, of Taylor having married a Lady of large fortune'. The Cambridge Alumni Database also records this marriage to 'an elderly lady of means'.

Parish records for St. Giles in Field indeed register the 1834 marriage of a Robert Taylor and Harriet Robinson although we have yet to obtain a copy of the certificate.

The Cambridge records also record Taylor's 1844 death in Tours, France. This might explain another diary entry:


"Left Tours for Jersey June 4th 1842...
...my second visit to Tours June 7th 1844. Mr. Taylor died about 7th June 1844"

So to summarise, the 1808 marriage of John Brooks and Elizabeth Stagoll looks very likely to be the correct one. Harriet Robinson was a good friend of Elizabeth who later married Rev Robert Taylor. Elizabeth continued to visit Harriet even after the Taylor's move to Tours and yet another diary entry records a last visit to Mrs Taylor in Cumberland.



Sources:
Cambridge Alumni Database
The Gentleman's Magazine Published by F. Jefferies, 1834

Stagoll verses Steggall

Frederick Vincent Brook's autobiography names his paternal grandmother as Elizabeth Steggall. Although we are fortunate enough to have a transcription of some of her diary entries we have always struggled to learn much about her origins or even her marriage to John Brooks. It now seems that the spelling of her surname could well have thrown us off the scent.

Our first inkling that something was not right was when the only marriage record we could find for the name John Brooks was for a marriage to an Elizabeth Stagoll. This wedding took place on the 10th May 1808, which is a little early considering Frederick's memory of John Brooks returning from America 'in time for the Waterloo Rejoicing' in 1815. At a time when there was only one form of contraception it is also unusual that Frederick's father, Vincent Brooks, wasn't born until the same year.

Was there any evidence to back up the 1808 marriage certificate?
We are fortunate to have a copy of the record of Vincent Brook's first marriage to Mary Ann Wybrow in 1839. Elizabeth, his mother, signed as a witness to the event. Although surnames are different (the first an unmarried Stagoll, the second a married Brooks) we can compare the signatures from the two marriage documents. Both names are abbreviated to 'Elizth' and are remarkably alike.

What else do we know about Elizabeth that might add weight to our theory?
All we know about her family comes from a snippet in her diary:

"My beloved sister Fanny married Feb 27th, 1820.
Elizabeth Matilda Clara born Dec 30th, 1820, her only child.
On the 10th of January 1826 my dear sister with her husband & child were lost off the Texel coming from Bolivia to Amsterdam".

A search of parish records for Elizabeth Steggall produces nothing.
A search for Stagoll gives us the following results:

Elizabeth Clarkson and John stagoll Married 1787 St.Botolph Without Aldgate,
Children and christening dates:
Elizabeth Stagoll, 1789 St.Olave
Mary Stagoll, 26.10.1791 St. Botolph Without Aldgate
Matilda Amelia Stagoll, 17.08.1792 St. Olave
Martha Stagoll, 09.10.1793 St.Olave Hart Street
Fanny Stagoll, 26.06.1796 St.Botolph Without Aldgate
Jonathan Stagoll, 15.05.1803 St. Botolph Without Aldgate

So here we find an Elizabeth Stagoll who would have been nineteen or twenty at the time of the 1808 marriage and who also had a younger sister called Fanny. This fits in nicely with the diary entry. In naming her child 'Elizabeth Matilda', could Fanny also have been using the names of two of her older sisters?

The chances of our Elizabeth being a Stagoll instead of a Steggall are looking more likely. However, does the real key to the mystery lie in the name of a witness on the 1808 marriage certificate?

To follow, Harriet Robinson and the Devil's Chaplain...

Percy Bysshe Shelley and the pirate

One of the more notable books published by John Brooks was an edition of Shelley's Queen Mab. The rather unauthorised appearance of this volume, how it was obtained and Shelley's amendments to it have long intrigued scholars of the subject. The text below comes from two sources. The first first-hand account was written by Thomas Medwin and comes from 'The Life of Percy Bysshe Shelley' published in 1847. The second is from 'The complete poetry of Percy Bysshe Shelley' by Donald H. Reiman (2000). Reiman describes Queen Mab,

'...perhaps Shelley's most intellectually ambitious work, articulating his views of science, politics, history, religion, society, and individual human relations. Subtitled A Philosophical Poem: With Notes, it became his most influential -- and pirated -- poem during much of the nineteenth century, a favorite among reformers and radicals.'

"One evening he [Sir Thomas Lawrence] persuaded me to accompany him to the Owenite chapel, in Charlotte-street. In the ante-room, I observed a man at a table, on which were laid for sale, among many works on a small scale, this History of the Nairs, and Queen Mab, and after the discourse by Owen—a sort of doctrinal rather than moral essay, in which he promised his disciples a millennium of roast beef and fowls, and three or four days' recreation out of the seven, equal division of property, and an universality of knowledge by education,—we had an interview with the lecturer and reformer, whom I had met some years before at the house of a Northumberland lady. On finding that I was connected with Shelley, he made a long panegyric on him, and taking up one of the Queen Mabs from the table, read, premising that it was the basis of one of his chief tenets, the following passage:

"How long ought the sexual connection to last! What law ought to specify the extent of the grievance that should limit its duration! A husband and wife ought to continue so long united as they love one another. Any law that should bind them to cohabitation for one moment after the decay of their affection, would be a most intolerable tyranny, and most unworthy of toleration."

If Lord Melbourne did not hold similar opinions, he at least thought there was no harm in encouraging them, by presenting Mr. Owen to our Queen. The question is, whether, in the - present state of society, and with the want of education that characterises the sect of which Mr. Owen is the founder, the Socialists, their tenets are, or are not pregnant with danger. This philanthropist, however, certainly is sincere in believing the contrary; and up to this time experience seems to have confirmed his belief. He has spent his life, and expended his fortune in inculcating them; and a more thoroughly amiable and moral man does not exist. "He has had but one object in both hemispheres," (to use the words of Frederica Bremer,) "to help the mass of mankind to food and raiment, in order that the mass may make provision for their mental improvement; for when the necessary wants are satisfied, man turns to those of a more general and exalted kind. Hence, when the great day work of the earth is done with men, the Sabbath will begin, in which a generation of tranquil worshippers will spread over the earth, no longer striving after perishable treasures, but seeking those which are eternal; a people whose whole life will be devoted to the improvement of their mental powers, and to the worship of the Creator in spirit and in truth. Then the day will arrive in which the angels will say, 'Peace upon Earth!!!'"

This edition of Queen Mab, that has led to the above quotation, bore the name of Brooks as publisher. It contains a beautiful frontispiece illustrative of the death of Ianthe, and as a motto, the well-known line from some Greek dramatist —probably Eschylus—which may be rendered:

Give me whereon to stand, I’ll move the earth.

Brooks did, or does, live at the bottom of Oxford Street, and I paid him more than one visit. He had a correspondent at Marlow, who knew Shelley, but whose name I have forgotten, from whom he obtained a copy of Queen Mab, which, like the Wandering Jew, had probably been left by Shelley's inadvertence in his abode here. This copy was exceedingly interlined, very much curtailed and modified, as by a specimen given in a fragment entitled the "Demon of the World," appended to "Alastor;" and what is still more important and worthy of remark, with the Notes torn out. The copy had been revised with great care, and as though Shelley had an intention at the time of bringing out a new edition, an idea which his neglect of his labour shews he soon abandoned. This emendated work is a great curiosity, and has scattered about the pages rude pen-and-ink drawings of the most fantastic kind, proving the abstraction of his mind during this pursuit. It was a comment that led me to many speculations, suggesting a deep sense of the obloquy of which he had made himself the victim, and betokening a fluctuation of purpose, a hesitation and doubt of himself and of the truth or policy of his theories. That Mr. Brooks (he was the publisher if not the printer of the Owenites) did not make use of the refacciamenti or pentimate in his numerous reprints of Queen Mab, may easily be conceived, for these very alterations were the only objectionable parts to him, and he would have thought it a sacrilege to have struck out a word of the original text, much less the notes. Queen Mab is indeed the gospel of the sect, and one of them told me, that he had found a passage in Scripture that unquestionably applied to Shelley, and that the word Shiloh was pronounced in the Hebrew precisely in the same manner as his name.

It is much to be desired that Mrs. Shelley should endeavor to obtain this Queen Mab of Mr. Brooks. I have no doubt that he would estimate it at a price far beyond my means, nor have I made any overtures to him for the purchase, invaluable as its acquisition would be to me at this moment."

Donald H. Reiman;

"Brooks, an Owenite publisher, produced a “very handsome edition,” priced 9s. (see ad reproduced in Shelley Library, 55). Its engraved title page omits the subtitle and mention of the notes and includes only the epigraph from Archimedes. It does, however, contain a striking vignette depicting Queen Mab calling forth the sleeping Ianthe’s spirit, which was drawn by Charles Landseer (son of the engraver John Landseer) and engraved by Edward James Portbury (who did much engraving for the gift books of the 1820’s and 1830’s). Brooks, who includes the dedicatory poem to Harriet (in the copies we have seen) and does not provide translation of the notes, took his text directly from [the] 1813 [edition], a unique copy of which he had obtained from Robert Madocks, Shelley’s handyman and the agent for his landlord in Marlow who had confiscated it years earlier in addition to other of the Shelley’s belongings left behind along with an unpaid balance. This copy contains Shelley’s draft revisions of Queen mab into Demon and other shorter pieces, which are mentioned above and which ended up in the hands of Forman and ultimately Pforzheimer.

Brook’s edition follows 1813 closely but not uncritically: rarely emending the text of the poem proper, it is somewhat freer with the notes, especially in revising Shelley’s grammar and in correcting errors in the foreign language passages (once in Note 17 even “correcting” back to the orginal an intentional change Shelley made in Horace’s Latin). Several of these changes were transmitted through Ascham to Mary Shelley’s editions. Perhaps Brooks’s most significant textual gaffe in editing the poem comes in VIII.232-33, where, misunderstanding Shelley’s grammar, he initiates three misguided emendations (“extends / Its…wields” for “extend / Their wield”) that were also transmitted through Ascham to Mary Shelley. Beyond this textual important edition, Brooks’s influence on the transmission of Queen Mab extended in 1833 to his acquiring the stock and stereotyped plates of Mrs. Carlile’s 1832 piracy, which first printed the notes as footnotes to the poem, at the bottom of the page. Brooks published this pocket-sized edition under his own name for the price of 1s 6d., and from him the plates seem to have passed on to Hetherington and Watson, who continued to make Queen Mab widely available to the lower classes."

Investigation on Illustration

The following adds a little more to a query made some time ago regarding a menu sporting the image of Wilfred Vincent Brooks. Don Grant of The London Sketch Club was kind enough to give some suggestions as to the identity of the artists and their artwork featured on this curious occasion which may, in time, provide the answer to Wilfred's connection.

Don points out that the pictures depicted behind Wilfred by artist John Hassall bear similarity to the work of other artists in the aforementioned London Sketch Club.

Top left has a resemblance with an illustration first printed in The Illustrated London News entitled "Deuced Funny" by Phil May. It apparently shows Melton Prior, a war correspondent, sharing a joke with the Punch cartoonist Alfred Chantrey Corbould.

Below this, two monkeys are depicted with their tails entwined. These are in the manner of Clarence Lawson Wood, also once an illustrator for the Illustrated London News. He is known for his ape and monkey drawings. I've not been able to locate an identical image but this is quite close.

Other proposed illustrators include William Heath Robinson. All pinned up follow this paired 'entre nous' theme.

Gerry was able to provide a photo of his illustration by John Hassall for which we are very grateful. His grandfather had connections with the 'Entre Nous Club Commitee', the role of which still remains a mystery. This picture is shown top middle, above Wilfred's head. Can anyone identify the other illustrators or illustrations?

Back to Baxter

A few months ago we were contacted by Mic Relf of the New George Baxter Society. He was keen to trace the missing 'George Baxter and his Methods' chapter from My Life's Medley. After some correspondence Mic asked if he could use some of the information on this site for a forthcoming presentation at the Society's AGM. Mic's knowledge of Baxter is superb and his work has filled in many a blank hole in our own knowledge. He was also kind enough to send us the illustrations that accompanied his presentation.


"The Printing company of Vincent Brooks is best known to ourselves for the ‘official’ republishing of Baxter’s prints in the mid 1860’s on presses that Baxter had lent them, managed by George Baxter Jr and under the supervision of George Baxter himself.

‘Vincent Brooks’ the company that we know was run by Vincent Robert Alfred Brooks (1815 – 1885) but we can’t overlook the influence of his son Fredrick Vincent Brooks (1848 – 1921) who joined the company during the company’s close association with George Baxter.

