On 25 July 1823, East India Company warehouse labourer Charles Richards was brought into the Court for the Relief of Insolvent Debtors in London to receive his discharge from debtors’ prison.  However he was opposed by Mary Ann Richards, widow of his brother Benjamin.  She challenged the schedule of debts.

Morning Herald 26 July 1823 British Newspaper Archive

Benjamin Richards had been the cook on board East Indiaman Marquis of Camden on a voyage to Bombay and China.  The ship’s captain Thomas Larkins told the Court that Benjamin had been ‘deranged’ during the voyage and unable to do his duty.  When the ship arrived back in the Thames, Benjamin had jumped or fallen overboard and drowned.  He was buried on 14 May 1823 at Milton near Gravesend in Kent, aged 38.

Before the ship entered the docks in London, Charles Richards went on board and asked for the slush and fat which was the perquisite of the ship’s cook.  Slush was the floating grease skimmed off boiled meat which could be sold to tallow merchants.  There were fifteen casks worth about £60 or £70 and they were given to Charles on the understanding that he was receiving it for the benefit of Benjamin’s widow Mary Ann.  He sold the slush to Mr Rottenbury of Gravesend.

The Court was told that Mary Ann was in great distress.  She stated that she had married Benjamin seven months before he left on his last voyage.  Her husband had left £10 with Charles who was to give her money as needed.  She had received £3 from Charles in the two years that Benjamin had been absent.  Charles claimed that his brother had owed him £40.

The Court heard evidence of Charles’s financial situation and property.  He earned 18s a week from the East India Company, and let out rooms as lodgings in his house in St George in the East.  Charles and his wife both owned watches and she had five shawls, three from India.

Mr Heath addressed the Court, claiming that Charles had endeavoured, by misrepresentation and fraud, to obtain the perquisites of a poor widow.  He drew attention to the income Charles derived from his position as warehouse labourer, the profits from his lodgers, and other sources of emolument.  Charles should be obliged to pay the debt due to Mary Ann.

The Chief Commissioner ruled that this was a case of persecution, where there ought to have been protection, and of fraud where there should have been pity.  Charles’s villainy ‘was too glaring to be doubted for a moment’.  It was hard to conceive of a case of greater hardship than that of this poor widow.  The Court granted the application made on behalf of Mary Ann that the schedule of debts should be dismissed.  Charles was remanded and he returned to prison.

Margaret Makepeace
Lead Curator, East India Company Records

Further reading;
The British Newspaper Archive has several articles on the Court proceedings of 25 July 1823, with variations to the story e.g.
Public Ledger and Daily Advertiser 26 July 1823
British Press 26 July 1823
Morning Herald 26 July 1823
Morning Chronicle 26 July 1823

Are you a fan of needlework? Then you absolutely must visit Mrs. Evershed’s London emporia.  Step back into the 19th century and explore 7 Hanover Square, 59 South Moulton Street, or 71 Chiltern Street, and marvel at ‘rare old pieces of petit-point, quilting, crewel work, and silk work [which] mingle happily with the modern'.

Enlargement of embroidered bookbinding by Mrs Evershed on Washington Irving’s The keeping of Christmas at Bracebridge Hall - British Library Collins 461

Ellen Evershed, widowed aged 38, was left to raise four young children, yet she thrived.  By 1913, her estate was worth the modern equivalent of £27,900.  What was her secret?  A combination of exquisite embroidery and entrepreneurial genius that could rival even the sharpest minds of today’s ‘Dragons’ Den’.

Ellen Middlebrook Cockcroft (1834-1913) came from a Leeds family of drapers.  The 1851 census records Ellen in the Brighton hosier and draper’s shop of her stepfather Thomas Sturdy.  In 1862, She married Frederick Evershed (1832-1872) from Sussex, a draper who specialised in silk.

The Eversheds owned two shops in central Rugby catering for women and men.  An adroit user of the social media of the day, Ellen advertised new stock in The Rugby Advertiser and in 1866 called for apprentices and ‘improvers’ in millinery and dressmaking, an indication of her success.

The Rugby Advertiser 9 May 1863  alerted Mrs Evershed’s patrons to new stock.  British Newspaper Archive

The Rugby Advertiser 27 January 1866 advertised Evershed's men’s accessories and celebrated flannel shirts. British Newspaper Archive

The Eversheds raised their family in Brighton.  Life was challenging after Frederick’s death but thankfully, the family had domestic and childcare help.  It seems that Ellen was driven. She certainly had her own unique talents on which to base a new future in the capital.

 

Brighton Gazette 6 February 1873 - Ellen vowed to continue the business. British Newspaper Archive

Ellen's unusual occupation in the 1891 Hampstead census was ‘Secretary of the Exhibition of Embroidery’.  She organized competitions for amateur needleworkers and showcased their creations.  While there were few formal rules, one requirement was the use of Pearsall’s threads (which, naturally, were sold by Ellen).  Embroidered book covers were offered as prizes.

The Queen of Saturday 2 February 1895 informed its readers that Mrs Evershed ‘the courteous manager of Messrs Harris' depot for embroideries in old Bond-street’ had opened a shop around the corner.  At the age of 60, she was ready for a new challenge, albeit helped by her daughter Ellen Lucas Evershed.

