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