Vincent Brooks father was John Brooks a Bookseller and Stationer, who had set up business at 421 Oxford Street, London about 1813. He mixed in the literary circles publishing books by Shelley, Lamb, Coleridge and others. His wife, an amateur actress of some distinction and great beauty, was painted by the well-known artist Charles Hayter.

About 1820 John Brooks became interested in politics and was actively involved in the activities that bought about the Reform Bill in 1832 (giving voting rights to middle class-men over 21) and then the Chartist Movement, which demanded voting rights for all men over 21.

He was obviously an activist and one of his riskier activities was printing a poster, which was later held to be seditious (stirring up rebellion against the government) entitled:
STOP THE DUKE - GO FOR GOLD

The idea was to cause a run on the Bank of England and to stop the political efforts of the Duke of Wellington who was out to stop the Reform Bill being passed. A few years later he was approached to be a Constable but when being sworn in at Westminster Court he continually refused to swear on the bible and was fined £8.

His son, our Vincent Robert Alfred Brooks was born on October the 25th 1815.
After his schooling he worked for a short period with a firm of Artist Colourmans before joining and then taking over his father’s printing company about 1843 aged 28. Some time before 1851 his father had left the business and took his family to Jersey.

Vincent Brooks’s first colour efforts were on show at The Great Exhibition 1851. Interestingly Day & Son, who, we will see, Vincent Brooks would take over in 1867, were prize medal winners at the same Exhibition. A short while after he moved the business to 40, King Street, Covent Garden.

In 1855 he was conducting a Lithographic class for Ladies at Marlborough House, Prince Albert had arranged for it to be used as the National Art Training School later to become the Royal College of Art. Here he came to the attention of the Queen, Prince Consort and the Princess Royal and was entrusted to produce the Princess’ own picture “Dying Soldier on the Battle Field” in aid of the Patriotic Fund.


In 1857 Leighton Bros left Red Lion Square and Vincent Brooks took over part of their business. In 1859 the business moved again this time to 1, Chandos Street and in the 1862 Exhibition Vincent Brooks won a Gold medal for his Lithograph of Mulready’s ‘The Wedding Garment’.

In 1864 Vincent Brooks acquired plant and premises of Messrs J.S.Hodson & Son of High Street Lambeth and he embarked in letterpress and colour block printing. Hodson’s process was based on W. Dickes method and Hodson’s son was apprenticed to Leighton. One of Hodson’s principal customers was Mr Edward Whymper who, though by trade a Wood Engraver, was subsequently much better known as a Mountaineer and Lecturer. Mr Whymper’s work at the time chiefly consisted of coloured illustrations for the frontispieces of ‘The Leisure Hour’ and ‘Sunday at Home’.

At this stage shall I introduce you to the son, Frederick Vincent Brooks. Born on December 21st 1848 in the same room at, his Grandfathers house, 421 Oxford Street that his father had been born 33 years earlier, he was christened at the Parish Church, St. Ann’s, Soho, coincidentally the same church where up to only a few years ago the New Baxter Society held all their AGM’s in the Allen Room.

Frederick was schooled in various establishments but in 1862 we find him at the
High School at Bishop Stortford (only 20 odd miles from this AGM venue). A couple of stories came from his schooling with interesting colour printing connections.

In 1863 Frederick won a book as a school prize, it was entitled “Wild Sports of the World” with coloured plates by W. Dickes, one of George Baxter’s licensees. Frederick stated “I was very proud to be able to point out to the principal, Dr. Goodman, that the maps were engraved by my father”. Another book was won on Speech Day of 1864 entitled “A Chronicle of England” by Doyle, a well-known book illustrated with some of the best work by the colour printer Edmund Evans.

In 1865 he befriended Cecil Rhodes, who was only 12 years old at the time, later to be founder of the diamond company De Beers and the South African politician, his father being vicar and visitor of the school.

Frederick won a scholarship to Sidney Sussex College in Cambridge but he didn’t take this up as “my education was cut short in consequence of my father’s urgent need for help in his business”.

This must have been about 1866 and Fredrick states “Perhaps the most interesting work was going on at Lambeth as at the time my father was printing many of the ‘Baxter subjects”

Let me now take you back a couple of years to 26th & 27th July 1864 – George Baxter had held his 2nd unsuccessful auction of prints, plates and plant in 4 years which made him announce that “The entire series of these highly popular pictures are now in process of republishing by George Baxter, The inventor and Patentee, 12 Northampton Square London EC”. Within 6 months on 14th January 1865 he declared himself bankrupt so output of this series with labels on the reverse, where they can be found, must be small.


Vincent Brooks then purchased many of Baxter’s plates and printed them using Baxter’s presses which he had lent him on the understanding that George Baxter Jr took up the management of them and that George Baxter himself supervised the work. Everyone counts these Vincent Brooks printings as genuine George Baxter prints.

There are two known Vincent Brooks adverts stating “Republication of Baxter’s Celebrated Oil Prints”. The first states published by Vincent Brooks so must have been issued somewhere between the date of purchase of the plates and March 1867 i.e. the date Vincent Brooks took over Day & Son. Then the second slightly shorter list stating published by Vincent Brooks Day & Son, which would date it between March 1867 and Aug 1868 when the plates were sold.



Labels can be found on the back of these Vincent Brooks printings but they are very rare and only seem to be found on a few different subjects. By the time Vincent Brooks Day & Son were republishing Baxter prints after March 1867 it was without the benefit of George Baxter senior who had died in Jan of that year, after having an accident the previous November.


On both these lists are two interesting prints – new items not previously published by Baxter himself, “Miniature designs - The New Ten” showing the Princess Helena and Prince Christian, Courtney Lewes says this dates the printing to before June 1866 as they were married in July 1866 and would then have been described as Prince and Princess Christian. Prince of Wales and Queen Alexandre were married in 1863 so possibly could have been designed anytime between 1863 and June 1866. Was George Baxter involved in the original design?

The second item is the “soon to be published, The Tired Soldier”, interestingly the copy at Lewes Town Hall that we saw at the summer meeting is noted in pencil “printed (or presented) by my nephew Mr G Baxter 1867' (that would be George Baxter Jr).


So when did Vincent Brooks buy the plates? Courtney Lewes states it must have been by 1866 but he also states these plates were “thought to be stock held back from Bankruptcy (January 1865) OR sold before” so it could have been as early as late 1864, just a few months after Baxter’s own republishing. This is also ties in with George Baxter Jr who, in a letter in 1875 states “at the end of four years Vincent Brooks found the business did not pay… and I should have to leave and obtain a buyer for the plant” Le Blond bought the plates and blocks about August 1868 which could again date the purchase of the plates to 1864.

When Vincent Brooks purchased the “celebrated business of Day & Son Limited” that had gone into liquidation in 1867 it is interesting to note that he was financially assisted by Mr Henry Graves the Printseller of Pall Mall. This Mr Graves is also directly connected to George Baxter as at some stage he acquired and printed in monochrome the plates of ‘The Opening of Parliament’ and ‘The Coronation of Queen Victoria’. It has always been presumed he purchased them from George Baxter but perhaps he received them via Vincent Brooks who might have decided not to republish them himself, they were not included on either of his republishing lists and it has always been assumed he never had them.

At this stage I mention Day & Son, a celebrated company in their own right. William Day, senior, was a lithographer as early as 1823 and by 1825 was at 59 Great Queen Street. Interestingly he described himself as 'Successor to Rowney Forster', a firm of artists' colourmen who are today known as Daler–Rowney the major manufacturer of artist mount board.

By 1829, they had moved to 17 Gate Street, Lincoln's Inn Fields, where they remained until Vincent Brooks moved into the premises in 1867, coincidentally this is only 100 yards from where the Society holds its committee meetings, we must have walked right past it so many times.

From 1833, the firm was frequently referred to as 'Day and Haghe' due to the popularity of the work that Louis Haghe, the Belgian draughtsman and watercolourist, did for William Day. It is not certain whether this was an official nomenclature or not.

They were “Lithographers to the King” and shortly after 'Lithographers to Queen Victoria and to the Queen Dowager, Queen Adelaide' as early as 1837 and when
William Day died in 1845, his son, William junior, carried on the business changing the name to Day and Son. They were awarded one of only four 'prize medals' for their display of colour lithography at the Great Exhibition of 1851.

It is not noted why Day & Son went into liquidation. They were the largest and most prominent lithographic firms especially known for the quality of their work and in many ways had a better standing than Vincent Brooks themselves.

On 3rd August 1868 Vincent Brooks, through George Baxter Jr, sold all Baxter’s plates and blocks to Le Blond, George Baxter Jr then Vincent Brooks’s employment.

Between 1869 and 1906 Vincent Brooks printed their well-known ‘Vanity Fair’ caricatures starting with Benjamin Disraeli.

By 1871 it is noted in records that Vincent Brooks employed 168 men and 40 boys.

There is a further Baxter connection when in 1885 Vincent Brooks acquired the remaining part of Leighton Bros. On the 29th Sept 1885 Vincent Brooks died and was buried at Wandsworth Cemetery but the business which had been successfully run by Frederick for many years went on to further successes.
In the early 1920’s they can be found at Parker Street, Kingsway as this interesting photograph illustrates.

1923 saw the centenary of this successful Lithographic house and one of the speakers was the then, Baxter Society President, Courtney Lewes who “responded in amusing an interesting fashion, recalling many facts connected with the introduction of Lithography into London and referred especially to the work of George Baxter in regard to which Mr Lewes is an authority.”

They were successful printers throughout the 20th century and appear to have printed many Railway and travel posters which are greatly sought after. Vincent Brooks Day & Son were taken over by Banyard Press in 1960.

So where did all this information come from? Courtney Lewes’ The Picture Printer, Baxter Society Journals, Baxter Times and The Centenary Baxter Book and also a new source a website I recently stumbled across.

www.vincentbrooks.blogspot.com

Simon Vincent Brooks (Vincent Brooks’ great, great, great grand son) had recently discovered an old manuscript in his grandfathers house, he soon discovered that it was the autobiography of Frederick Brooks and promptly published it on the Internet. Chapter V was titled George Baxter and his Methods – I thought - this is going to be the only known account of how George Baxter produced his prints. Unfortunately, although Frederick knew enough about the subject and felt it important enough to warrant its own chapter it doesn’t appear that he ever got round to writing it. All the same I greatly appreciate Frederick’s and then Simon’s [and Laura’s] hard work to give us much new information."

Jennie Jots her Borman History

This is a copy of some notes written by my mother [Mary Jane Elizabeth Brooks] and found after her death:-

27 Hornsey Rise Gdns
London N.

I don’t know if any of my children care about family history, but it has always been a matter of interest to me to know that my father’s people were old country Gentlepeople. The Bormans originally were Reading (Berkshire) people. Early in the 1700 my grandfather William Borman, settled at Tetney Lincolnshire where he built Tetney House and married at Kingston-on-Hull Elizabeth Burnett, a niece of a Bishop. Grandfather had some rights in the Chancel of Tetney Church, for all his people are buried in the chancel and till the church was restored [1861-2] the stones were there, but have been removed to the Vestry. The Bormans took great interest in the Church matters and Shepherd Cottage at Bromley, Kent was built by the widow of Dr. Shepherd who was a Borman and she also left a good deal of money towards the endowment of Magdalen School Oxford.

Grandfather’s sisters were [Mary] married to the Revd Charles Wildbore, vicar of Humberstone & head master of the Grammar School since divided into separate positions, Mrs. Hutchins, wife of the vicar of Bridgemouth nr. Nottingham, Mrs Atkins wife of a sheep farmer at Oldhill (Lincs) and Mrs. Heath wife of a Banker at Andover. As far as I know all these had family. Great Uncle Wildbore’s son Charles was rector of Old Hunstanton. My father Allan Borman was the 2nd son and by profession a surgeon. He settled in Derby & married my mother [Fanny Redhead abt. 1831-1898] coming from Chelmill [Chilwell] near Nottingham. Of my father’s 3 sisters one married a Mr. Henry Morley the leading partner in the firm of Morley & Boden the Lace Mills Derby. They had one son who died at birth. The two aunts Borman put up the stained glass window in the church at Cleethorpes in the memory of Mrs. Morley, her husband & son and they with the other two aunts are buried in Cleethorpes Cemetery. My father had 2 brothers the elder Richard came in for Tetney House and all the land. The youngest Fred Borman went to South Africa early in 1800 and has not been heard of for sixty years- he was then a widower without children. My father never kept in touch with his relations so only knew them by name but the 2 aunts who lived at Cleethorpes said they had many relations in different parts & that the Bormans at one time were very wealthy and grandfather had a great deal of property in Louth.

