Crowded places attract thieves. This has always been true and the coming of
the railways created a particularly attractive target for those who have chosen
to disregard the 7th Commandment.
From the mid 19th century the railway companies started to
tackle the problem of theft from passengers, including pickpocketing. Several
companies employed officers specifically to target this problem and virtually all
of these officers executed their duties with zeal and fidelity. More recently
and since the war the ‘Dip’ Squad of the
London Transport and then British Transport Police have acquired a reputation
for successful detection of offenders that placed it in the first division of
detective activity in the UK.
Highly specialised policing brings officers into close
contact with a relatively small number of offenders. The financial stakes are often high and out
of these circumstances comes temptation.
It is to the credit of police officers of all forces that this
temptation rarely leads to corruption.
When it does it the reputation of the police service suffers and the
work of the great majority becomes more difficult.
The London Underground has suffered from pickpockets since it first
opened in 1863. By the 1890s the
District Railway Company employed a handful of inspectors and sub-inspectors
who worked in uniform and plain clothes.
They investigated the more serious cases of travel fraud and thefts from
passengers. They were part of the company’s police
contingent. They would detain offenders and provide evidence to the
Metropolitan Police to support charges being laid, and subsequently appeared as
witnesses at court. On especially busy
days the underground railway companies would also pay for the deployment of Met
officers on the Underground. This did
not always work well but had the advantage of increasing resources when they were
required.
In the 1890s one of the specialists dealing with pickpockets
was Francis Edward OSTIME, known generally as Frank. He was 16 when had joined the company as a
junior clerk in 1886. Later in the same
year he transferred to the Enquiry Inspector’s Office and became involved in detecting
travel fraud. He was clearly good at his
work as he received several bonus payments and commendations. By the 1890s he was a police sub inspector
arresting pickpockets on a regular basis.
He received much praise for this work including the thanks of the Met
Commissioner and a commendation from a
Grand Jury. His pay, supplemented by bonus
payments, was not bad and was roughly equivalent to the pay of Police Inspectors
in other forces. However temptation was too much for Frank OSTIME.
He became involved in the practice of allowing certain
pickpockets to ply their trade uninterrupted on receipt of a cut of the profits
from their crimes. He advised offenders
which stations were the best places to target victims, often lone women. His descent into corruption followed the same
pattern as many before him and since. He
probably saw it as getting a little extra cash on the side with ‘no great harm
done’. The Dips he was working with
would have committed their crimes anyway so why not supplement his income? Everyone was at it, it was a perk of the job
surely? Such thought processes, if they are an accurate guess of his approach,
converted him into a criminal.
On 10th December 1897 a passenger had her purse
stolen on a train between South Kensington and Sloane Square. The Victim, Mrs BOLTON, pointed out two
suspects to the guard of the train at Victoria. He arranged for them to be
detained. With the suspects was Frank
OSTIME who stated that he was about to arrest them for the theft. The suspects were taken to the station office
at Victoria. OSTIME asked the station
inspector, Mr SHELTON, to send for a uniformed officer. At this point the two suspects allegedly assaulted
OSTIME and escaped. The assault was not
serious and it was later said that OSTIME allowed them to get away just in time
to jump on a departing train. OSTIME circulated a description of the suspects
that did not match their actual appearance. On 14th January one of the suspects,
John PERRY, was arrested by Detective
Sergeant HUGHES of the Met. PERRY (known as ‘Waxy)’ was a major criminal with a long history of convictions
and a large network and family of criminal associates. At the police station OSTIME identified the
suspect as being involved in the theft from Mrs BOLTON. OSTIME knew PERRY well having arrested him in
the past .
Clearly angered at the identification PERRY told the Met
that he had an ‘arrangement’ with OSTIME and that 50% of the proceeds of his
thefts were paid as a form of ‘rent’ to OSTIME. He regarded the fact that he was to face a
charge as a betrayal by OSTIME. Such
allegations are not that unusual when dealing with professional criminals and
by itself it would have been unlikely to secure the conviction of OSTIME. However, correspondence between the two was
produced which suggested that OSTIME was trying to prepare PERRY for his inevitable
arrest. OSTIME claimed that the letters
were forgeries and evidence was produced that PERRY had previously threatened
OSTIME during another case. A small
amount of stolen property from other thefts was found at OSTIME’s flat. PERRY
(who was serving a 20 month sentence for the theft from Mrs BOLTON) gave
evidence that he had been approached by OSTIME to enter into a corrupt
relationship and that he had offered to pay OSTIME £4-5 a week but they settled
on the percentage deal. The amount PERRY
first offered was about three times OSTIME’s weekly pay. Interestingly PERRY alleged that OSTIME had alluded
to an arrangements with police officers of the Great Eastern Railway but PERRY
denied any such association. PERRY
reported that the arrangement worked well and that OSTIME would sometimes
shadow him when he was stealing to make sure that things went to plan. There was considerable weight of evidence as
to OSTIME’s good character but the evidence of the letters was considered
conclusive.
The prosecution suggested that additional evidence of
similar corrupt practices was available.
A jury at the Old Bailey convicted Frank OSTIME of
conspiracy to steal. The Common Serjeant
of London (the second most senior judge at the Old Bailey) sentenced him to 22
months imprisonment without hard labour and expressed his regret that the
sentence could not be longer.
As an aside, the Junior prosecuting barrister, Archibald
BODKIN, went on to enjoy an illustrious career, serving as Director of Public
Prosecutions and as a Judge. He took a
particular interest in the campaigns against what he regarded as obscene
publications, leading efforts to ban books such as the Well of Loneliness by
Radclyffe Hall.
Frank OSTIME disappears from the public record. It would appear that he went on to live a
quiet, law abiding life, dying at the age of 70 in 1940.
OSTIME was not the last RDC officer to fall into criminal
practices. But the total number is small,
even allowing for the fact that most corruption goes undetected.
01 Feb 2022
References
District Railway Staff Register www.ancestry.co.uk (accessed 01/02/2022)
Proceeding of the Old Baily: https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t18980425-334&div=t18980425-334&terms=ostime#highlight
(accessed 01/02/2022)
N/A (1898) 'A Detective's Conspiracy', Weekly Dispatch, 15
May, p. 16.
N/A (1898) 'Detective Otime's Trial', Daily News, 07 May, p.
3.
N/A (1898) 'Serious Charge Against Railway Detective',
Police Review & Parade Gossip, 6 (272), pp. 117.
Comments
Post a Comment