falsepretences

Does "False Pretences" mean con man?

Technical definition "the means whereby the defendant obtained any chattel, money or valuable security from any other person with intent to defraud, indictable as a misdemeanour under the Larceny Act 1861" so yes, a con man. We don't have more details of these people's crimes - if anyone wanted to follow them up in newspaper reports that would be great!

He looks awfully smug about the whole situation.....

Here's the newspaper account: "FALSE PRETENCES AT NORTH SHIELDS. -- Alfred Wilkinson, clerk, North Shields, was charged this morning with obtaining from Elizabeth Banks, at the Albert Arms, the sum of 2s 6d by means of false pretences, and also 1s from William Rutter. -- Elizabeth Banks stated that on the 8th inst. the prisoner went into their public-house and asked her if she knew the late Mr John Dawson who had recently died and was to be buried that afternoon. Witness replied that she did know him, and all his family. He then asked to see her husband, but she told him he was not in just then. Defendant put a paper on the counter and said it was a subscription list for a wreath to be sent to Mr Dawson's funeral. He told her that he had ordered a wreath at Hogarth's and it would cost 30s. On that statement witness gave him 2s 6d. -- Sarah Ann Whittle stated she carried on business as a greengrocer and florist in Saville Street under then name of Hogarth and Co. She knew the prisoner, but he had never given any order for a wreath for Mr Dawson's funeral. -- Thomas Dawson, bar manager, and a brother of the deceased, stated that he had charge of the funeral arrangements, and no wreath was taken or sent by the defendant. He had no permission to collect subscriptions for any wreaths. -- P.C. Hall deposed to arresting the defendant and when he charged him he made no reply. William Rutter, a publican in Tyne Street, stated that defendant went to his house and asked him if he knew the late Mr Dawson, he replied that he did and thereupon defendant produced a subscription list to purchase a wreath, and witness subscribed 1s towards it. There were other two similar charges preferred against the defendant of obtaining subscriptions towards a wreath for the late Mr Hepple. -- Inspector McQueen put in a list of convictions against the defendant, for fraud and false pretences, in various parts of the country, one sentence running to 12 months' hard labour. -- The Chairman (Mr Foot) stated that it was the worst record he had seen during his time in that Court. They ought to have sent defendant to the Assizes, but, however, they would give him another chance, and he would have to go for one month hard labour on each charge -- four months in all." --- Shields Daily Gazette, 20 Apr 1903, page 3

I think he was a con man!

Doesn't look as though he was starving and stole a loaf of bread

[https://www.flickr.com/photos/flyeye] I've added the story behind the mugshot. Looks like you were right about him being a con man.

Lol what do we think the odds would have been of the shopkeeper ever seeing his 4s again -- let alone any part of the 50 pounds.

Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums It's the raised eyebrow which gives it away. Even the recording of the photograph seems like a challenge to him!

I shouldn't judge but she looks well shifty haha! Interesting that she had a daughter and they travelled the North Tyne area carrying out this scam..

May Britain always have a sufficient social safety net so that people in penury are not forced to steal, lest they starve.