Your father’s people were said to come from Doncaster. The Grandfather John Brooks married a Miss Elizabeth Steggall. He was a man who travelled a great deal and at one time owned a lot of land in America. He finally settled in Jersey where he is buried. He had three sons Vincent, Thomas & Frederick and one daughter who married a Jerseyman named Buttfield. She had three sons & 2 daughters. Vincent Brooks married a Miss Rhoda Wybrow. They had two sons Alfred William & Frederick Vincent. Frederick Vincent & myself were married at St.Saviours Church, Eastbourne on December 15, 1888. Of our 5 children Edith, my only girl married Edward Jarrett June 1908 at Christ Church, Crouch End, Hornsey. My boys are Frederick Allan, Arthur Reginald, Wilfred Vincent and Herbert Cecil. All my children were born at 22 Santos Road West Hill, Wandsworth and were christened at St. Stephens Church with the exception of Herbert Cecil who was christened at St. Andrews, Shepherds Hill, now pulled down and Christ church enlarged to take its place

Jennie Brooks

Notes:
Rev Charles Wildbore, b. 22 November 1801 Tilton-on-the-Hill, d. 14 November 1876 Humberstone, Lincs.
Son of Charles Wildbore and Frances Stimson. Married Mary Borman 25th June 1829 at Great Grimsby, Lincs.
Children: Rev. Charles Wildbore, b. 25 March 1830. d. 2 November 1912.
Source: Family history of Roger williams Link

HUMBERSTONE or Humberston, is a near and well-built village, finely interspersed with trees, and pleasantly situated nearly two miles from the river Humber and Waltham Station; and 4½ miles SSE of Grimsby.
It’s parish contains 259 souls, and about 2930 acres of land, mostly the property of Lord Carrington, who is lord of the manor, and patron of the vicarage, which is valued in KB at £5 18s 4d and now at 63, in the incumbency of the Rev Charles Wildbore, who is also headmaster of the free school.
Source: White’s Directory 1856

Henry Morley's Lace Mill:
The History of the County of Derby: Drawn Up from Actual Observation, and from the Best Authorities; Containing a Variety of Geological, Mineralogical, Commercial, and Statistical Information
By Stephen Glover, Thomas Noble
Published by Printed for the publisher by H. Mozley and son, 1829

The photo of St. Peter's is taken from this marvellous site.

A description of the Morley stained glass in St.Peter's Chapel of Ease, Cleethorpes
Found in: A History of Clee and the Thorpes of Clee ...: being a brief account of the townships of Clee, Hoole, Itterby, Thrunscoe, Weelsby, Holm, Cleethorpes, New Clee, Beaconthorpe, and New Cleethorpes
By Charles Ernest Watson. Published by Grimsby News Co., 1901

Dusty Diary Delivers Dates

The following is a transcription of papers which appear to be from the diary of Elizabeth Brooks nee Steggall 1790-:

Copy of notes from a diary found at 27 Hornsey Rise Gdns, & lent to us by Edith.

I met Madame de Rausman at Mr Morgan’s 1834 Jan 6th. [poss. John Minter Morgan]
Mrs. Robinson was married to Mr. Taylor Jan 17th, 1834. [Rev. Robert Taylor 1784-1844]
Mr. Julian Hibbert died Jan 22nd, 1834. [Born 1801, atheist]

[from The Gentleman's Magazine Published by F. Jefferies, 1834]

My first visit to Jersey with Harriet Aug 20th, 1834. [Harriet Brooks,b.1832, Elizabeth's daughter]
My second visit to Jersey & called at the Isle of Wight Aug 18th, 1836.
Mr. Thomber first attendance on Harriet Oct 11th 1837, and continued his visits twice a week till April 1st 1839.
Began to strengthen Feb 15th, 1839. Began to walk Aug 1st, 1839.
Frederic returned to Jersey Nov 15th, 1837. [Frederic Brooks, Elizabeth's son]
J. Brooks at Mr. Greenfells April 21st, 1838. [John Brooks, Husband]
J. Brooks set off to Bologne May 1838.
J. Brooks Guernsey July 6th, 1838.
Paid a visit to Mr. Watts at Ditton July 29th, 1838.
Mr. & Mrs. Hooper came to London the same week.
J.B set off to Jersey Aug 10th, 1838. [John Brooks]
J.B returned home Nov 24th, 1838.
Fred Brooks sailed in the Iris to Newfoundland Sept 22nd, 1838.
Returned home Jan 21st, 1839.
J.B set off to Jersey Feb 11th, 1839 and returned to London Feb 23rd, 1839.
We arrived in Jersey May 19th, 1839.
Mr. M & Mrs. Broomfield came Sept 21st, 1839.
Mr, & Mrs. Barlow came Nov 1st, 1839.
Left about the end of the year 1840.
My beloved sister Fanny married Feb 27th, 1820.
Elizabeth Matilda Clara born Dec 30th, 1820, her only child.
On the 10th of January 1826 my dear sister with her husband & child were lost off the Texel coming from Bolivia to Amsterdam. [Texel= island on Dutch coast]
Frederic came home Feb, 1840, left March 30th, 1841.
Mr. & Mrs. V.B. May 1841. [Vincent Brooks]
Fred left May 4th, 1841.
Harriet christened at St. Aubins Church May 13th, 1841. [Jersey]
Miss [Elizabeth] Beard came June 6th, 1841.
Miss Rogers came June 7th, 1841.
Mrs. V.B. returned July 30th, 1841.
Mrs. V.B returned to Jersey Feb 28th, 1842.
Myself and Harriet left for France April 24th, 1842.
Miss Rogers returned to London May 27th, 1842.
Left Tours for Jersey June 4th, 1842, got home the 7th, found Vincent who had come to take home poor Mary, they set off June 10th, 1842, and my poor girl died August 3rd, 1842. [Death of Mary Ann Brooks nee Wybrow]
Harriet left Jersey for the convent at Valonges July 7th, 1843. [Benedictine convent]
Left Jersey with Mr. Harrison for London March 1844.
Set off from Tower for Valonges April 21st, 1844. Via Le Havre.
My second visit to Tour June 7th, 1844. Mr. Taylor died about 7th June 1844. [Rev R Taylor]
Brought Harriet home for holidays from convent August 17th, 1845.
Harriet returned for good in September 1846.
Left St. Aubins Xmas 1845. Took Millbrook Cottage Xmas 1845.
Left Millbrook Cottage Xmas 1849.
Visited London May 1850 with Harriet and took my Alfred home. [Alfred Brooks, her Grandson, aged 3?]
Harriet set off for London May 17th, 1851.
H. Brooks left Jersey for London September 12th, 1851 and returned with Harriet Oct 11th, 1851.[poss. mistake? J. Brooks]
I paid a visit to Mrs. Taylor in Cumberland and returned October 11th, 1851.
M.S. died June 1851.
Fred’s children:
Harriet Brooks born Sept 9th, 1847.
Margaret Jane Brooks, Aug 19th, 1849.
Frederic 29th April 1853 in Quebec.

Mustard Pot on the Trot

"Coming down Tottenham Court Road I was much struck by the Omnibuses, yellow then as now: they certainly appeared of a size not less than a tram-car would appear to me at the present time and I was amused to hear them described as “mustard pots” a name for these yellow vehicles that has not quite disappeared."

Frederick Vincent Brooks' childhood experience of a London Omnibus from the 1850's.

The first horse dawn omnibus services were started in London by George Shillingbeer in 1829. Apparently, despite problems with dishonest conductors and various lawsuits the service proved a success and George soon had several competitors.

The vehicle pictured was built in 1885 by Patsy Hearn a famous wheelwright, London Bus and Hansom Cab operator. It's home is now the West Runton Shire Horse Centre in Norfolk.

Schooling Sexologists

It is always gratifying when a description or name mentioned by our author can be corroborated with the account of another. Such an example is given by Henry Havelock Ellis. In his colourful and controversial adult life he spent time as a sexologist, psychologist, philosopher, critic, author and editor, teacher, a man of medicine, long-time virgin and husband of a lesbian. At least some of his childhood time at the school near Tooting Station must responsible for influencing published ideas.

Frederick attended The Poplars, Mitcham from the age of 8 in 1856. It is surprising that, 16 years later, Havelock Ellis did the same under the notable Albert Grover. This teacher had at least 25 years of experience to develop his eccentric method and although Frederick is largely complementary, Havelock Ellis is exasperated by his poetry and it is a fellow teacher that inspires him on his path within philosophy and medicine.

Havelock describes Albert Grover as

...an oddity, a tall middle-aged man, looking much older than his years, with a long grey beard, a bald head and a blind eye. He had some resemblance to Darwin but he cherished much contempt for that great man's doctrines...

Havelock Ellis developed his interest in literature, reading Keats, Shelley, Carlyle and Elliot, the kind of people Frederick's grandfather would have had dealings with. As a man, he too mixed with the men of ideas and reformers of his age.











Sources:
Havelock Ellis
Australian Dictionary of Biography Online Edition Henry Havelock Ellis
Havelock Ellis, Henry et al. (1967) My Life
Brome, Vincent (1979) Havelock Ellis, Philosopher of Sex: A Biography

Frederick's Figge's Marsh Military Mates

Following his banishment to boarding school, Frederick was fortunate to come to know the brother's McRae, MacRae or M'Rae.

The 1861 census lists both brothers, their widowed mother and teacher Albert Grover boarding at the schoolhouse in Mitcham, Surrey. Archibald is roughly Frederick's age and Henry around three years younger. The boys' inevitable journey into the military would have made their Surgeon father, James and their mother, Emma Caroline proud.

My understanding of army rank and regiment is sketchy but first record found of Archibald attests that he became an Ensign on 11th January 1867 at the age of 19. His career starts with the 36th (The Herefordshire) Regt. Of Foot. Quickly he rises to Lieutenant by 1871 as part of the Punjab Frontier Force. Wing Subaltern, Quarter Master, Wing Officer, Adjutant and Wing Commander by 1883, he served in the '22nd (Punjab) Bengal Native Infantry (late 11th Punjab Infantry)'. The 22nd had their headquarters at Peshawur. We can speculate that Archibald felt somewhat at home in this part of the world as Emma's children were born and christened in India, Dr McRae had belonged to the Bengal Medical Service.

Archibald eventually becomes a Major but it is Henry Napier McRae CBE who becomes the subject of many a story of war gallantry and heroics...

Sources:
The New Army Lists of 1867, 1874, 1875, 1878 and 1883
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Family Search Index
Richard Cannon Historical record of the Thirty-sixth, or the Herefordshire regiment of foot

Henry Napier McRae

Younger brother of Archibald Spiers M'Rae, Henry, appears to have surpassed him in terms of fame, through the saving of lives, winning medals and contributing to favourable outcomes in famous battles.

Linley and Jim Hooper neatly summarise Henry's military career and further relations. An extract is below:

Henry Napier MacRae CBE
b. 27 January 1851, d. 18 January 1915

Henry Napier MacRae CBE was born on 27 January 1851 at Ferozepore/Firozpur, Lahore, Punjab, India. He was the son of Surgeon Major James McRae (b. 1803 Edinburgh), Indian Army. He was educated privately.

Henry Napier MacRae CBE appeared on the 1861 census at 'The Poplars', Figs Marsh, Mitcham, Surrey. Archibald S McRae, 14, born Benares, India & Henry N McRae, 10, born Ferzapor, scholars, were boarders with Albert Grover, schoolmaster.

Henry Napier MacRae CBE appeared on the 1871 census at Royal Engineers & Royal Engineer Dept, Aldershot, Hampshire. Henry Napier McRae, visitor, unmarried, 20, Ensign 8th Regt Infantry, born India.

He served in the Indian Army from 1871 to 1914. He received his first commission in the 8th Foot on 25 March 1871; Lieutenant 28 October 1871; Bengal Staff Corps 15 August 1874 with the 45th Bengal Infantry; Captain 25 March 1883; Major 7 December 1888; Lt Col 25 March 1897; Commandant of 45th Regt 19 April 1899; CB 20 May 1898. Served in Afghanistan 1787-80, North West Frontier 1884, Hazara 1888, North West Frontier 1897-8 (dispatches twice, medal with two clasps, CB); ADC to Queen Victoria and Edward VII; North West Frontier 1901-2 (despatches).

Frederick neglects to tell us of this in favour of fond memory concerning Archibald who was nearer his age. It is out of character for Frederick's pride not to make use of such association and so it is left to us and others including Winston Churchill to document these daring escapades. The Strand magazine documents the gripping account that persuaded The Royal Humane Society to provide the silver medal:

Follow the links for some more smashing pictures of Henry at the Siege of Malakand and Churchill's account, himself a second Lieutenant in the relief force.

