It was the early 1990s when I first discovered that my husband was descended not only from a convict, but also a Superintendant of Police! Back in the days of having to use snail mail and be satisfied with not viewing original records easily. Thirty years later, I discovered a transcription error that has hidden an intriguing chapter of John Taylor’s career from view. The Mitten Murder was really the Millen murder!
Finding a police officer in the tree
Hannah Taylor was my husband’s great-great-grandmother. I knew she and her husband had arrived in Australia from New Zealand after each emigrating separately and marrying there in early 1867. So I took out my pen and wrote to New Zealand’s National Archives. They sent me a transcript of both their marriage and their application to marry (no parents’ details on either) and some photocopies of their mentions in the local Dunedin newspapers. One was the marriage announcement which described Hannah as ‘the fourth daughter of Mr Superintendant John Taylor, Chorlton Town Hall, Manchester, England’.
Soon after, I found that Hannah had died just a year after arriving in Australia. I obtained her death certificate which confirmed he was a Superintendant of Police.
John Taylor’s career details
The 1851 Census was unable to assist in locating John. It turned out that this section of Manchester’s census had been destroyed by water damage, and only the 1881 Census was otherwise available back then – there was no John Taylor, Superintendant of Police to be found there.
Taking out my trusty pen again, I wrote to the Greater Manchester Police Museum to see if they had any information on John. They wrote back to say they only had details of post-1858 recruits onwards. He wasn’t amongst them.
So that was that, until two years later, when they wrote again, bless ’em. They said that they had a volunteer researcher compiling an index of earlier officers and they had remembered my request. Attached was a three-page transcription of his service records, his 1855 letter of resignation and a report of the Watch Committee approving his superannuation payment.
It was fascinating reading. He’d been recruited in 1833, and become an Inspector very quickly, rising to Superintendant of the D Division by 1842. Among other notes, he was recorded as having been severely injured in the Chartist Riots in 1848. It was on the basis of his ongoing head and leg problems from these injuries that he resigned seven years later.
In an otherwise very impressive career summary, there was one blot on his copybook. Reference was made to an enquiry regarding ‘the murder on 13th August 1844 of a woman called Jane Mitten, by a man called Evans’. John had allowed a confidential letter to be seen by the press and was found guilty by the Watch Committee of ‘the most inconsiderate and reprehensible conduct’.
Finding The Mitten Murder
Of course, I wanted to know more, but could find no reference to the murder of a Jane Mitten anywhere. As in my previous post, it was only when I recently remembered to revisit this mystery that I found the answer. I went looking for Jane Mitten in the British Newspaper Archive…
…still nothing. I went back to the original correspondence from the Police Museum. They had mentioned that much of the Watch Committee Minutes was written in illegible handwriting. I tried various combinations of names and alternatives. Finally, I found a plethora of articles regarding ‘The Millen Murder’. Jane Mitten was actually Jane Millen mistranscribed from those messy minutes.
The Millen Murder
A particularly detailed report was printed in the Manchester & Salford Advertiser and Chronicle on August 17th 1844 under the title ‘Barbarous Murder and Daring Robbery’. It told of the crime, the chase, the capture, the prisoner’s statement, the inquest and court case over several tightly packed columns. This included praise of John Taylor and his ‘extraordinary exertions and vigilance’ to bring the prisoner to justice.
The Millen murder was an awful crime. Jane Millen was an elderly lady who took in a lodger by the name of George Evans. He subsequently lost his job. She supported him for six months, kindheartedly waiving his rent and feeding him. Eventually, she began to ask him to make more effort to find a job and ultimately found him one. He worked for a day and then decided he didn’t wish to return to the job the next morning. Instead, he bashed her on the head and strangled her, before stealing several items from her home and catching the train to Liverpool. He was found in a lodging house there, awaiting a steamship to New York the next morning. Evans was totally unrepentant and it took a very short time for the jury to find him guilty of ‘Wilful Murder’.
The Tide Turns
Just a week later, the newspapers revealed the letter for which John Taylor was severely upbraided. It is printed in full in the Manchester Courier and Lancashire Advertiser of the 24th August:
It was quite rightly felt that since it had been published in a rival newspaper before the trial it would have been prejudicial for the jurors to have the opportunity to have read it. This newspaper took full advantage of the opportunity to criticise their rival, thus bringing even more attention to it. The Watch Committee had to act.
The Watch Committee’s findings
On the 14th September, the same newspaper published the Watch Committee’s findings on the matter.
And thus, with John’s previous good record and eating of much humble pie, he retained his position and reputation. What a relief.
Once again, newspapers have come to the rescue to brilliantly add detail and colour to the information supplied in other documents.