Mexborough and Swinton Times May 22, 1896
Robberies at the Denaby Main Post Office
money having been made from the till at the Post Office at Denaby Main; a watch result in the apprehension of a messenger named John William Whitlam, and on Saturday, at the Doncaster West Riding Police Court, he was charged with having stolen £7, £6 in cash and a postal order of the value of £1. Two other young fellows, John and Alfred Baines, of Denaby, also stood in the dock, charged with having received money knowing it to be stolen. Superintendent Blake said he could not go on with the case that they, and a remand was granted till Wednesday, bail being allowed.
Wednesday: before Capt Dove and Mr Stockil
John William Whitlam was charged with stealing a postal order of the value of 20s, and various other sums of money, and Charles and John Baines were charged with having received money knowing it to have been stolen.
Mr Baddiley defended.
Samuel Cliff, postmaster, Denaby Main, in the township of Conisborough, stated that Whitlam had been engaged as a Telegraph messenger some five or six weeks. The person in charge was supposed to keep the drawers locked at the office. The orders were kept in a drawer under the cash drawer, and that was supposed to be locked. He (witness) had not the keys. Alan Lowcock had them. He had never seen the lad Whitlam do anything wrong. On the 15th inst Lowcock made a complaint, and in consequence of that he spoke to Whitlam. He (witness) I been to the New Conisborough a box, and Lowcock said he had missed some gold from the till. He asked Whitlam about it, and he denied any knowledge of it, saying he could be searched. He took his own boots and shoes off, and then took his coat off. Half a sovereign fell from the coat pocket, and the lad picked it up and put it on the table. He did not speak in doing so.
Witness sent for PC Evans, and the officer came.
The boy told the policeman he had taken the gold from the till. He did not see the policeman further search the boy.
By Supt Blake: Each night of the account has been shot. One poor slaughter is missing. It is of the value of £1. Yet found one sixpenny stamp shop. The two boys had not been in his employ. He paid the boy Whitlam.
By Mr Baddiley: We have an off-licence for beer, and also a stationer’s shop. There were three persons only in the Post Office Department. Lowcock looked after drawers when witness was away. There was a Telegraph Department, and one of them at to be always on the premises. He did not know how the theft was committed without been seen. He asked the lad how it was the money was short.
Did you not try to check it or stop it?
I did nothing more than check the accounts.
Did you not try to see how it was?
I told the boy he must be more careful and take the numbers.
Why did you not try to find out where the money had gone to, there being only three of you?
How long have you been there? – Seven years.
Have you missed any money before? – No.
You have known the boy’s father is a respectable man? – Yes.
And you know the boy was born a good character up to now? – Yes.
The father of one of the others is a wagonette proprietor? – Yes.
Alan Lowcock said he was employed as Telegraph ace at the Post Office, and he had been there three weeks. The boy Whitlam was there before him. He had been at the Force Office business before he went there. He had a key for the cash drawer, but not for the poor slaughter draw, and the latter at not been locked until a week ago, the key being lost during the first fortnight he was there. Postal orders were not locked up. He got a key from Mr Cliff and hand it over at night, along with the taking; both easy and it to him at night. He had breakfast before going to the office at 8 o’clock, and he said there till nine at night and did not leave the place.
Superintendent Blake: 13 hours without leaving the office?
Witness: Yes and I have dinner in the office.
Continuing, he said he was not sent out with messages. He received all monies at the counter and put them in the drawer. The keys were kept in his pocket. The stamps were in the same drawer as the money. He missed money the first night he was there.
Superintendent Blake: How Much?
Witness: 15 shillings I think.
Superintendent Blake: So much?
Witness: Yes.
Supt Blake: You were short every night? – Yes
did you speak to Whitlam about it? – Yes.
What did he say? – He said he did not understand it, or something.
What happened on the 15th? Mrs Cliff asked him to change some stamps. He took her the money 2s 6d.
Supt Blake: Where was she? – Where the beer was. Did you go to her? – Yes
Did she come and do Post Office work? No, she is a cripple.
Mr Baddiley: That matter is a separate department, and I will explain that. There is 2d commission allowed on the changing of the stamps.
Supt Blake: Oh, I see.
He got her stamps. He told Mrs Cliff and Mr Cliff was left in the office. He had left three sovereigns and two halves in the drawer, and when he returned he found half a sovereign was missing. There was a young woman who call for a stamp, but she could not reach the drawer. Whitlam was sitting near the drawer. While the young woman was in the shop he said “There’s half a sovereign gone.” Whitlam said “Blame me then,” adding to the young woman, “They always blame me.” The female made no remark, but went out when she got her stamp. He told Mrs Cliff and Mr Cliff.