Sources:
The Strand Magazine, Volume V, Issue 28, April 1893, An Illustrated Monthly The Medal of the Royal Humane Society
Jim & Linley's family pages

In Good Company

Frederick attends an evening at the Oxford Music Hall with a partner in the firm of John Weiss & Son, a man by the name of Foveaux. A preliminary search reveals that the once cutlers and now surgical instrument makers had their premises at 62 Strand at the time of Frederick's meeting.

"John’s son Frederick Foveaux Weiss also joined the company in 1831, which became John Weiss & Son for the first time. John Weiss died on December 25th, 1843, and was buried by his wishes in St. Nicholas churchyard, Brighton. His large fortune took care of his widow, son, daughter, sister, stepsister, porter and coach man. Frederick Foveaux Weiss then managed the company."

It is credit to Frederick's namesake that the business became noted for its quality in manufacture and success, even when the market for surgical instruments changed with the growth in the modern hospital. Despite the bright future in store for the partner, it is gratifying to know that 'Foveaux' still took pleasure in mixing with the common folk at the music hall.

Sources:
History - John Weiss International
Snowden & Brother (1860) Surgical and Dental Instruments Catalogues from the Civil War Era

York Regatta

Another visit from the parents and another surprise from Grandad's attic.


Object: Silver cup.
Inscription: York Regatta, 1874, Won by F. Vincent Brooks

Frederick's associations with the old West London Rowing club are well known and are documented in the posts below. Unknown until now have been his exploits further a field. The river Ouse still sports a York City Rowing Club with their own regatta but whether this is the same historic event we do not know.

If you have any information please let us know using the comments facility below.

Obituary from Times of Old

THE DRAWING OFFICE MATERIAL MANUFACTURERES’ & DEALERS ASSOCIATION

26/27 Farringdon Street,
London. E.C.4

27th September, 1921.
Dear Sirs,

I have pleasure in quoting a copy of the Obituary Notice which appeared in “The Times” on the 11th August, which will be of interest to you.

Yours faithfully,
ALFRED W. FOSTER,
Secretary.

A Master Lithographer.

A correspondent writes:-
Frederick Vincent Brooks, who died on Sunday, was the hereditary head of the old lithographic firm of Vincent Brooks, Day & Son Ltd, and a leading authority on all the subjects connected with lithography and sun-copying, on which matter he wrote the articles in the latest edition of “The Encyclopaedia Britannica.” He was also chairman of the G.W. Bacon & Co, Ltd., Map Publishers, official printer to the Senefelder Club, and was a personal friend of Charles Dickens.

Born to a Chartist father 72 years ago, Brooks was educated at Bishops Stortford, where he became personally known to Cecil Rhodes. He obtained a scholarship for Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, but was called early to business. As a young man he distinguished himself on the river. For years he was the popular captain of the old West London Rowing Club, and became well know as “Daddy” Brooks. An excellent swimmer and a good boxer, he was also much more than an average amateur actor. Succeeding his father early as head of the business, he reproduced the first VANITY FAIR cartoon for Sir Gibson Bowles in 1869 – that of Benjamin Disraeli – and continued his connection with that journal almost without break until the end of its cartoon series. He was not only a master-craftsman, but a real artist in his own line, as may be judged generally by the work of the firm ever since it won the gold medal at the Great Exhibition of 1862 for a reproduction of Mulready’s picture, “The Wedding Garment.” He was also a very active Churchman. Well known and greatly respected as he was for his integrity and quick grasp of detail, he was in great demand as an arbitrator in business disputes. Brooks was a very kind-hearted and unselfish man, and was regarded with affection by his employees. Probably his last kindly action was to arrange for a service to be held at Holy Trinity Church, Kingsway, (close to his company’s works in Parker Street), to-day, at 12.30 before the funeral at the Wandsworth Cemetery, for the convenience of all the members of the staff.

Two sons are left to carry on the business after the hereditary manner. Both are ex-soldiers, and one of them, Captain W. Vincent Brooks, who gained the Military Cross, was wounded and taken prisoner by the Germans in May 1916.

Rowing, Sculling and Am-dram

Frederick Vincent Brooks intriguingly entitles chapter 11 of his autobiography 'Theatrical memories'. Sadly we do not have this entry and cannot shed light on whether a humble 'first dramatic venture', on an occasion of the West London Rowing Club, led to further board-treading by our author.

The occasion referred to is documented in a programme we have found and records an address penned and presented by Frederick at St. George’s Hall, Langham Place, Regent Street. This venue originally opened as a concert hall for the New Philharmonic Society on April the 24th 1867 and in 1878 was being leased to amateurs for theatre productions.

F.V Brooks was for many years Captain of the West London Rowing Club and as the column in Vanity Fair attests, helped win the Thames Cup at Henley in 1876.

Dickens Dictionary of the Thames states that "Wandsworth is the head-quarters of the West London, a club which has the credit of having originated many years ago the athletic sports which are now so interesting a feature in London life."

Birley confirms that such rowing clubs popularised out of season activities such as the boxing, high jump and even the tug-of-war to maintain their competitors fitness and raise funds.

Dickens continues that "West London Rowing Club, founded in 1856, and consequently one of the oldest clubs on the river. Election by ballot of members, one black ball in five excludes. Entrance fee, £1 1s. Subscription £2 2s. for active, £1 1s. for non-active members. Members are permitted to take up life membership on certain conditions. Colours, scarlet and white stripes. Boat-house, Putney."

Programme of the Amateur Dramatic Entertainment, given at St. George’s Hall, Langham Place, by the West London Rowing Club, Saturday Evening, March 23rd 1878

An Address written and delivered by F.V. Brooks, (Captain W.L.R.C.) on the occasion of the West London Rowing Club

“ Brief words while actions wait are well,
The prompter’s hand is now upon the bell.”
And yet I must, although I gain your censure,
Just speak of this, our First Dramatic venture.
An old friend said ; who, it matters not,
Let’s show the world how many friends we’ve got.
Agreed ! Agreed ! ! Let us not lose a day,
But you, of course, must show to us the way.
Boxing ! Fencing ! ! Bayonet and Sabre ! ! !
Or “ Tug of War,” to show how we could labour
At pulling guns in front of hostile forces,
If England’s army should be short of horses.
No! there are competitions without end,
And competitions, Ladies can’t attend.
Ah ! That’s your weakness ; Well, you may laugh,
But of all our friends, they form the better half,
Who never fail to cheer us with their faces,
Whene’er a steamboat follows with our races.

This is such a theatre-going age,
For one short night we’ll try to walk the stage.
What shall we play ? Gilbert ? Farnie ? Reece ?
No ; we’ve a Member who has writ a piece.
This we can have, if we’ll but engage
To put it fairly on the stage.
Whose can it be ? Are you bewitched of Nemesis ?
A Comedy Drama is really Dilley-ightful.
Now, there’s the name, and here my mystery ends,
May “ Auld Acquaintance” bring to us new friends.
As to our Company, who shall create the parts ?
We’ve willing heads, I know we’ve willing hearts ;
Now flushed with pleasure, now pale with fright,
Just our Club colours, alternate Red and White.
We’ve Macklin and Hall, Simpson, yes and Strong ;
They’ll ply their sculls, and push the boat along ;
And should they meet with over much resistance,
We’ve other friends who’ll come to their assistance.
West Londoners have never yet been craven,
And should they hap’ly reach the looked of haven ;
Then shall this night, recalled o’er and o’er
“ In memory’s sweet, but brief encore.”
Bring back to us, though endless seasons run,
Your hearty, welcome plaudit, of Well Done !

Sources:
www.arthurlloyd.co.uk St. Georges Hall, Langham Place, Regent Street, London
The Rowers of Vanity Fair/Brooks FV
Dickens Dictionary of the London/the Thames (1871 & 1881)
Birley, D (1993) Sport and the making of Britain

John Hassall Draws W. Vincent Brooks

This piece, from the trunk of ephemera, is a menu for an occasion on January 12th 1937. It is illustrated with the unmistakable figure of Wilfred Vincent Brooks. The circumstances of the meal remain a mystery, although, like many of the conferences and celebrations documented before, the inclusion of cheese, biscuits and celery is comfortably replicated. The menu itself is in French and headed with the handshake logo of 'Entre Nous 1910'. The plot thickens. Who was or is 'Entre Nous'? A terribly difficult title to search for on the Internet and does the illustration give us any clues?

Entre Nous or 'between us' is captured in the illustrations of folk engaged intimately behind Wilfred. Wilfred clutches, with his partially drawn hand, what appears to be printed matter and written correspondence is in evidence but tantalisingly less than legible. Was he part of Entre Nous or working with this company?

The only positive connection I can make at this time is the signature on the bottom right.

'Hassall' refers to the illustrator John Hassall (and not the bassist with the Libertines). He designed a number of posters for the Underground Group 1908-1913 but might be most readily identified with the poster entitled 'Skegness is So Bracing'. He set up an Art school which later amalgamated with that founded by Frank Brangwyn, a name mentioned by Wilfred in one of his speeches. Vincent Brooks, Day & Son may have been associated with Hassall in the later years before the company's final demise when seemingly incorporated by the Baynard Press in 1960.

Some more investigation is needed to pin this one down.

The Duke of Wellington

The 'Iron Duke' believed in strong government and his opposition to parliamentary reform earned him his metallic title for reasons of a more domestic than constitutional nature; his unpopularity forced him to beef up security at Apsley House against the window-smashers. Despite this, his passing drew the crowds and the spectacle of a lavish state funeral had enormous repercussions on the arts, journalism and everyday consciousness of the general public. Although the irresponsible nature of Frederick's baby-sitting had arguably profounder impact on the boy who had not observed the procession himself, an account of the time would not be fitting without a mention of this occasion.

Frederick begins his autobiography with mention of his grandfather's return at the Waterloo celebrations and his subsequent agitation with regard to Arthur Wellesley. Scarcely had the Duke been 'stopped' in the 1820s, when, in the second chapter, his parents attend his funeral on Thursday November 18th 1852.

It is worth noting that the Duke had died on the 14th September. We can speculate on the reason for the delay in his interment. It may be that the preparation required for the ceremony, coupled with a macabre level of Victorian superstitious fear of burying a living icon meant that it was not until two months later, that Wellington was finally laid to rest.

For a taste of the experience Frederick's parents may have had, we can quote the New York Times, which followed the procession from Constitution Hill, Piccadilly, St. James's Street, Pall Mall, Cockspur Street, Charing Cross, Trafalgar Square to the Strand towards Fleet Street, Ludgate Hill and St. Paul's.

"Amid the rise, and perhaps the fall, of empires, amid “fear of change perplexing the nations,” amid earthquake and flood, a trembling earth and a weeping sky, Wellington was conveyed..."

"Most of the houses along the line of the route exhibited half-mast flags or other symptoms of mourning. Temple Bar was completely enveloped in drapery of black silken velvet, with fringe of silver, and turned aside at the top so as to display an under lining of cloth of gold."

Despite Frederick's fleeting reference to the funeral and his grandfather's apparent preference to rock cakes and drinking, we should not underestimate the occasion for a significant proportion of Londoners and those from further a field.

W. Liebknecht neatly illustrates the frenzy of the procession as observed and as joined from the opposite side of Temple Bar to that of Frederick's parents.

"I had made my plan. We had no money to hire seats at a window, or on a stand. The funeral procession was to pass along the Strand, parallel with the Thames. We must get into one of the streets entering the Strand from the north, and running towards the river.

Holding one little girl by each hand, our pockets filled with provender I steered towards the coign of vantage which I had chosen, just by Temple Bar – the old City gates that divided Westminister from the City. The streets from earliest morning had been unusually animated, and were thronged with people. The procession, however, having to pass through many quarters of the giant town the millions of sight-seers divided up, and without any crush, we reached the chosen places. It was just what we wanted. I stood on some steps, the two little ones clasping one another, and each holding me by the hand, stood on a higher step. Hush! A movement in the sea of people; a distant, growing roar, like the roaring of the ocean, drawing nearer and nearer! An “Ah!” from thousands upon thousands of throats! The procession is there, and, from our position, we can see it as beautifully as if we were at the theatre. The children are delighted. No crush. All my fears are gone.

A long, long time. The golden procession wends its way with the gorgeous catafalue that is taking the “Conqueror of Napoleon” to his tomb, One new sight after the other until nothing more came. The last gold-laced rider has gone.

