On Christmas Eve, 1923, Kate Wiseman was stabbed, so she alleged, by her Fitzroy housemate -Theresa Lacey.
They’d got into an argument as to when the Christmas goose should be killed, and Wiseman, taking the initiative, had begun chasing the reticent bird around the yard with a knife. As she flashed past the side door in pursuit of her quarry, she was felled by Lacey with a blow to the head. They’d then engaged in a fierce struggle for possession of the knife, the victory going to Lacey.
Wiseman was discovered in the early hours of the morning by Senior Constable Hehir. She was lying on the footpath outside her house and bleeding profusely from wounds to the head, face and hands. Lacey was found by police in the kitchen. She was covered in blood, surrounded by broken glass, and blamed it all on “the curse of drink”. The goose made no comment.
If you’re looking for a Christmas present which doesn’t bite, honk or run away, then have a gander at a Gift Card from Melbourne Historical Crime Tours. https://www.melbournehistoricalcrimetours.com/book-now.html They are delivered instantly via email and the recipient can use them on any of our tours throughout the year.
Merry Christmas from Melbourne Historical Crime Tours.
(story by Michael Shelford © 2018)
Photo courtesy of Public Record Office of Victoria: VPRS 516, P0002, Unit 13, Item 7078, Theresa Lacey, Government Agency - Chief Secretary's Department

By Michael Shelford © 2019
​
On the 15th May 1933, Patricia O’Brien and George Harper entered Our Lady Help of Christians’ Catholic Church, in East Brunswick, and got themselves hitched.
By this point, Patricia had a list of convictions in the double digits. They were fairly minor offences, which included: resisting arrest, insulting words, indecent language, and loitering for prostitution. To the legal institutions, Patricia represented herself as being born in 1912, whereas her birth record confirms she was actually born in 1915, meaning that her first convictions were not as an adult, but as a child of 15, and that she was convicted 3 times under the charge of loitering for prostitution when only 17 years of age. When she married George she was only 17, but she must have lied to the priest as her marriage record states that she was 19.
At the time of their wedding, George’s criminal record was more extensive than Patricia’s. He’d just been released from Pentridge Prison after serving 2 years for larceny. In 1930 he’d done 6 months in Geelong for receiving stolen goods, and before that he’d accumulated a string of minor convictions including: drunkenness, insulting words, unlawful possession, offensive behaviour, and loitering with intent to commit a felony.
What could possibly go wrong?
They'd been wed less than a week, when their marital home was raided by police, and they both found themselves under arrest. It turns out that George had taken possession of 22 silk shirts without making payment for them. He was charged with larceny, and Patricia was charged with having insufficient lawful means of support.
The charge of having insufficient lawful means of support meant that it was the opinion of the police that you were living of the proceeds of crime. The onus was then on you to prove in court that you were making an honest living.
Patricia was the first to be tried, and she called her mother as a witness. Her mother testified that there was always a place at home for her daughter. Patricia then called her husband George to the witness box. He didn’t have to travel far, he was being held in the court cells awaiting his own trial. George’s testimony was make or break for Patricia, because, in that era, the husband was expected to be the ‘bread winner’. If he could demonstrate that he was supporting her financially, then she could not be found guilty of having insufficient lawful means of support.
George didn’t do a very good job though. Under questioning he denied that he’d been living off Patricia’s earnings as a prostitute. He stated that instead, he had been supporting her. When the Magistrate asked George what he’d been doing since he got married, George replied “Oh, just running about town”.  “What means have you of supporting her?” the Magistrate then asked, “You can see what I have been charged with”, was George’s reply.
Patricia was then sentenced to a year in prison.
When George’s turn came to be tried, it was proven that he had stolen the silk shirts. He pled for leniency, explaining that he’d just gotten out of prison after doing a sentence of 2 years for receiving stolen goods. The Judge sentenced him to the maximum he could give: 12 months prison. After delivering the sentence, the Judge said to George, “I will probably be seeing you again”. To this George replied, “I hope you will not be so severe next time.”