The Gentlewoman 3 April 1897 advertised the new designs and twice weekly classes available at Mrs Evershed’s new shop. British Newspaper Archive

 

The Queen 19 March 1904 . Mrs Evershed’s work basket featured ribbon work, a new decorative technique.  British Newspaper Archive

The shops sold an astonishing variety of traditional and modern needlework sundries.  Patrons were encouraged to embroider everything which could be embroidered including ordinary curtains, cushions, work baskets etc' and the surprising, for example ‘Natty coats for dogs’ (sorry, no images!).  Other items for sale included ‘artistic furniture,’ which combined ‘ease with tastefulness in designs’ and copperware made by Newlyn fishermen, inspired by the contemporary Arts and Crafts movement.

Weldon’s needlework old and new Needle Art Series no 9, p 5 illustrated the historic patterns available at Evershed’s

The Queen published a regular column headed ‘The Work-Table' which provided advice upon knotty (sometimes literally!) needlework problems.  Frequently answers relied upon the expertise of Mrs Evershed and her staff.

It is a testament to Ellen’s business acumen that all levels of customer’s ability were addressed and monetised.  Less skillful embroiderers could avail themselves of a service ‘to stretch to shape needlework tapestry that has pulled crookedly in working'.

Ellen saw potential everywhere. Church furnishings provided an obvious source of work, but lest non-religious customers felt overlooked, her trade ticket reminded customers of her versatility.

Trade ticket for Mrs Evershed from Washington Irving’s The keeping of Christmas at Bracebridge Hall - British Library Collins 461

Stock was frequently refreshed.  Imports from Italy, France and even New Zealand provided constant temptation.  Evershed’s was not the only embroidery retailer in London.  There was much competition but The Queen’s estimation of Ellen as ‘the best in needlework’ has much justification.  The shop was still operating in 1945, but appears to have closed before daughter Ellen Lucas's death in 1949. 

Assurance that Evershed's was still in business - The Queen 21 March 1945 British Newspaper Archive

P J M Marks
Curator, bookbindings, Printed Heritage Collections

Further reading:
Florence Sophie Davson ‘The revival of art needlework and embroidery’ in The Girls’ Own Paper pp.798-799
Weldon’s Needlework Old and New series number 9. 
British Newspaper Archive

 

 

In a previous blog, I described how a volume of 17th century Surat records belonging to the Government of Bombay travelled backwards and forwards between India and London and was subsequently lost at sea in the wreck of the SS Oceana.

Just weeks later, on 15 April 1912, RMS Titanic famously sank in the waters of the North Atlantic, with the loss of over 1500 lives.  Many notable books, paintings and artefacts were on board (including the ‘Titanic Omar’.  But so too were fourteen Sanskrit manuscripts belonging to the Governmental Library, Deccan College Poona (Pune).  These were on loan from the Government of Bombay and were en-route from the India Office in London to Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.  They had been borrowed by Franklin Edgerton, a budding Sanskrit scholar working under Professor Maurice Bloomfield.

In May 1911, Edgerton wrote to the India Office Library in London requesting assistance in locating and examining all copies of the Vikramacaritra, including those in India, for a critical study of the work.  The Library was a hub for the loan of manuscript materials, particularly those in Persian, Arabic, and South Asian languages.  It facilitated and arranged access to manuscripts in its own collections, to the Government of India’s collections, and to collections in European institutions, with the recipients being a wide range of academics and interested persons worldwide.

Letter forwarding manuscripts from Bombay to London February 1912 IOR/L/R/9/9

 

List of Sanskrit manuscripts to be loaned with values February 1912 IOR/L/R/9/9

The fourteen Sanskrit manuscripts were formally requested from Bombay and were despatched to the India Office Library in London to administer the loan, arriving in March 1912.  As was usual practice, Edgerton paid a bond for the ‘value’ of the manuscripts, said to be Rs 303.  The Library Committee proposed that Edgerton should only have three manuscripts in his possession at any one time, and the manuscripts were only to be loaned until 31 December 1912.  Unfortunately, that did not mean staggering their despatch.  They were parcelled up and sent via the forwarding agents Carter, Paterson & Co on 1 April, and placed aboard Titanic.

Letter informing the India Office of the loss of manuscripts on the Titanic April 1912 IOR/L/R/9/9

The India Office was informed of the loss on 17 April.  The Librarian Frederick William Thomas was phlegmatic in telling the Library Committee: ‘The loss is regrettable, but it cannot be said that the Mss were exposed to any greater risk when despatched to America than when en-route from Bombay.  The work contained in the 14 manuscripts was by no means a rare one, & it has been edited in print’.  The India Office had insured the parcel and received £20 in compensation, which was passed to the Government of Bombay.

Librarian FW Thomas's report of the loss to the Library Committee May 1912 IOR/L/R/9/9

Franklin Edgerton went on to borrow more manuscripts and finally published his two volume work Vikrama's Adventures; or, the Thirty-two Tales of the Throne (Cambridge Mass; 1926).  In the preface to the first volume he acknowledged both the assistance of the India Office Library, Librarian FW Thomas, and the loss of the Sanskrit manuscripts: ‘This terrible disaster deprived me of materials which would unquestionably have proved a great enrichment of the sources at my disposal for the edition; yet I cannot but recognise that my personal loss is small in comparison with the permanent loss of this large collection of manuscripts...’.

Lesley Shapland
Archivist & Provenance Researcher
India Office Records

Further reading:
Papers regarding loans to Dr Edgerton, including details of the loss of Sanskrit manuscripts on the Titanic can be found in IOR/L/R/9/9, L135/13: Library Committee Papers, 1913.