And now suddenly a rush – a rush forward of the mass piled up behind us. Everyone wants to follow the “procession”. I struggle with all my might to protect the children so that the stream may pass without hurting them. In vain. Against the elemental force of the masses no single human force can stand. It was as easy for a small fragile boat, after a hard winter, to resist an icefloe. I must give way, and, pressing the children tightly to me, I try to get out of the main street. I seem to be succeeding, and I breathe again, when suddenly from the right a new and more mighty wave of people bears in upon us; we are thrown into the Strand, the thousands and hundreds of thousands who have gathered into this street-artery want to hurry after the procession in order to see the sight once again. I set my teeth, try to lift the children on to my shoulders, but am too hemmed in. I convulsively seize the children’s arms; the vortex carries us away, and I suddenly feel a force pressing between me and the children. I grasp their wrists in either hand, but the force that has pushed its way between me and the children still presses forward like a wedge – the children are torn from me, resistance is hopeless. I must let them, go, or I shall break their arms. It was a hideous moment."

"...the funeral procession, comprised of more than ten thousand marchers, encompassed central London, enjoying an audience numbering more than one and a half million people. Queen Victoria and virtually every major and minor national figure in politics or the arts viewed either the procession or the ceremony at St. Paul’s."

Sources:
Bloy, M Arthur Wellesley, first Duke of Wellington (1769-1852)
December 3, 1852 New York Times The Wellington Funeral
March 1895 W. Liebknecht A Bad Quarter of an Hour translated by Eleanor Marx Aveling
Illustrated London News November 20th 1852 The Duke's Funeral
Pearsall C.D.J (1999) Burying the duke: Victorian mourning and the funeral of the Duke of Wellington Victorian Literature and Culture 27: 365-393 Cambridge University Press

Come let us cut the cackle

Yet another speech written by W. Vincent Brooks has been transcribed addressing those in the company of a certain Douglas Cockerell of bookbinding fame. It can be found here.

The speech is clearly written in anticipation of great and somewhat unsettling changes within lithography, the print industry and the wider world. Despite this, Wilfred remains defiantly optimistic in this between war era of considerable uncertainty.

Nerves are the Devil

1889 saw the birth of Frederick's first child, a girl named Edith Mary Brooks. The photograph here dates from around the turn of the last century.

At the age of nineteen, on the 3rd June 1908, Edith married Edward W L Jarrett. We currently know little of their early time together other than they had soon produced both a son and a daughter.

By the mid 1920's Frederick's old school acquaintance Cecil Rhodes had moved up in the world and Edith's youngest brother Herbert Cecil Brooks was working as a Assistant Native Commissioner in what was then Northern Rhodesia. Although far removed from the luxuries of London, while the kids boarded at school, Edith and Edward Jarrett decided on a little holiday.

On Christmas day 1927 Edith wrote to her brother in Solwezi. She and Ted would be sailing on the Arundel Castle out of Southampton on Jan 27th bound for Cape Town. She had booked directly with Union Castle as, "I know someone there and got 10% back off the passage money". Ted had problems with depression but on this Christmas morning at 33 Wilbury Gardens he had managed to get himself out of bed.

Ted's health also prolonged their stay once they had reached Cape Town. Whilst staying at the Mount Nelson Hotel Edith took the time to finalise the details of the trip. The Walmer Castle would take them on the six day voyage to Durban. From the 11th to the 15th of April they would be staying at the Marine Hotel before heading for the Carlton in Johannesburg. After a further stay in Bulawayo they would be staying at Victoria Falls for a week before making the final leg of their journey to Elisabethville (modern day Lubumbashi) and Solwezi.We see from Edith's letters that she arranged with Thomas Cook to have supplies for their stay sent straight up to Solwezi. As well as extra food and camp kit, a collection of gramophone records was also dispatched. Unfortunately Thomas Cook had trouble with this request, the road between Elisabethville and Solwezi "is at present impassable the bridge having been carried away". Another request for a car to take Edith and Ted on the final leg of the journey from Sakania was also in doubt as the car due to collect them was, "apparently held up at Kasenga; we understand there are five lorries bogged on the Kasenga road and the position at present does not appear hopeful".

While still in Cape Town Ted visited a Doctor recommended by a friend. Whilst waiting Edith pencilled another letter to Solwezi. "Friday, Saturday and Sunday Ted seemed much better and took quite an interest in everything but hasn't been to grand since. Nerves are the devil. I'm only hoping it will be such an immense change with you it will make him forget there is such a person as E. Jarrett for a bit". They had some luck at the horse races and attended a dance at Sea Point but Edith ends her letter, "Ted hasn't brought a gun as he said he should shoot himself if he had one so I dropped the question quietly".

The next letter we have dates from 19th April 1928, two weeks after Edith and Ted arrived in Solwezi. Herbert wrote to Thomas Cook in Elisabethville asking for arrangements to be made for their return to Cape Town via Durban. It is only in a letter from the following day that a clearer picture starts to emerge. Herbert wrote to a friend in Elisabethville, "the visit of my sister and brother-in-law, Mr & Mrs Jarrett, has unfortunately been a failure and Jarrett is now suffering with a bad type of nervous breakdown. The Doctor has ordered him home and they will leave Elisabethville for Durban on the 28th April".
He goes on to ask if a travelling companion can be found for Edith for the journey as, "my sister is nervous of the journey down to Durban, without anyone on the train that she knows, as Jarrett is at times very difficult to handle".

On the 16th May Edith once again writes to Herbert's wife Hilda. Having arrived back in Cape Town she is now at the Cape of Good Hope. "Dear Hilda, Many thanks for forwarding letters and sending home address book. I got your letter the day of Ted's funeral. He died on board the Edinburgh Castle on May 12th and was buried at Maitland cemetery on Monday...I am now staying with Miss Fairbridge till Friday when I am going on on the Edinburgh. I am very sorry I created such a disturbance in your household. Lots of love to you & Bill, Edith [p.s] Ted especially wanted to be remembered to Kinross whom he said he felt liked & was sorry for him".

The events in Solwezi and the cause of Edward's death are not covered by any of our present documents. The story told by 'Bill', now in his eighties, is that Ted tried to attack his brother-in-law with a knife. The death on the Edinburgh Castle while officially being recorded as malaria, again according to Bill, was in fact suicide.

Back in the UK their son Jack Jarrett went on to marry Molly (maiden name unknown) who apparently was a pioneer in the flower business, being the first to grow carnations under glass and establishing a very early floral mail order service. Jack and Molly had two boys together, one of which being David Allan Robert Jarrett born at Puncharden, Willian, Hertfordshire on 6th December 1936. Edith's daughter Kathleen, or Kay as she is better know, married Alfred Wall. They had two children Judith and Robert.

Following the unexpected end to her first marriage, Edith later tied the knot with Herbert Edward Newsum. Herbert was nearly twenty years her senior and was the fourth child of Henry Newsum the famous timber merchant of Lincoln. In his younger days Herbert made an appearance for Lincoln City FC in an FA Cup match against Hull. Both him and his brother Clement scored in the 5-1 victory. Later, as a Captain, he headed the Lincolnshire Volunteer Company during the Boer war. Later still, in 1913, he followed in his brothers foot steps and became mayor of Lincoln.

Borman and the Body Snatcher

Allan Borman was the father of Frederick's wife Mary Jane Elizabeth Borman. During 1838-39 he attended a number of courses at Edinburgh's Old Surgeon's Hall.

From November 1838 to April 1839 he attended nineteen of twenty lectures on 'Nathology (?) and the Practice of Medicine'
and from 1st May to July 27th 1839 he attended a ten part course on 'Practical Chemistry and Pharmacy'. Both these were given by William Reid.

Allan Borman took two anatomy courses. Both consisted of twenty sessions, the first between 4th November 1837 and 23rd April 1838, the second between 6th November 1838 and 26th April 1839. These took place at Robert Knox's private Anatomy School in Surgeon's Square (pictured).

Knox was infamous for the role he played in receiving the murder victims of Burke and Hare. Between 1827-28 the pair, after selling on a pensioner who had died at Hare's lodging house, murdered a total of seventeen victims, each one bought by Knox. On two occassions students on Knox's course recognised the cadavers. Knox denied the bodys' identities but on one such corpse started the dissection with the face just to stop further interjections.

Hare later testified against Burke who was executed and himself used for medicial dissection. A note book bound with Burke's skin can still be seen at the Royal College of Surgeons in Edinburgh.

An old family story also involves Allan Borman. It is told that one night he was awoken by a knock at the front door. On opening the door he was seized, blindfolded and taken to an unkown location. He was held for three days during which time he safely delivered a baby. Job done, he was once again blindfolded and dumped back on his door step in the middle of the night. Who the mystery mother and child were, or the reason for the secrecy we will never know.

Revisiting Hornsey and Holborn

On a rather wet Saturday we set off up to London to revisit some of the places associated with Frederick's family and the business.

The first stop was a building site in Hornsey Rise Gardens. The Brooks family's old home was first given permission to divide in 1978. Then it was into three flats now, in 2007, it is five. To help achieve this the earth around the basement has been removed and the whole garden re landscaped.

My Grandfather, William Vincent Brooks, recalls visiting Granny Brooks at the house and how Frederick, his grandfather, had purchased a strip of land to the rear of the garden that ran along the top of the now disused railway embankment. This was the perfect play area for Frederick's four boys.

Next stop on the trip was Oxford Street. Since John Brooks first started business in 1813 the buildings have of course changed and been redeveloped at least twice.

Frederick describes his Grandfather's business to have been, 'just opposite to the Western end of where Frascati’s now stands'. If our detective work is correct Frascati's was next door to the Oxford Music Hall which is now occupied by the Virgin Mega Store. This places John Brooks somewhere near the top of Soho street. Just across the road is Rathbone Place home of the future Wybrow inlaws.

Kings Street was left for another visit as was Chandos Place.

Moving along to Holborn we came to Parker Street. Knowing that the the firm had been bombed out during the war, we did not expect to find very much but it was worth a look. Indeed the majority of the street seems to be post war although the buildings on the south side at the western end give a taste of it's previous industrial character. Unlike the office block that stands where number 48 once was, one of the new developments pictured, shares many features with the old Brooks building.

Just across Kingsway we find the narrow entrance to Gate Street. This was the original home of Day & Son. Having gone into liquidation in 1868 the company was purchased by Vincent Brooks forming 'Vincent Brooks, Day & Son'.

The centre section of the building has been rebuilt, presumably after war damage, but both ends remains the same. The northern part is now Pu's Brasserie while the south section is home to the Barristers of the Holborn Chambers. An old illustration of Gate Street can be found in 'The Business' post blow. It was dark by the time we arrived late on that winter's afternoon, the narrowness of the street also made a good photograph of the whole building difficult. At least we have an excuse to return and maybe sample one of Pu's coffees.

Educating Good Taste and Art in Industry

On Monday 29th April 1935 Wilfred Vincent Brooks gave a speech to the Lincolnshire branch of the National Council of Women. Having served as chairman of the Commerical Printing Section of the Royal Academy of Art's 'British Art in Industry' exhibition earlier that year he gave a luncheon talk entitled:

"How Improved Art in Industry can help to conquer Ugliness and add to the Happiness of our fellow countrymen."

As the article is lengthy we have posted it here. The paragraph below is just a taster...

"The day, I hope, will come when quality and quantity will come together in happy alliance and the most ordinary commodities will benefit in form as well as in substance. Ugliness is at all times and in all places to be vigorously rejected; it is a coarsening and debasing influence, a clear sign of deterioration in a nations life. Since the products of industry are so widespread amongst the people, there influence for a good or evil condition of taste is immense. Hence the conquest of ugliness is of even greater moment in industry than elsewhere."

Looking to Learn about Lithography?

Want to know a little more about this 'lithography' thing that you keep reading about on this site? Nowadays the internet is an amazing source of information on just about any subject you can imagine. Just ten years ago we would have had to spend much time visiting libraries or seaching through archives. One of the many useful sources may have been an encyclopedia, none more well-known than the Encyclopedia Britannica. If we had followed this course, and happened upon the 1911 edition, we would have discovered an entry on Lithography written by none other than Frederick himself which you can read here. The 'LoveToKnow' site we have linked to states that many consider "the best encyclopedia ever written:[to be] the eleventh edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, first published in 1911. At a time when many encyclopedias have capsulated and condensed important knowledge, the 11th edition is generally much more in-depth and thorough on its topics.

It is not uncommon for its entries to be 5 to 10 times the length of other encyclopedias. As a research tool, this 11th edition is unparallelled - even today.
The Eleventh Edition filled 29 volumes and contains over 44 million words. It contains over 40,000 articles written by over 1,500 authors within their various fields of expertise. What was particularly remarkable was that many of the entries were written by the most famous people of the age. As such, it was considered to represent the sum of human knowledge at the beginning of the 20th Century."

