Kidnapping

REMARKABLE STORY OF CHILD STEALING.

In April last, on the day of the City and Suburban, a child named Michael Magee, aged five years, was stolen from its gipsy mother on Epsom Downs. According to ancient precedents the gipsies ought to have been the offenders in a case of child-stealing, but here they were the aggrieved party, and their complaints to the police and the race course authorities excited much sympathy at the time. The boy’s fate, however, remained undiscovered until Tuesday afternoon.   About a month ago a medical practitioner in Westminster Bridge-road gave certain information to the police, which led to a renewal of the active search for the child,  whose description bad previously been fully circulated. The child was found on Tuesday ‘afternoon by Detective-serjeants Gray and Brogden, of the L division, in a house in Stamford-street, suffering from a terrible disease. The officers arrested a woman named Mary Carr on a charge of having the child in her possession.

At Southwark police-court on Wednesday the woman Mary Carr was charged having in her possession the child Michael Magee. Detectave-serjeant Grey disposed that when he went to 118, Stamford-street he told the prisoner he would take her into custody for stealing the boy, and she said, “I did not steal him; Phil Ochre brought him here, and I took a liking to the child and told the people he was mine, because they were dirty, I don’t know where Phil Ochre lives, but I can find him for you in an hour or two.” Upon this evidence Detective-serjeant Grey asked for a remand to enable him to prove his identity.  Mr. Sydney, solicitor for the defence, objected, on the ground that no offence bad been disclosed. There, was no evidence that the child was in the unlawful custody of the accused, who had a satisfactory answer to the charge. Mr. Slade remanded the prisoner on her own recognisances for a week.

OUR SPECIAL INQUIRIES.

The full story of the little boy now in Lambeth infirmary is in many respects. touching and romantic. His gipsy mother sold race cards and left the little fellow to play about among the carriages. He had long flaxen hair and wore petticoats, and might  easily have passed for a girl, his healthy-looking, handsome face, rosy cheeks, and sunburnt skin making him a very attractive child. Now the boy has been recovered the mother cannot be found, but he racing season being about to begin, the police are hopeful to be able to trace her.

Our picture of Michael Magee was taken on Friday in the workhouse. The steward and the medical officer, Dr, Marcus H. Quarry, kindly afforded every facility, and the child was seen in the ward. Though sitting up in bed, he seemed quite happy under the care of kindly and cheerful nurses. He was amusing himself with the perusal of a coloured scrap picture album, and he was greatly pleased when the artist lent him his watch to play with and to listen to the ticking while the sketch was made. Dr, Quarry stated that having won the child’s confidence he found him exceedingly intelligent and communicative, and had even succeeded in getting from him his account of his capture, and some part of the story of his recent history. This was chiefly done through the medium of pictures in his book. When shown a picture and asked what it was he replied that it was a bird’s nest. “Did you ever see a real bird’s nest?” he was asked, “Yes” was the reply; “when I used to be under the hedges on the racecourse.” He was shown a horse’s head, and asked what it was. His reply was that it was the head of a racehorse, Then he pointed to some other pictures himself, and said ” That one is the picture of donkey; that is a cart horse; the other is a big cart horse.” In reply to whether he bad had many rides in carts when he was at the races, he said, “No; only one, when they brought me away.” He then pointed voluntarily to a picture and said; That is just like the cart I was put into when I was brought from the racecourse.” He was asked who were sitting in front of the cart, to which he replied, “Two men.”  “Did you ride in the body of the cart?” was the next question. “No,” he said; “they made me lie down here on the footboard underneath their legs,” pointing to the picture; “and I didn’t see my new mother till I got to her house,” “Where did: your mother live ?” he was asked. “Oh, she had no home at all; when I was with her we used to sleep anywhere where we could.”  “Do you know what your real name is?” he was next asked; to which he replied, “No; but they called me Billy Hurley,” “Where is your father, little boy?” was the next question ; to which he replied, “In prison,”

He made other statements, which are purposely withheld, so as not to interfere in any way with the police inquiry, but sufficient was elicited to show that he well remembers his “first” mother, and he could give a capital account of his capture and past history.

If is stated that Mary Carr; the ‘woman with whom he was found, is exceedingly fond of children, having had none of her own. She is a fine handsome woman, supposed to be about 36 or 38, and has received large sums of money for sitting as an artists’ model.