Keep an eye on this page for Part 4 which will be coming soon.

If you’re looking for a fun and practical gift for Christmas, Birthdays, or for any reason, they are available by clicking on the 'Book Now' tab on this website. Gift Cards are emailed immediately.
​
To learn more about the interesting characters from Melbourne’s past, come along on the Fitzroy True Crime walking tour, Fridays 2pm and Sundays 1pm, or the Gangsters, Brothels and Lolly Shops tour (Melb CBD), Thursdays 8pm and Saturdays 4.30pm. Bookings can be made by clicking on the 'Book Now' tab on this website.

By Michael Shelford © 2019
​
In May 1930, a young man by the name of George Harper entered a lane near the corner of Bourke and Swanston St. George Harper wasn’t his only name, he was also known as George Ferguson, George Fraser, George Lewis, John Kite, Degen etc. He was a drinker, a brawler, and made his living as a thief, burglar, and pimp.
As he entered the lane he met with an acquaintance called Thomas Brown. Brown suggested that he go and buy them both a bottle of beer, but George declined, explaining that he didn’t have enough money. It was then that there was a sudden movement from Brown’s arm as he pulled a cut throat razor from his pocket and slashed George across the face.
George managed somehow to walk to Melbourne Hospital. By the time he got there he was weak, his clothes saturated in blood. The injury to George’s face was horrendous. The wound was 6 inches long, stretching from ear to mouth. It was an inch deep, had gone through nerves, muscles and a gland, and had caused partial paralysis to some of his facial muscles. Over 40 stitches were installed and for some time his life was considered to be in peril.
Thomas Brown was arrested later that evening in a billiard saloon on Flinders St and charged with occasioning grievous bodily harm.
The story above was how George originally explained the circumstances to police, but by the time of the trial, the narrative had changed slightly. George testified that he’d met Brown in Bourke St, and that Brown had been accompanied by a man called ‘Snowy’. He, (George), had argued with Brown, and Brown had then slashed him with a razor.
Not surprisingly, Brown gave a different explanation in his own defence. He said that the man ‘Snowy’ was not his friend but his enemy. That Snowy was the one in possession of the razor, not he. “Snowy tried to slash me with a razor”, he explained, "I ducked and it caught Harper in the face.”
A friend of Brown’s gave testimony which supported this version of events. None of them knew the true identity of this ‘Snowy’ character so he couldn’t be called to testify.
At this point the Judge had had enough. He directed that the jury find Brown not guilty because obviously everybody was too drunk on the evening in question to be able to give reliable testimony.
Note: By the early 1930’s the use of the cut throat razor as a weapon was becoming more common in the Melbourne underworld. There was belief at the time that this was a result of amendments in the Vagrancy Act in NSW. The amendments meant that people could be sentenced just for ‘consorting’ with known criminals. Many of Sydney’s gangsters relocated to Melbourne at this time. Quite a few of those who relocated had been active in Sydney’s razor gang era (roughly 1927-1931).
Keep an eye on this page for Part 3 which will be coming soon.
If you’re looking for a fun and practical gift for Christmas, Birthdays, or for any reason, they are available by clicking on the 'Book Now' tab on this website. Gift Cards are emailed immediately.
To learn more about the interesting characters from Melbourne’s past, come along on the Fitzroy True Crime walking tour, Fridays 2pm and Sundays 1pm, or the Gangsters, Brothels and Lolly Shops tour (Melb CBD), Thursdays 8pm and Saturdays 4.30pm. Bookings can be made by clicking on the 'Book Now' tab on this website.

by Michael Shelford © 2019
In April 1932, Constables Brown and North were patrolling St Kilda Rd, near the Victoria Barracks, when they came across Patricia O’Brien and Constance McNamara,
On seeing the police officers, the two young women immediately began to run. They were captured, arrested, and later charged with having used insulting words.
Patricia, when questioned in court, explained that she’d told Constable North that he belonged in a lunatic asylum.
​Constance McNamara then said under oath, “I only told one of the constables that he did not have the brains of a rabbit. I did not think it was insulting, because it was positively true.”
Keep an eye on this page for Part 2 which will be coming soon.
If you’re looking for a fun and practical gift for Christmas, Birthdays, or for any reason, they are available by clicking on the 'Book Now' tab on this website.
Gift Cards are emailed immediately.