A handwritten copy of the entry (see picture) was also found amongst Frederick's documents. At first we thought these papers might be a speech or draft of a journal article. Finding the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica online, as we had during many internet searches, we noticed the tell-tale F.V.B. signature and put two and two together. The online text matches the hand script which Frederick wrote in 1907.

From the Cradle...

From reading the obituary in the British & Colonial Printer Circular, we knew that Vincent Brooks was laid to rest in Wandsworth Cemetery. His funeral, four days after his death, took place on October 3rd 1885.
Working in Selhurst and finishing early on a Friday I decided to track down his final resting place, if indeed it was still there. For a small fee I could have checked the local borough's cemetery records but declined, thinking that it might take the spontaneity out of the expedition. Walking from Wandsworth Common Station, on an overcast autumn day, I reached the cemetery and regretted not having done my research. Wandsworth cemetery is large. Some areas were obviously more recent than others but half a mile of probable headstones, crosses and angels stretched down the gentle hill, their colour matching the threatening clouds above.

Not quite knowing what to do or where to start (we only came across the colour print, right, later on) I walked towards the cemetery's two chapels. I was here and I had to start somewhere. I was drawn across to the plots on the right hand side of the road, as good a place to start as any. Bainford, no, Seaman, no, Vincent Brooks, yes! Just three graves into my search there he was. Much to my surprise, he was joined not only by his wife Rhoda, but also by his son Frederick and his wife Elizabeth.

The next part of the puzzle is the stone 'King's Royal Rifles Corps' emblem at the base of the headstone...

The Business

Frederick very clearly states the business of his grandfather as a, stationer at 421 Oxford Street. The trade directories also have him as a bookbinder at 3 John street in 1810 and at 72 Farringdon Street and at the first address as a bookseller and account-book manufacturer from between 1812 and 1817-1839. There may be some confusion at Farringdon Street as it is a John Henry Brooks listed here in 1846. Whether this middle name is correct we cannot verify at this time. Lastly, publishing is confirmed as part of the equation between 1839-68 when Vincent comes into his own. Preceding this, the firm trades as John Brooks & Son.

Through Frederick's writing, we have the clearest picture of his father's movements from Oxford Street around 1852, to King Street, Covent Garden then to 1 Chandos Street in 1859 where expansion is such to force the family to live away from the business in Mitcham. In 1868, the drive of pioneering Vincent sees the purchase of Day & Son at Gate Street, Lincoln's Inn Fields. This is described in detail here. Tidman states that Brooks himself had set up as a printer around 1843, but apparently did not produce any lithographs until the early 1850s. It appears he was building on equipment and premises purchased in 1864 at Lambeth Street from J.S. Hodson where his brother Alfred was in charge.

The centenery of the business we record, attests to 100 years of lithography by 1923 and finds the family business at 48 Parker Street. In credit to Vincent, his sons and grandsons, the business was shrewd in pursuing new techniques and processes, moving from chromo-lithography to photo-lithography and offset printing. The purchase of Day & Son was crucial to the business, especially as it bought not only the premises but good reputation of the company.

Sources:
Tidman, Kathy Kajander (2007) A Lithographic House: Day & Son
University of Birmingham The British Book Trade Index

A Word on William Wybrow

We've heard quite a bit regarding Frederick's father and grandfather's activities so it is appropriate to mention his other esteemed maternal grandfather. The publisher William Wybrow was, by Frederick's account, quite fond of a tipple in his later years. No hint of intemperance is betrayed in the largely and alternatively spiritual material he was producing in the realm of the arts. Sheet music appears to have been his mainstay with some work satirical in nature.

Like John Brooks, Wybrow's firm appears to have been struck by criminal opportunists and it is through this court case we learn of the nature of his business run with his brother Stephen. Fortunately for the alleged thieves, the sentences are merciful. Records show the premises at 24 Rathbone Place was known as "The Temple of Apollo" and William is listed in the trade directories, here and at no. 33, from 1822-57.

The area of the shop has for a long time been characteristically artistic and Bohemian with artists and craftsman occupying the quarter. It is gratifying to know that this haunt, just off Tottenham Court Road and Oxford Street, is still occupied by those in the music business.

Lady Lytton Legs it to Lizzy in London

When we first started to transcribe 'My Life's Medley' we worked from a typed copy. In a subsequent hunt for the missing chapters we obtained the original hand-written script. Unfortunately no 'thirty-six years of Vanity Fair' or 'theatrical memories' were found but the hand-written copy did provide us with a wealth of scribblings and corrections that were omitted when the document was later typed.

The most substantial of these alterations comes from the chapter on 'Family History' and relates to John Brooks' wife Elizabeth Steggell. Although now crossed out, this original paragraph can just about be read;


"She was an amateur actress of eminence and was proud of having been requisitioned to go to Knebworth where she played Mrs. Malaprop in The Rivals; a visit which led to such a friendship with the first Lady Lytton that on leaving her husband her Ladyship came straight to her home in Oxford Street for shelter. Elizabeth was never tired of telling how she and the visitor enjoyed sitting on the first floor window hearing the news boys of the period shouting out, “flight of Lady Lytton from Knebworth".

Considering how fond of name dropping Frederick seems to be during the rest of his autobiography it is hard to understand why he scrapped this segment.

Lady Rosina Bulwer Lytton (1802-1882) was the daughter of the eary feminist Anna Wheeler. She married Edward Bulwer Lytton in 1827, a marriage that seemed to scar the rest of her life for after their separation in 1836 she spent much of her time denouncing her exhusband, exposing mistresses, illegitimate children and even claiming that he had sexual relations with Disraeli. Lady Bulwer Lytton went on to write thirteen novels, Edward, a poet and playwright, moved in to politics ending up as Secretary of State for the Colonies serving alongside his old friend Disraeli.

Introducing Captain Wilfred Vincent Brooks

After Frederick's death on the Seventh of August 1921, control of Vincent Brooks, Day and Son passed on to Wilfred Vincent Brooks (centre) and Frederick Allan Brooks (right). The latter of these two has been described by his nephew as a bit of a lay about and it is perhaps for this reason that Wilfred seems to have played the major role in the continuation of the firm.

Below are two 'Who's Who' articles from trade journals that give some insight into the man.


Who’s Who
In the
Printing & Allied Trades

A prominent London Lithographer.

Captain W. Vincent Brooks, M.C., who has consented to take the chair at the concert of the Lithographers’ Auxiliary to be held at the Cannon Street Hotel on the 17th inst., in aid of the funds of the Printers’ Pension Corporation, is the managing director of Messrs. Vincent Brooks, Day and Son, Ltd. This well-known establishment, now in its 104th year of existence- can justifiability boast of many interesting historical connections with the evolution and practice of lithographic printing. In spite of its long association with the industry, however, it retains a foremost position among firms devoted to this branch of the graphic arts. Amongst the many outstanding happenings in this firm’s long history, it may be mentioned that it was granted a Royal Warrant by Queen Victoria in 1837, whilst in 1855 the grandfather of Captain Brooks held a class for the teaching of lithography at St. James’s Palace, at which class the Princess Royal, Empress of Germany, was a pupil. This celebrated pupil sketched her own originals, which were afterwards transferred on to the lithographic stone, then printed by the firm. In 1867 Messrs. Vincent Brooks, Day and Son secured a gold medal at the Paris International Exposition for the excellence of their productions, and in 1921 and 1925 were successful in gaining awards for chromo and offset printing at the exhibitions held in London. It is also interesting to mention that Messrs. Vincent Brooks, Day and Son hold the original plates for the illustrations for the Chapman and Hall’s editions of Charles Dickens’ works, and for over forty years printed the Vanity Fair cartoons. As indicative of the progressive nature of the business, it may be stated that a factory comprising 2,000 square feet has recently been acquired in Parker Street. Captain Brooks has much meritorious war service to his credit. Though he received eight wounds during his period overseas, he, fortunately, to-day feels no ill effects of the strenuous years of war. He joined up as a private in 1914 in the Seventh City of London Regiment, and when to France in 1915 as a Lieutenant. He was taken prisoner in May 1916, at Vimy Ridge, and afterwards spent two years as a prisoner of war in Germany, being eventually exchanged in Holland in 1918. Captain Brooks is a valuable member of the Colour Lithography Committee of the London Master Printers’ Association and is also a member of the London Central Districts Master Printers’ Association. Though he has no outstanding hobbies, except it be[sic] his absorbing interest in his own particular craft, he is a believer in open air exercises, and finds time occasionally to indulge in a game of tennis. He is looking forward with pleasure and anticipation to the laudable task he is setting himself in raising funds for the Lithographers’ Auxiliary, and hopes that the occasion may prove in every way successful.

Source:
British & Colonial Printer & Stationer
Volume 100, Number 2. January 13th 1927
Page 22.

Printer’s Who’s Who
W. Vincent Brooks
Managing Direct, Vincent Brooks, Day & Son, Ltd.


Captain Vincent Brooks is best known in the printing industry for his activities in the allied spheres of lithography, art and education. Head of a firm of lithographers which specialises on poster work, he is closely connected, as a Chairman of the Education Committee and member of the Advisory Sub-committee, with the London County Council School of Photo-Engraving and Lithography in Bolt Street, Fleet Street, and has been an inspector of the London printing schools for the Board of Education. He represents the London Master printers’ Association on the Federation Lithographic Committee, and the Federation itself on the Industrial Art Committee of the Federation of British Industries. He as acted also as Arbitrator and has frequently given expert evidence in legal cases in which lithographic questions have been involved. He is a member of the Executive Committee of the London Master Printers’ Association.
Educated at Merchant Taylors’ School, he joined the 7th London Regiment in 1914, went to France the following year, was taken prisoner in May 1916, and retired at the end of the war with the rank of Captain and the Military Cross. His clubs are the Eccentric and the Royal Automobile.

Source:
World Press News
Vol. 4, No. 81. September 18th, 1930
Page 47.

One Hundred Years of Grease and Ink

London Lithographers’ Centenary

Vincent Brooks, Day and Son, Ltd.

A notable event in the history of the printing trade of London was celebrated on Friday night, when a dinner was given by Messrs. Vincent Brooks, Day and Son, Ltd.- London’s oldest firm of lithographic printers- to mark the centenary of this well known house. At the Horse Shoe Hotel, Tottenham-court-road, the firm entertained a large company of their employees, together with a number of distinguished visitors connected with the printing trade, amongst the latter being Mr. Gerard T. Meynell, Mr. A. E. Goodwin (secretary of the Federation of Master Printers), and Mr. Woodgate Stevens (London secretary of the Amalgamated Society of Lithographic Printers).

Under the presidency of Mr. W. Vincent Brooks, the present head of the firm, an excellent dinner was enjoyed, and then the company settled down to a generous concert programme interspersed with speeches.

Before the speeches started, an interesting preliminary took place, the chairman and his brother, Mr. Frederick A. Brooks, being presented each with a framed portrait of himself. The presentation was made on behalf of the employees by Mr. Broadstock, who was supported with enthusiastic applause. Both brothers then briefly returned thanks for this pleasant souvenir of the occasion.

The toast of the firm was given by Mr. Gerard Meynell. After remarking upon the wonderful achievement which was being celebrated that night, Mr. Meynell pointed out that lithography was not introduced until 1800, and in 1823 the firm which Messrs. Vincent Brooks represent to day began business, and they were still going on, turning out first class work. The thought of this achievement lead him to suggest the slogan “There are far more crooks than Brooks in the printing trade to-day.” (Laughter) Mr. Meynell concluded with a few personal references affectionately reminiscent of Mr. F. Vincent Brooks, the late managing director.

A Unique Record

Response was made by the chairman, who began with a word of regret that his respected father had not lived to see this remarkable occasion. He regretted, too, that their old esteemed friend, Mr. Oliver A. Fry, who had been editor of Vanity Fair for a number of years and a director of this company since it’s incorporation, was prevented by ill-health from being present. After thanking Mr. Meynell for the generous way he him proposed the toast, Mr. Brooks went on to recall some outstanding facts relating to the firm’s history. Although, he said, their were older firms in existence that were now practising lithography, no other house had been established as lithographic printers for so long a period as theirs. This achievement was, he believed, unique. Another point was the record of their staff, and he went on to mention a number of cases of remarkably long service, including that of Mr. Greenfield, who had join joined the staff in 1861 (though his connection with the firm had not since been unbroken), and Mr. Broadstock who had been with them since 1869, and Mr. Clements, the works manager, who had been with them since 1870. He thought these two facts, the age of the firm, and the long experience of their worker, had been a valuable asset to the them in the period of trade depression. They had in their time done some unique and famous work. For instance everybody knew the world-renowned Vanity Fair cartoons. After recalling a number of other outstanding pieces of work, the speaker mentioned the fact then when Baxter ceased his practice, the firm of Vincent Brooks carried on the process, and they had also been the pioneers of photo printing. The chairman mentioned incidentally that Mr. Griffiths had, at the last board meeting, been co-opted a director of the firm - an announcement greeted with applause - and he closed by expressing, on behalf of his fellow directors and himself, a hope that their happy gathering that evening would help to cement the very excellent feeling already in existing between the management and the staff. (Applause).