Whitlam said: “You can search me if you like, for I didn’t get it.” He took his shoes and stockings off. While he was taking off his coat, half a sovereign dropped out. A £1 postal order was missed last Tuesday week. He did not tell Whitlam, but he told Mr Cliff.
By Mr Baddiley: The boy Whitlam got 5s per week wages. We did up 1d for every one shilling for changing stamps. The cooperative committee get that. They engage persons to work there.
Then why go to Mrs Cliff? – Because there was no one else to give it to.
Where did you get the money from to give change for the stamps? – Out of the drawer.
How much did you take Mrs Cliff? – 2d
Did you do that every time? – No.
How could the boy get the money without you seeing him? – There is the Telegraph and the telephone to look after.
Where is Mr Cliff then? – Yes to look after the beer, and is busy.
All the day? – Yes. – Doesn’t he help you in the office? – Only in the accounts.
William Morris, 37, Tickhill Street, New Denaby, said on Wednesday, the 13th inst., he saw the two boys Baines. They went to his shop. John purchased some chipped potatoes, and in answer to his brother said he had tuppence and a 20 shillings order. John produced the order, and the brother said “It’s only a sham order.” He did not think anything at the time, as yet seen both the Baines with more money than they had that night. John said, “You can have the order, boss, for 19s 6d,” but he said he did not want it. They went away.
Cross-examined by Mr Baddiley: They have all often been to my place. John drives a wagonette for his father.
In answer to the charge, all the defendants pleaded not guilty.
PC Evan, stationed at New Denaby, said he apprehended Whitlam on the 15th inst. He charged him with having stolen an order for 20s, a 6d stamp, also 5s on May 4, 2s 6d on the fifth, 10s on the ninth, and 6s on the 12th.
In answer to the charge he said: “I may as well tell the truth, I have taken the other, the money, and the stamps. I have given the order away to John Baines. I’ve also given John some of the other money.”
The same night he apprehended John Baines and charged with receiving a postal order of the value of 20s on May 13, 10 shillings in money on the 9th and six shillings on the 12th. He said “I haven’t had so much. I have had the 20 shilling money order and one half sovereign, which I’ve given him back. The order I destroyed.
The same night he apprehended Charles Baines and charged him with receiving 16s from Whitlam. He said he had not had so much is that; that he only had 2 shilling. He said “I saw Whitlam bring my brother an order for 20 shillings and asked him to get a pen and ink. John went and got the ink, and we wrote two names on it. The name of Arthur Rogers and Alan Lowcock.
Mr Baddiley, for the defence, said it was very unfortunate to see three respectable young men brought before the court on such a charge. There could be no doubt that if the business at the Post office at Denaby and be managed in a better manner this charge would never have arisen. It seemed to him a most peculiar thing that a boy like Whitlam should have an opportunity placed in his way to get money or a postal order. He could not conceive how it was that when Mr Cliff missed those monies, as he said, nightly, that some check was not put on to try and find out where the money went to. A very strong temptation have been put in the way of the boy. Is the office and be managed in a proper way, the present charge would probably not have occurred. Notwithstanding that these monies had been lost there did not appear to be the slightest opportunity taken of checking to find out where it went. If there are been a number of clerks he could understand there would have been a difficulty, but where there were only three persons, one would naturally think it would be an easy matter. He could not understand why was not done at the first opportunity. When the complaint was first made to the postmaster it might have been considered only reasonable that the temptation should be taken out of the youth’s way.
The boy regretted very much that he had given way to the temptation. It was the first time any of the three have been in trouble, and they were the children of most respectable parents. Whitlam’s father and held responsible position at the colliery for 20 years, and the lad had been known to have a good character. As to the other two boys the great question was whether they had received this money knowing it to have been stolen. They knew nothing about postal orders and it would be remembered that the younger one had said “It’s only a sham.” He thought the Magistrates will be justified in deal with the defendant under the First Offenders Act, or it was the first charge against any of them, and that it would never have been brought as the temptation have been kept out of the way. He hoped the Bench would take advantage of the Act of Parliament, which was framed expressly for cases of this kind. The ages of the lads were from 13 to 15.
Capt Dove (chairman) said the justices agreed to deal with the boys under the First Offenders Act. They were of opinion that an undue temptation be put in the way of the boy Whitlam to take the postal order and the money – owing to the system, or want of system, which appeared to exist in the Denaby Main Post Office. Whitlam must remember however that he had had a very narrow escape, and brought before the court again he would be severely dealt with. It was an exceedingly strong case against Whitlam, and if the order had not been destroyed, he might have been charged with forging the name that was written upon it. He could not emphasise too strongly on all the boys the serious position in which they were place, as young men just beginning life, giving way to temptation of that kind. If persisted in there was no telling how such a course of conduct would end.
They will be discharge on their own recognizances, and would have to come up for judgement if called upon. The Bench hoped the parents would look well after the lads and give them corporal punishment if necessary.