To learn more about the interesting characters from Melbourne’s past, come along on the Fitzroy True Crime walking tour, Fridays 2pm and Sundays 1pm, or the Gangsters, Brothels and Lolly Shops tour (Melb CBD), Thursdays 8pm and Saturdays 4.30pm. Bookings via this website by clicking on the 'Book Now' tab

© Michael Shelford 2019

The French sailor, Pierre Desire, didn’t have a very good time of it in Melbourne. In 1902 he was released from Pentridge Prison, after serving a 12 month sentence for burglary, and decided that he’d best get his finances sorted by breaking into another place. In fact, he thought he may as well start in the suburb in which he’d just been released: Coburg.
He was rummaging through some drawers in the front bedroom of a house, when he was surprised by the occupant, who promptly smacked him over the head with a baton. The occupant was Desire’s former warder from Pentridge Prison. Of all the rotten luck. The judge must have thought that Desire missed his former overseer and sent him back to Pentridge for another 3 years.

© Michael Shelford 2019

Mary Ann Smith, alias ‘The Woman In Black’, was born at sea in 1826. NSW prison authorities were not sure which year she arrived in their colony, nor which ship brought her to them.
She was, for long periods, a lone wolf pickpocket - but she also ran an all-female assault and robbery gang in Sydney in the early 1870’s.
Her prison record is the only one that I’ve noticed, where ‘Thief’ is listed as the prisoner’s trade or occupation.  
In October 1870, Mary Ann Smith,  along with accomplices - Mary Smith, (yes another one), and Wentworth Dixon, found herself undergoing trial for assault and robbery.  A man named Thomas Beard testified that, on the previous Saturday night, he had met a woman on the street in downtown Sydney, and accompanied her to a house in nearby Cohen’s Court. His new friend had quickly absented herself, leaving him in the company of the aforementioned women: Mary Ann Smith, Mary Smith and Wentworth Dixon. Shortly afterwards, Mary Smith decided to break the uncomfortable silence by snatching Beard's hat and running upstairs with it. When Beard went upstairs, in pursuit of said hat, Mary attempted to steal some money from his side-pouch - but the money fell to the floor and he was able to secure it. It was then explained that if he wished to be reacquainted with his hat, he must shout them all drinks at the pub.
He went with Mary Ann Smith, Mary Smith and Wentworth Dixon to the Ship Inn, on Clarence St, where he shouted two rounds. He was rewarded, as promised, with the return of his hat – but then Mary snatched it again and ran off. He chased her all the way back to the house where they were soon joined by the others. The four of them were sitting together on the couch, engaged in amiable conversation, when suddenly one of them grabbed hold of his beard. The two others secured his arms and he was forced to the floor. After a violent struggle, he managed to free himself from their grasp. He raced to the front door but found it to be securely locked. He looked around in a panic for other avenues of escape and saw a closed window. Without hesitation he ran and dived through it, shattering the glass and cutting his arm. 
He was in possession of his freedom, he still had his money - but I’m not sure what became of his hat.
After a lengthy court process, Mary Ann Smith, Mary Smith and Wentworth Dixon were found not guilty.
In the early 1870's, Mary Ann Smith's gang were also known to rob people on the street: often attacking them physically, before dragging them into a side alley and going through their clothing for valuables. This occurred mainly around the Clarence Street area of the Sydney CBD. They also went through the pockets of drunken men who were unwise enough to fall asleep in public places. The Ship Inn, on Clarence St in downtown Sydney, was Mary Anne’s local boozer, and she was known to ‘knuckle on’ at this establishment on a regular basis. In 1872, Police Inspector Rawlinson described her as “one of the cleverest thieves in the colony”.
​
Mary Ann Smith was referred to as “The Woman In Black” in newspaper articles, police records, and on her prison entries.