Mr. A. V. Hunt, for 25 years a director of the firm, then proposed “The Guests” in an entertaining speech. After recalling 80 years of friendship between the Brooks family and his own, he proceeded to make appreciative individual mention of their visitors, and concluded with a very cordial reference to his old friend Vincent Brooks, to whom he referred as a “great hearted and noble minded” man.

The Visitors’ Speeches

Mr. A. E. Goodwin, very cordially received, responded on behalf of the visitors. In the course of an able speech he spoken in very high terms of the firm’s lithographic work, and also mentioned his own association with the F. Vincent Brooks in connection with the Federation of Master Printers, remarking that the whole printing in London had often be indebted to that gentleman’s sane and useful counsel.

Mr. Courtney Lewis was also called upon to respond, and did so in amusing and interesting fashion, recalling many facts connected with the introduction of lithography into London, and referring especially to the work of George Baxter, in regard to which Mr. Lewis is an authority.

Mr. Woodgate Stevens also responded recalling his own early association with the firm, and especially his very high regard for Mr. Frederick Vincent Brooks whom he had known. In the old days, he said there were happy relations between employers and staff and he felt he could express on behalf of the staff of the present day their appreciation of the way they were treated.

Mr. F. A. Brooks (who was enthusiastically received) proposed the toast of “The Staff,” and this was responded to Mr. Clements.

A very entertaining and musical programme was given during the evening, and the proceedings terminated at a late hour with the singing of the National Anthem. The whole proceedings were marked with the utmost cordiality, and Messrs. Vincent Brooks, Day and Son, Ltd., are to be congratulated both upon the unique achievement celebrated, and upon the happy manner of its celebration.

Source:
The British & Colonial Printer and Stationer
Vol. 93, no. 25, December 20, 1923.

Sentenced to Death

It was around one o'clock in the morning on the 10th of February 1818.
At 421 Oxford Street an arm reached in through a previously broken window...

Read the full story here.

The Late Mr. Vincent Brooks

"Other pens than ours will probably record the full details of Vincent Brooks’ busy and eventful life. We shall endeavour to confine ourselves to those details specially connected with the Trade we represent, and those features in his character which led him to become so close to our ideal of what a master Printer should be.

The subject of our memoir was born on October 25th, 1815, and was the son of John Brooks, of Oxford Street, Stationer, and Publisher of many books on the advanced side of politics, so that he early came into the society of men of letters who were much attracted to him by his energy, activity, and great physical strength. These influences who probably made him a Radical of the usual type, had he not also had the guidance of the philanthropists, John Minto Morgan and Robert Owen.

Vincent was educated at Tottenham, and on leaving school, he, for a short time, assisted Mr. Morgan in the management of his farm and estate near Uxbridge, but he was more inclined to commercial pursuits, and shortly joined his father in his Oxford Street business.

At this early age his capacity for work was enormous, and after working hard from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m., he would repair to the Birkbeck Institute, in Chancery-lane, or engage himself in the practice of book binding, a pursuit in which he was very efficient and used to occasionally practice throughout life.

To the lad’s clear intellect it soon became apparent that the active pursuit of politics was injurious to business, and by this consideration he was led to the practice of liberal principles rather than the profession of liberal views. We have dwelt rather fully on this period of his career, because we think that it was at this time that he formed that strong regard for the rights and interests of others, which was the chief characteristic of his commercial and family life.

Before succeeding to his father, he was for a short time associated with Mr. Charles Robertson, the well-known Artist’s Colourman, of Long Acre, where he doubtless learnt much that was of service to him in his eventual pursuit of Chromo-lithography.

His first effort as a Colour Printer was at the 1851 Exhibition, and it is wonderful how soon he reached almost the highest pitch of perfection. In his office at Gate-Street, Lincoln’s-inn-fields, may be seen two examples of his very earliest examples in Chromo-lithography, “Spanish Peasants,” after John Gilbert, and the marvellous and well-known reproduction of the Chandos portrait of Shakespeare.

In 1855, we find him conducting a Lithographic class, for ladies, at Marlborough House, where he came under the notice of the Queen, the Prince Consort, and the Princess Royal, by whom he was entrusted with the reproduction of the Princess’ well-known picture of the “Dying Soldier on the Battle Field”- painted and reproduced on behalf of the Patriotic Fund. At this time he was in King-street, Covent-garden, but he shortly after extended his business by removing to Chandos-street, in the same neighbourhood. Here a very large quantity of first-class work was done, and Mr. Brooks directed his attention to Colour Printing from blocks and aquatints for the first time.

It was 1867 that Mr. Brooks took the most important step in his career, by purchasing from the liquidators of Day and Son, Limited, the business which had been conducted in Gate-street for many years. The way in which he combined together the two businesses testify to his energy and experience, and the way in which they formed a harmonious whole, are a record of his remarkable tact and kindness. Here, his success followed him, and it would be impossible to recount a tithe of the important works on which he has since been engaged.

Although there have been many highly successful productions- perhaps the most remarkable feature has been the general average of success – this has undoubtedly arisen from the painstaking character of Mr. Brooks, which may be said to have influenced all parties concerned in the conduct of the business; in his view, it was not sufficient to get the proof passed, he must himself be satisfied. For example, he had a remarkable eye for portraiture, and no portrait was allowed to be etched till he had carefully gone over it with the artist. He was also equally careful with the title pages of books, and would always go through them and make alterations. The habit of this painstaking has thoroughly permeated the establishment, and is the guiding principle of his sons, Alfred William and Frederick Vincent, who have for some years been in partnership, and who succeed to the control of the business which will be carried on under the style of Vincent Brooks, Day and Sons, as heretofore.

As we have seen, Mr. Brooks commenced business wholly as a Chromo-lithographer, but he was fully alive to the necessity of moving with the times, so that although his business has been established almost as long as any, it has retained in the fullest degree the energy and freshness of its youth. This has arisen from the principal’s inclination to listen to every one who wished to show him a new process, thus he was very early in the field with photo-lithography, and purchased in 1866 Mr. Willis’ remarkable Aniline process of direct photography, which has so many years been of great assistance to the Architect and Engineer, and remains far and away the best of all the processes of direct photography, that is to say, of photography without the aid of a negative.

Mr. Brooks was among the earliest to work the Woodbury-type process, and the results in this direction attained at Gate-street at the present time are most interesting, but it is impossible within the limits of our space to record the full extent of the business, but we have done enough to show the breadth of view of the deceased, and we think that he leaves behind him a business with wider range than any other in this country. Mr. Brooks secured the goodwill and attachment of his customers by his spirit of fairness, and the disinterested character of his advice. His regard for the interest of his staff was remarkable, and he thus won for him himself a very high place in their regard, a fact that received remarkable testimony from the gathering of grief-stricken employees who mingled, with many other friends, at his grave.

The sudden nature of Mr. Brooks’ death has already been recorded in our pages, but it may be mentioned that the funeral took place at Wandsworth Cemetery, Wandsworth Common, on Saturday, October 3rd, and that he leaves a widow, and the two sons previously referred to, to mourn his loss.

We feel that we have scarcely done justice to his great love for his fellow-men, and the grand equity of his mind- the following recently-written verse comes across us, and fills the void more fully than we can, and indicates the lesson of his life:

Let us live for those who love us,
For those who think us true;
Let us live for the Heaven above us,
That is waiting for us, too.
For the right that needs assistance:
For the ill that needs resistance:
For the future in the distance,
And the good that we can do."

Source:
British & Colonial Printer & Stationer and Booksellers’ Circular.
Vol. XV, No. 17. Thursday, October 22nd 1885.
image of 'The Dying Soldier' kindly provided by Mic Relf of The New Baxter Society

A Grisly Murder

It seems that Frederick may have escaped lightly given the murderous potential of his headmaster Reverend Watson. The flogging he received as a schoolboy of Stockwell Grammar School was enough for him to make an untimely graduation. The brutal birching and its result, compounded by a certain Sergeant Tully, make Frederick witness to the passion responsible for a rather 'Victorian' trunk murder.

Well-versed and published in the Classics, the long-time headmaster John Selby Watson murdered his wife, Anne Watson on 8th October 1871. The case was not without considerable legal controversy, as Brooks recounts but his recall of the case details, may reflect a certain confusion that often infiltrates public and media fascination.

The number of pupils at Stockwell Grammar had fallen by 1870 and the governors were forced to give the 66 year old master notice. De Loriol says of the couple:

"...they moved to 28 St Martin’s Lane, a short walk from the school in Stockwell. Gradually, Anne became shrewish, taking to the bottle and ranting at the staff and sometimes at her husband.

He contented himself with the knowledge that, during his tenure as headmaster, the school had thrived; some students even attaining national prominence. His charges also respected him as he was one of the few masters of the age who didn’t believe in corporal punishment, preferring to encourage his students."

This is laughably at odds with the evidence of Frederick's assault and, in any case, Mrs Watson was unlucky enough to come to a singularly grisly end. Although described as having ‘rather hasty temperament’, to be difficult, quarrelsome, or, alternatively, 'a holy terror who drove her husband batty with her black moods and fierce temper', it seems the Rev. Watson, in actual fact, was more than willing to reciprocate by 'beating his wife's head to a jelly'. The weapon of choice was the butt of a pistol discovered in Watson's dressing table.

One failed suicide attempt, a confession note and the discovery of the body by his faithful servant Ellen Pyne led to a trial at the Old Bailey from which he did indeed escape hanging at Horsemonger's by the intervention of the Home Secretary. The details of the trunk and Watson's final demise are various. Whether 'temporary insanity' or 'melancholia' were truly acceptable as a defence, the census of 1881 finds him at Parkhurst Prison, a mere three years before successful suicide down a stair well, fall from a hammock or death by natural causes.

Sources:
Martin J. Wiener Judges v. Jurors: Courtroom Tensions in Murder Trials and the Law of Criminal Responsibility in Nineteenth-Century England
Gregg Manning Male murders
Nene Adams The Year Round: A Victorian Miscellany
Marilyn Stasio He Did, She Howled
Penny Illustrated Paper, 1871

At Her Majesty's Pleasure

Kenneth MacLeay of the Royal Scottish Academy was a difficult artist to identify given the erroneously typed description. Queen Victoria commissioned a series of portraits of the Scottish clans and some of her retainers including John Brown. The work took four years and in 1870 Vincent Brooks received the command for lithographic reproductions to be executed. The copies were intended for subscription by visitors to the exhibition at Mitchell’s Royal Library, 33 Old Bond Street.

Despite his predicament, Rudofsky was able to carry out the work, including the portrait of John Brown noted by Frederick. What the lead portrait artist of the firm was able to produce in his confinement, has a curious claim to have assisted in MacLeay's success. The National Galleries of Scotland describe the series as his 'best known work'.

Frederick alludes to the conditions of Whitecross Street Prison for debtors. The location of this establishment is now partially covered by the present day Barbican. The author appears to be not far off the mark in his assessment of the place, the risk to the arrested as 'not very distressing as long as they were not totally without resources.' The opportunity for the better off to eat and sleep well and for 'Harpies' to fleece the vulnerable are supported by the following account:

The Receiving Ward was a long low room with windows secured by bars, at each end. There were two grates, but only one contained any fire. The place was remarkably clean - the floor, the deal tables, and the forms being as white as snow.
The following conversation forthwith took place between the new prisoner and the steward:-
"What is your name?"
"Arthur Chichester."
"Have you got your bread ?"
"Yes."
"Well - put it in that pigeon-hole. Do you choose to have sheets to-night on your bed?"
"Certainly."
"Then that will be a shilling the first night, and sixpence every night after, as long as you remain here. You can, moreover, sleep in the inner room, and sit up till twelve o'clock. Those who can't afford to pay for sheets sleep in a room by themselves, and go to bed at a quarter to ten. You see we know how to separate the gentlemen from the riff-raff."
"And how long shall I be allowed to stay up in the Receiving Ward ?"
"That depends. Do you mean to live at my table? I charge six pence for tea, the same for breakfast, a shilling for dinner, and four-pence for supper."
"Well - I shall be most happy to live at your table."
"In that case, write a note to the governor to say you are certain to be able to settle your affairs in the course of a week, and I will take care he shall have it the very first thing to-morrow morning.''
"But I am sure of not being able to settle in a week."
"Do as you like. You won't be allowed to stay up here unless you do."
"Oh! in that case I will do so at once. Can you oblige me with a sheet of writing-paper ?"
"Certainly. Here is one. A penny, if you please."
Chichester paid for the paper, wrote the letter, and handed it to the Steward.
He then cast a glance round the room ; and saw three or four tolerably decent-looking persons warming themselves at the fire, while fifteen or sixteen wretched-looking men, dressed for the most part as labourers, were sitting on the forms round the walls, at a considerable distance from the blazing grate.
The Steward, perceiving that the new prisoner threw a look of inquiry towards him, said,- "Those gentlemen at the fire are Sheriff's Debtors, and live at my table: those chaps over there are Court of Requests' Men, and haven't a shilling to bless themselves with. So, of course, I can't allow them to associate with the others."