Lloyds Weekly Newspaper 1 March 1896

THE ALLEGED CHILD STEALING ON EPSOM DOWNS

At Southwark Police Court on Wednesday Mary Carr, alias Crane, from Stamford Street, surrendered to her recognisance as, before Mr Slade, charged with unlawfully detaining a child named Michael Magee, aged five years, who was stolen from his mother, a gipsy woman, at Epsom Downs, on the day of the City and Suburban, April 24, 1895. The accused, a well-dressed, good-looking woman, gave her age as twenty-five years, but is known to be several years older. After the prisoner had surrendered, in consequence of further information, she was formally charged by Inspector Martin, L Division, with stealing the child. The poor infant, who is suffering from a shameful disease, looked much better for his week’s sojourn in the workhouse infirmary.      The prosecution was conducted on behalf of the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children by Mr Arthur Hutton, barrister, and the prisoner was defended by Mr H. I. Sydney, solicitor.      Witnesses having been ordered out of court, Mr Hutton stated that the prisoner, with another woman and two men, was in a booth on the Downs on April 24 last, when Mrs Magee came into the booth to sell race cards. She had the child with her, and prisoner noticed it, and said, “What a pretty child.” Later in the day the mother missed the child, and gave information to the police, who did their best to discover the infant without success, until Tuesday week, when Detective-sergeants Gray and Brogden, of L division, found the boy at 118, Stamford Street, in possession of the prisoner. The child was suffering from a certain disease.      Mr Sydney objected to that statement.      Mr Hutton said the doctor was present in court to prove the fact. The prisoner was charged with stealing and receiving this child, and the prosecution were entitled to show the condition in which it was since she became possessed of it. He did not propose to give on this occasion all the evidence which had been collected against the prisoner, but only sufficient to justify another remand.      Bridget Magee, the mother of the child, said she was the wife of a painter, but had lived apart from him for five years, and gained her livelihood by selling race cards. She had three children, of whom Michael was the youngest. She remembered seeing the prisoner and a man, called Phil Ochre, with another woman and man, whose names she did not know, in a booth on City and Suburban day. The prisoner admired the child Michael, and said she should like to adopt him if the witness would allow her. The witness replied, “I would not let my child go for the Queen’s crown.” She had a drink with the prisoner and her party, and after a while the second man walked out of the booth with the child on his shoulder. The witness said, “Where is he going with my child?” and the prisoner replied, “Oh, he’s all right; he has children of his own, and will be sure to bring your child back.” Phil Ochre also said it would be all right it the witness would wait and have another drink. She consented to do so, but the man did not return with the child, and she gave information to the police. She had not seen the child since that day until the present proceedings. When the child was with her he was clean and free from disease; he was an exceedingly healthy and handsome child, and she was very proud of him. He had long golden curls, but they were now cut off.      Cross-examined: She was very excited at the loss of her child, but she could positively swear to the prisoner. She recognised the prisoner outside the court before the case was called on. She was not told by the detectives, nor by the society’s inspector, Mr Lodge, that that was the woman whom she was to identify. She had previously stated that she could identify a fair woman and a man called “Phil.”      In further cross-examination, Mrs Magee, who is a weather-beaten, honest-looking little woman, declared that she had never relaxed her efforts to discover her child, but she had almost lost hope, until last week, on her way from Warwick Races, she met a man at Birmingham who told her about the report of this case in the papers.      Philip Jacobs, Alias Phil Ochre, general dealer, of 40 Commercial Road, E., said he was in the prisoner’s company at Epsom on the afternoon of April 24, and she asked him to take the little boy home to her place in Stamford Street, and he did so. He was given to understand that the child belonged to a friend of hers. Since then he had often seen the child with the prisoner in Stamford Street.      Cross-examined: He had not discussed with a Mr and Mrs Hart gave him certain advice, and went with him to the police station, where he made a statement. That was in consequence of seeing his name in the papers.      Dr Rowe, assistant-surgeon of the L division, spoke to the disease with which the child had been infected.      Cross-examined: Bicycle riding would not produce the same results.      Mr Hutton asked for another remand.      Detective-sergeant Grey, L division, said the police would require substantial bail. The prisoner had been convicted of felony and kept a disorderly house. There was reason to believe she would abscond, and that she had plenty of money at her command.      Mr Slade granted a remand, and said he should require two sureties in £100 each.

Illustrated Police News, 14 March 1896

THE GIPSY KIDNAPPER

THE QUEEN OF THE FORTY THIEVES SENT TO PENAL SERVITUDE

At the Central Criminal Court, before the Recorder, Mary Carr, twenty-five, of no occupation, was indicted for unlawfully taking away Michael Magee, a child under the age of fourteen years, with intent to deprive Bridget Magee of the possession of such child. She was indicted further for unlawfully receiving the child. The child who was six years of age, was stolen from its mother at Epsom during the rubbing of the City and Suburban in April last. Information of the loss of the boy was communicated to the police, together with a description, and the matter was placed in the hands of Detective-sergeants Brogden and Gray, of L division of police. The prisoner, who lived in Stamford Street, Blackfriars, came under the observation of these officers, they having seen her taking the child about from place to place, and eventually they visited her premises. Prisoner said that she received the boy from a person called Phil Ochre on the night of the City and Suburban. She was conveyed to the Kennington Road Police Station. In reply to the charge of stealing the child, she said that she merely agreed to keep him and did not steal him. The evidence showed that the mother was a race card seller, and on the day in question she had been drinking with two men and the prisoner in a public house. Some conversation ensued about the adoption of the child, but the mother said she would not part with the child “for the Crown of England.” One of the men picked the child up and walked off with it, and it was not seen again by its mother until February last.      Prisoner strenuously denied having been at Epsom on the day in question.      The jury found her guilty of harbouring the child, knowing that it had been stolen.      Sergeants Gray and Brogden informed the Court that prisoner was know as “The Queen of the Forty Thieves,” a gang of young females who infested the Strand. She lived with notorious characters.      Wardress Staite proved a previous conviction against her.      The Recorder said that the offence was regarded by the Legislature as a very serious one.      Prisoner, who persisted in saying that she was innocent, was sentenced to three years’ penal servitude.

Illustrated Police News, 04 April 1896

You can read the Old Bailey Court proceedings at Old Bailey Online

If you are worried about child abduction Reunite International publish a number of Child Abduction Prevention Guides.