1915-02-24rr

“Detectives are scouring the city for one of the boldest crooks that ever operated in Hamilton.”

Hamilton Spectator.    February 24, 1915.

Crime was certainly not unknown in Hamilton in 1915, and break-ins involving thefts from residences were part of the instances that Hamilton police had to investigate.

However, on Sunday evening, February 21, 1915, a break-in occurred which was very remarkable and very troubling. At first, the police saw fit to keep the robbery out of the public realm in the hopes that they might be able to quickly apprehend the theft. Four days later, the police had been unsuccessful in that effort and decided to publicize the case, perhaps as a result, someone in the community might have information which would be of assistance.

While the occupants of an east end home were away at a Sunday evening religious services, their maid was left alone in the home:

“She had occasion to go to the basement to regulate the furnace and she had just descended the stairs when a man, with a mask over his eyes, sprang at her with a broom.

“The maid eluded his rush and ran back up the stairs. When she gained the ground floor, she turned the lock in the basement door and ran from the house to summon the police.

“Detectives and a squad of men responded with the patrol, but when they reached the house the intruder had disappeared.

“A thorough search revealed the fact that a bottle of beer and a bottle of wine was the extent of the visitor’s loot, but on the dining room table the police found a note giving their official pride a severe shock.

“The note was short, but sweet, and read : ‘This was a hurry call. I’ll be back again. Look out.’¹

¹ “Nervy Thief Promised He Would Return.”

Hamilton Spectator.   February 24, 1915.

The police questioned the maid and were able to get a meagre, vague description of the intruder from her.

Three days later, the police were called again from the very same house:

“The maid, sweeping in the hall in the morning, found a note which had evidently been carefully tucked under the front door. It was in the same handwriting as the one found on Sunday night and read: ‘I’ll be calling again soon, as I warned you.’

“The officers took the note and made careful inquiries in the neighborhood, but no one had seen a strange man lurking in the vicinity.”¹

All the occupants of the house, especially the maid, were very much unnerved by the notes. The police stated that they intended to kep a close watch in the house for some time.

Inspector Campbell was asked by a Spectator reporter from information on the progress of the investigation, and he responded cryptically, “I’ll tell you nothing at all. We have been asked to keep it quiet.”

A little more than two weeks later, the police had not found the culprit and, in fact, were dealing with a number of household intrusions.

A Hamilton Times column which appeared on March 10, 1915 began as follows:

“Hamilton, at the present time, seems to be infested with burglars and second-storey men, who have been going the rounds during the past two or three weeks breaking into houses, binding and gagging victims that come in their way, and so far have been eluding the police, who have received a number of complaints, but refuse to give out anything about the different cases that they have been notified of.”²

² “Boy Gagged By Bold Burglars”

Hamilton Times.   March10, 1915.

One recent case that the Times reporter did learn about involved three men breaking into a house. They found a woman alone in the house at the time. The woman, it was said, was “badly used” by the intruders and was left “in a rather serious condition.”

Another case happened at the Thompkins home, 12 Wood street. Again, three men entered the residence:

“In this particular case , this trio of men failed to get away with any valuables, but at the same time, they bound and gagged a 14-year-old boy, and used him up in such a manner that the victim has still to recover from the shock.

“Mrs. Thompkins, who is a widow, went out in company with her 17-year-old daughter and her younger son. Francis, 14-years-old, who is employed at a store on James street north, was forced to work and was unable to go.

“After finishing his work, he went home, and, picking up a paper, began to read. About 9:45, he was startled by a knock at the front door, and went to open it, but before he could do so, two men forced their way in. On seeing him, they asked if any others were at home.

“The answer they received was in the negative, and on learning this, they grabbed the youngster and handled him very roughly. He screamed for help, and one man immediately gagged him with his hand, while the other pulled down a curtain that was hanging nearby, and with this they bound and gagged him and left him lying on the lounge where they had thrown him.

“The two men then started to ransack the house, while the third party remained on the outside and kept his eye open for the police.”²

After pulling every drawer in the house and finding nothing of value, the intruders left, but not before warning Francis that if he said anything about the matter, they would return and “get him.”

Mrs. Thompkins and her daughter returned home about 10:30 and found Francis on the lounge in a semi-dazed condition. They immediately summoned a doctor, who was able to bring the young man back to full consciousness. He was then able to tell the story of what had happened, and, despite the intruders’ warning, the police were called.

The police tried to reassure the public that they were following up a clue they had found, and were assembling evidence against the intruders whose identity they knew very well.

Before any arrests were made, the suspected burglars had disappeared. Presumably, they had left the city, as the rash of break-ins came to an end.