Source:
VictorianLondon.org Chapter XXXV. Whitecross-Street Prison

University Boat Race 1866

Preceded by a rather confusing section regarding Frederick's stay above a cutlery shop, the author describes his first sighting of the University Boat race. His solitary journey to Hammersmith, in the early hours, is as much rewarded with a memorable, if hairy, incident on the bridge as the considerable impression made upon the boy coming of age.

The Oxford Cambridge University boat race follows a course of 4 miles and 374 yards and on March 24th 1866 took the usual route from Putney to Mortlake upstream via Hammersmith. The race report was as follows:

For the third time running Oxford won the toss and, it was considered at the time, misguidedly chose Middlesex with a strong south-west wind and the potential trouble on the open side round the Surrey bend.

Once again steamers delayed the start until the tide was all-but at its peak. Cambridge stayed well out in the middle seeking any stream that remained, while Oxford sought shelter along the Fulham shore.

Although it was clear that Cambridge went into the lead initially, there was considerable divergence of opinion among the onlookers about whether the Light Blues were still ahead at Craven Steps and if so by how much.

It was not until opposite the Crabtree, when the crews converged when it was clear that Oxford had almost drawn level. However Cambridge moved ahead again and shot Hammersmith Bridge ahead.

Water conditions were now bad and the better watermanship of Oxford began to be effective, giving them a few feet lead as the passed the bottom of the Eyot and by Chiswick Steps the Dark Blues ahead. By the crossing they had clear water.

Shortly after this, any hope that Cambridge might have, was destroyed by their cox. A barge cut right across his course but he attempted to pass in front of it and only just avoided disaster by a dramatic turn right off the true course and by the time he was back on course, Oxford were almost 3 lengths ahead. (Charles Tottenham the Oxford cox in 1865, had ducked neatly under the stern and gained several feet.)

Oxford rowed on from there with no change in distance between the crews and their win was adjudged as 4 lengths in 23 minutes 35 seconds.

Sources:
http://www.theboatrace.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boat_Race

Friendly dedication

Frederick dedicates his autobiography to an Oliver Armstrong Fry. From 1889 to 1904, Fry was the editor of the literary and social periodical Vanity Fair, famous for its cartoon lithographs as produced by Vincent Brooks, Day & Son. Married to Annie Zetterquist Rolfe, Saint records that Fry wrote a preface to a book written by his brother-in-law, Clapton Crabb Rolfe. Saint describes this architect as 'notorious for talking clap-trap'. Oliver Fry was also a director of Vincent Brooks, Day & Son but there is surprisingly little reference to such a great friend of the author.

Source:
Saint, Andrew Three Oxford Architects. Oxfordshire Architectural and Historical Society.

Bank Run

The following is taken from George Jacob Holyoake's autobiography entitled, 'Sixty Years of an Agitator's life' and gives some background to the 'Go for Gold' story. Holyoake's account throws doubt on whether John Brooks was the original printer. It is surprising in either case that he added his name to the reverse but this shows his willingness to be associated in these politic circles.

Two years later the Duke of Wellington was driven from power a second time. One morning when the citizens of London appeared in the streets they found placards on the walls in large letters bearing two lines only—"Stop the Duke—Go for Gold."

How came these placards there? What printer had the temerity to print them? What stickers could be trusted with the dangerous task of setting them up, who might have been seized and imprisoned until they disclosed their employers, if indeed they escaped on those terms? Who devised that expedient of disturbing the Government of the duke? In those days of spies and militaryism the scheme was dangerous alike in conception and execution. The duke never knew that the blow came from one of the deputation whom he admonished "to keep their heads upon their shoulders." It was Francis Place who devised the scheme—which certainly he carried out.

He knew a printer in a court in Holborn who could be trusted. One Saturday afternoon when the men had left he went in to the master, examined his stock of paper, and finding it sufficient, he went out and brought in beer and food sufficient for two days, flour, a billstickers' flat can and a brush. They then locked the doors, and he and Place worked all night and the greater part of the Sunday, Place and he pulling alternately at the hand press. They made paste, and a bag which would hold the placards concealed under a loose overcoat, and on midnight of Sunday, Place went out and put up the placards himself, sticking them up in the most convenient places he came to. At certain points, he passed his friend, the printer, who had a supply of placards, which he put quickly into Place's bag, who then went on with his bill-sticking until daylight—when they went back and distributed the type. So, when the men returned to work on Monday morning, no one but Place and the printer knew how London had been placarded.

In the excitement in which London was, this suggestive warning produced an immense impression. The public knew not whence the mysterious announcement came, and, knowing nothing, every one imagined everything. No one doubted that the warning came from influential quarters. The Bank of England was besieged, and the duke who would not have retreated before an army—retreated before Place's placards.

Debate has arisen as to whether the words of the placard were "Run for Gold" or "Go for Gold." The evidence is in favour of "Go." The competent testimony of Mr. Collet admits that Place devised the placard. On hearing Joseph Parkes read a copy of a proposed wall-bill, Place stopped him and wrote instead a placard of one line "To stop the Duke—Go for Gold." It was like Place's directness and impatience of verbiage. Mr. Collet saw one of these bills at Saville House, Leicester Square, on Saturday, May 12, 1832, which may have been one Place had procured. Mr. J. G. Harney relates that he saw a placard at St. Hiliers which bore the words, "J. Brooks, Printer, Oxford Street, London," probably a reproduction of Place's placard, as £80 was subscribed to multiply them. Mr. Brooks claimed to have been the originator of the bill. Doubleday, in his "Life of Sir Robert Peel," says, "The placard was the device of four gentlemen who each put down £20 that thousands might be printed of the terrible missives. The effect was hardly to be described. It was electric." Miss Helena Cobbett, the last surviving child of William Cobbett, writes to Mr. Harney that "Her Father in the Register, vol. lxxvi. p. 392, mentioned the placard at the time of its appearance, and that her brother James had added to it a note, saying, 'The placard was suggested by Mr. John Fielden to Mr. T. Attwood, Mr. J. Parkes, and others.'" Mr. Samuel Kydd sends an extract from Alison's "History of Europe," which supplies a name for the placard which explains its efficiency. "Then were seen the infernal placards in the streets of London. ‘To Stop the Duke—Go for Gold!' and with such success was the suggestion adopted, that in three days no less than £1,800,000 was drawn out of the Bank of England in specie" (vol. iv. p. 373). The Duke resigned his first Premiership November 16, 1830, and returned to office May 9, 1832, and resigned on the 18th. The public agitations of which the placard was but a symbol, limited the Duke's second reign to nine days.

Source:

Holyoake, George Jacob (1892) Sixty Years of an Agitator's Life. London, T. Fisher Unwin. Chapter XXXI: Six Months' Imprisonment for Answering a Question in Debate.

reproduced online by Gerald Massey

John Brooks

The strength of the religious views of John Brooks, grandfather to Frederick Vincent Brooks, are illustrated in the court transcript quoted in this article taken from a issue of Richard Carlile's 'The Lion' from 1828.

SOCIAL VICE OF OATH MAKING.

WHEN a politically legal murder was to be committed at Chester, on Bruce the schoolmaster of Stockport, and Magennis who fired a pistol at Birch the constable, the court declared that the oath of a Deist was good, and that it was enough for a man to say that he believed in God to make his oath respectable. Wherever the political purposes of the crown, or the inclinations of the Judges have been in question, the courts have thus ruled. But, in two instances, where Deists have been prosecutors of thieves, two Judges have declared that a theft shall not be proved by the oath of a Deist. These two cases were decided at the Old Bailey, the first, in the person of Mr. Carlile, by the present Recorder, Newman Knowlys ; the second, in the person of Mr. Brooks, by Mr. Sergeant Arabin. Mr. Carlile certainly refused to say any thing about the word God, either as an admission or a denial, avowing no knowledge upon the subject, the Recorder refusing to define any thing about God, so as to communicate any knowledge of the word to the prosecutor. Mr. Brooks, in his case, simply expressed an absence of superstitious veneration for the New Testament, which Mr. Sergeant Arabin said was sufficient to induce him to reject the evidence and to encourage the thief, Mr. Brooks's case is the more singular and anomalous, inasmuch as, the day before, he had prosecuted another thief to conviction at the Clerkenwell Sessions; a circumstance that demanded, on the one or the other side, the immediate interference of the Secretary of State for the Home Department. The one or the otherof the courts must have been in error, the one to suffer, or the other not to allow, a conviction.

Subsequently, Mr. Brooks was called on a jury in the Palace Court, and there, informing the judge, that his oath had been rejected as a Deistical prosecutor, no objection was made to his taking the oath, and becoming a Deistical juror! He was sworn and sat as a juror. There seems to be more sense and honesty in Westminster, than in the City of London, on this subject, as is further seen in the following article, which has appeared in several papers, relating to Mr. Brooks's appointment to the constabulary :—

WESTMINSTER COURT LEET.
POINTS OF RELIEF.
The ancient Court of Burgesses, by whom all constables and other officers for the city and liberty of Westminster are chosen, held the annual court leet for swearing in constables for the ensuing year. The usual lists were handed in, and those who answered were either sworn in, excused, or fined, as the respective cases might be; but one gentleman set up an excuse of rather a novel kind. Mr. John Brooks, of Oxford Street, stationer, in being called for the parish of St. Anne, Soho, came forward, and addressing the Court, said he had no objection to the trouble and inconvenience attending the serving the office of constable, but he must object to taking the oath always required.

Mr. Robson (the Clerk of the Court.)—Upon what ground do you object
to take the oath?
Mr. Brooks.—I beg leave to inform the Court that some time ago, being a witness at the Old Bailey in a case of robbery, I was questioned as it my belief on certain points of religion, and on answering conscientiously on the points mentioned, Mr. Serjeant Arabin declared that I was an unfit person to be sworn, and that in fact, my evidence must be rejected. The judge of a superior court having refused to suffer the oath to be administered, I conceive that the example must be followed here upon the same grounds.
Mr. Robson, sen. (the Chairman.)—Administer the oath officer, let Mr. Brooks be sworn.
Mr. Brooks.—I will not submit to be sworn in one court when the oath has been refused to me in another. Besides, I object altogether being sworn upon the New Testament.
Mr. Robson, jun.—That is not a valid excuse. The Court here know of no objection to your taking the oath faithfully to perform the duties of constable.
Mr. Brooks.—But what is the use of my undertaking the office of constable, when my evidence is inadmissible in a court of justice, according to the declaration of a learned judge ?
Mr. Robson, jun.—Then, Sir, you must be fined. The same objection was made last year by Mr. Leigh Hunt, but the Court decided that he was liable, and fined him in the usual way.
The Chairman,—Officer, call Mr. Brooks upon his fine.
The officer then called John Brooks to come into Court and save his fine of £8.
Mr. Brooks.—I am here, but I object to be sworn.
Mr. Robson, jun.—You had better take the book, Mr. Brooks.
Mr. Brooks.—No, I will not. In the performance of my duty as a constable, it is very probable that my evidence may be necessary in cases extremely important to the interests of justice. I might, for instance, be called upon to apprehend parties concerned in great offences, and be able to give testimony which would go a great way towards convicting the offenders. How foolish should I then look, and how justice would be defeated, when I appeared in the Court at the Old Bailey and was told by some such sage as Mr. Justice Arabin that my evidence could not be received.
Mr. Robson, jun.—You must either serve or be fined.
Mr. Brooks.—I object to be sworn.
Mr. Robson, jun.—You cannot serve without being sworn.
Mr. Brooks.—Then I cannot serve at all.
Mr. Robson, jun. then entered Mr. Brooks as fined in the sum of £8.
Mr. Brooks said he would not pay the fine, and would resist any attempts to enforce the payment thereof.

Source:
Carlile, R. (1829) The lion Vol. IV, July 3-Dec 25, p.451-453, Fleet Street
Original from Harvard University