 Photo courtesy of NSW State Archives

by Michael Shelford © 2018
​
About 2.30am on the morning of the 28th September 1915, Constable Preece was working his beat in the back streets of Fitzroy when he saw a lone man carrying a galah in a cage. Being an unusual hour of the morning for someone to be out walking their pet, he decided to stop the man and ask him his business.
The man, it turns out, was a career criminal by the name of John ‘Scotty’ King. Scotty’s explanation, that he’d won the galah in a hotel raffle, was viewed as unlikely by Constable Preece, so he decided to arrest the wayward bird fancier. Scotty, who was obviously not partial to the handcuffs produced, threw a punch which broke Constable Preece’s jaw and dislodged 3 of his teeth. During the ensuing struggle a 2nd bird escaped Scotty’s pocket and flew to freedom. Constable Preece, dazed and vulnerable, pulled his police revolver and commenced firing shots in the air to attract attention. He then tempered Scotty’s recalcitrance by bringing down the aforementioned handcuffs on his head. A weakened Scotty and the squawking bird were subsequently escorted to the Fitzroy lockup and detained. Both Scotty and Constable Preece required medical attention, and on the way from the lockup to hospital, Scotty said to Preece “I hope you are not cross with me for hitting you. It is all in the game – mine to get away if I can, and yours to get me if you can.”

The galah was released from custody the following day when collected by its rightful owner.

John ‘Scotty’ King was found guilty of stealing in a dwelling and assaulting a police officer and sentenced to 2 years in Pentridge Prison.

To learn more about the era when Fitzroy was considered by Police to be “the home of Melbourne’s criminals”, come along on the Fitzroy True Crime walking tour. Sundays at 1pm and Fridays 2pm. Gift Vouchers are also available and are the perfect present for Birthdays, Christmas or any excuse really. Gift Vouchers can be purchased and tour bookings made by clicking on the 'Book Now' button or tab.

In 1918, several Melbourne Police Officers found themselves under investigation after they were discovered in a brothel by their supervisor during an internal investigation.


By Michael Shelford © 2018
​
In the years spent trawling through the historic police files at Public Record Office of Victoria, I’ve come across a lot of cases of alleged impropriety by police officers. Such occurrences are to be expected within any large organisation, but within an organisation such as the Police, where the accused are the enforcers of law, it should be of no surprise that matters were generally investigated internally - and the outcomes, guilty or otherwise, kept away from the newspapers where possible.
One of the more interesting files of this nature was an investigation into anonymous letters, received by the Chief Commissioner of Police in 1918. The letters alleged that two plain clothes police officers were in the habit of spending part of their shift each night, in the brothel-beds of ‘Fat Mona’ and ‘Barber Lil’.
In November 1918, when Melbourne’s old inner-city brothel district, ‘Little Lon’, was still in full swing, number 56 Lonsdale St, a building long since demolished, was a brothel disguised as a lolly shop. It was Mona's place of business at the time, and the focus of the subsequent investigation. The first of the aforementioned letters received by Chief Commissioner Sainsbury outlined the allegations as follows:

“Mr Sainsbury,
Sir I must bring under your notice the way Constables Skipper & Randle are carrying on when they are on night patrol. They meet the Officer at midnight and then they go to bed with 2 prostitutes until early morning. Randle sleeps with a woman known as ‘Fat Mona’, 56 Lonsdale St. And Skipper with ‘Barber Lils’, 22 Lonsdale St. This is only when they are on night patrol, midnight until morning. Hoping you will have them watched,
I remain yours,
One who has seen them.”
 
A second letter arrived, also in November 1918, and read:

“Mr Sainsbury,
Sir I must inform you of the conduct of your night patrol, Skipper and Randle. They meet their Officer at midnight and then they go to 56 Lonsdale St and sleep with 2 well known harlots till early morning and come out in time to go off duty … Are we paying them to sleep with women of the town? Hoping you have them watched and dealt with before we take it to the Truth (newspaper).
I am yours,
Ratepayer”
 
As a result of the correspondence, Senior Constable Campbell decided to keep Mona's place under surveillance. His subsequent report stated:

“I have to report that no. 56 Lonsdale St is a brothel kept by a woman known as ‘Mona’, although outward appearances indicate the house to be a confectionery shop. I received attached anonymous letters for attention on Friday evening last and on that same night I, at intervals, kept the house under surveillance but saw nothing unusual … On this morning (Sunday) at about 2 a.m. I took up a position in Leichardt St where I had a full view of the back entrance to 56 Lonsdale St … I could hear men and women conversing in the back room of the house which was close to where I was standing. After a little while I could easily distinguish the voices of Constables Skipper & Randle, although I could not phrase any of the conversation. At 3.30 a.m. the back door was opened and I heard Constable Randle say “We must be going.” Constables Randle and Skipper then opened the back gate and, as they did so, I entered. I walked into the back room and said to the woman ‘Mona’ “Are you the occupier of this house?” She replied “Yes”. I said “What are these men (meaning the Constables) doing here?” She said “We were having a Birthday and they came in to growl at us.” I saw no signs of liquor about but there were 3 women there besides ‘Mona’, 2 of whom I know as prostitutes. I came out and said to the Constables “This is nice conduct being in a house of that class and neglecting your work.” Constable Skipper said “I’m sure we work hard enough and if you do not go into these places you can get no information - and you are looked on as a bit of a ‘Nark’ if you don’t speak to them.” Constable Randle said “We were not there long and I am sure you don’t think we were there for any bad purpose.” I said “The Chief Commissioner has received anonymous complaints about you frequenting this house and sleeping with 2 women there.” The Constables strictly denied this assertion … I do not believe that there was any sexual impropriety in the Constables’ visits to this house but I do believe that they were foolish and indiscreet enough to visit this brothel unnecessarily and gossip with the inmates for periods of perhaps, at the outside, an hour during the night and some person in the neighbourhood, hostile to them, has greatly magnified matters with a view to having them found in the brothel.”  
​
Though the internal investigation deemed that the constables' behaviour was suspicious, Mona, when further questioned, backed up their story by saying that they’d entered her place on the night in question to tell her to turn down her gramophone. Her gramophone was a very loud one, she’d said, and they’d knocked on the door to rebuke her for making too much noise. They’d then remained chatting for 20 minutes before leaving via the back, just as Senior Constable Campbell entered. She also said that police regularly entered and left her premises in the same manner as Constables Skipper and Randle had done and that no impropriety occurred.
Investigators were unable to trace the authors of the anonymous letters, so the claims in relation to the regularity of their visits were seen as unsubstantiated. Senior Constable Campbell also said in his report that it was impossible for the constables to spend from midnight until the end of their shift in bed with prostitutes. He pointed out that he visited the slum portion of the city at least 3 times per night and that it was rare that he was unable to find them. “I do not for a moment believe that there was any sexual impropriety in the constables’ visits to this house but I do believe they were foolish and indiscreet enough to visit this brothel unnecessarily and gossip with the inmates for periods of perhaps, at the outside, an hour during the night and some person in the neighbourhood, hostile to them, has greatly magnified matters with a view to having them found in the brothel, M Campbell, Senior Constable 4400, 24th November 1918.”

The end result of the investigation is best explained in the words of the persons in charge of making the final decision and enforcing it:

“Inspector Superintendent Davidson
10/12/1918
Forwarded to the Chief Commissioner.
Whilst giving these constables credit for not being guilty of immoral conduct, I think it is clearly shown they spent too much time in this brothel. There can be no doubt, I think, but they were there for at least an hour on the morning Senior Constable Campbell found them there. On account of their previous good record, I am of the opinion the case can be met with a transfer to another block in the City, and not contiguous to the one now under notice. I recommend accordingly.”

“Russell Street Headquarters 13/12/1918
Noted and returned
Const Randle and Skipper were taken off the Plain Clothes patrol and placed on No. 1 Section, which is not in the locality of the premises subject to this complaint.
​Sergeant N K Grange.”

In July 1917, a girl was featured in a Melbourne newspaper as the lucky winner of a cash prize. The only problem was that she was next to her mother in the photo, and her mother was wanted by the law.

by Michael Shelford © 2018
​
In July 1917, the daughter of Gertrude Burns won a competition. She had been snapped in a crowd photo at the Moonee Valley Races by ‘The Winner’, sports newspaper, and the photo published with a circle around it. Beneath the photo were what would normally have been the welcome words: “Any person whose face is ringed in the picture is entitled to a reward of 5/.”

It just so happened that next to her in the same photo was her mother - and her mother had a warrant out for her arrest. This did not go unnoticed by the police, who recognised her as the person wanted for twice robbing the licensee of the Bridge Hotel, in Richmond, by use of fraudulent cheques. They cut out the clipping, placed a cross on Gertrude’s face and included it in the case file as a clue.

It’s not known whether Gertrude’s daughter ever collected her prize but the police finally collected theirs 9 months later when Gertrude was arrested in Melbourne.

Melbourne’s Theatre Royal was a place of prestige for theatre goers - and a reliable source of income for the notorious ‘Bourke Street Rats' gang.

​By Michael Shelford © 2018

The new Theatre Royal, 234 Bourke St, was built by actor, entrepreneur and politician George Coppin, after the last one had burnt down in 1872. It was a place of prestige, the venue for many of Melbourne’s most popular theatre productions - and also contained a number of ornately furnished and ‘well attended’ drinking bars.
These bars were frequented by wealthy visitors to Melbourne, persons with money to splurge and plenty of spare time to do so. The toilet closets were out on the eastern side, in an area which was open to Latrobe Place, a right of way which still connects Bourke and Little Bourke Streets today. Latrobe Place was not a place you wanted to be 120 years ago. It was the favourite haunt of a gang of pickpockets and garrotters known as the 'Bourke Street Rats' or ‘Rats Push’.  Their sobriquet included the words ‘Bourke Street’ because of their predilection for robbing people around the theatre district of Bourke Street and ‘Rats’ because they disappeared like rats into the nearby alleys and laneways after the deed was done. The toilets of the Theatre Royal were, to the Bourke Street Rats, a gift that kept on giving.
In 1899, a man by the name of Ullett, who had taken on the task of a lengthy bender with great application and resolve, got arrested for drunkenness, and then complained that the police must have robbed him of his wallet containing £30 at the lockup. The police retraced his booze-affected steps with the assistance of bar tenders, drinking companions and other witnesses - and then reported that there was no doubt his wallet had gone missing "due to the fact of his leaving the Bar so frequently to go to the back premises where it is well known to us that several of the Rats Push are in the habit of frequenting, also spielers and doubtful characters who are always on the watch for drunken persons and no doubt he must have fallen into the hands of this trap."
The famous criminal, Leslie ‘Squizzy’ Taylor, would later join the same ‘Rats Push’ gang of thieves. Squizzy was charged with robbing a man in the back toilets of the Oxford Hotel on Lonsdale Street in 1907. He had been seen by the hotel publican in the toilets at the time that a drunken man was garrotted and robbed. Squizzy was found not guilty but police were of no doubt that he’d been one of those who had choked the victim into a state of insensibility before relieving him of his funds.
The Theatre Royal was demolished in 1933 and replaced by Manton’s Department Store, then Coles and then Target. The Target Centre still occupies the same space.
Latrobe Place will be a feature on the upcoming Chinatown night tours. Dates to be announced shortly.