On 3 Nov 1881 Temple Wilmot/Charles Howard was released from prison and then further jailed for a month for failure to report for police supervision.
On release he evidently went straight back to writing ‘letters’ and attempting to commit fraud. By 27 Mar 1882 he was on trial again for unlawfully attempting to obtain by false pretences, from the Duke of Montrose, the Duke of Sutherland, and others, certain moneys, with intent to cheat and defraud.
The Duke of Montrose testified “I received a letter which has since been destroyed; it was in the same handwriting as this one which I hold in my hand—I subsequently saw the prisoner, and he admitted to me that it was in his handwriting (This was a letter signed Hoovardo, dated London, January 19, 1882, referring to a previous letter asking for an advance of 100l., and stating that 50l. would be a material sum, but 100l. would help him to weather the storm till October)—in his former letter, which was destroyed, he stated that he was Count Monti, and had taken his second title of Hoovardo because he was in difficulties, that he was my father’s godson, and in consequence bore the name of Graham, and that he was in difficulties owing to his agent in Italy having disappeared with the rents…”
Charles may have been back in Jersey as the first letter was dated in Jersey. Henry Wright the Duke of Sutherland’s secretary testified that he had received letters “These were also signed “Hoovardo” dated 9th and 10th December, from St. Heliers, and stated that the writer was the son of the late Marquis de Monti, and was the godson of the Duke’s father, and bore the name of Gower, and requested the loan of a few pounds.”
Neither Duke sent any money and Charles Howard was sentenced to a year’s imprisonment without hard labour.
On the 8 May 1885 Charles’ daughter Rose Eleanor Vivian Stuart Howard got married. She has been working in Germany as a governess where she met Major Johann Georg Hermann Friedrich Quehl.
On her marriage certificate she used the surname Von Zobeltitz, the daughter of Stuart Vilmar Howard Von Zobeltitz and Ana Von Zobeltitz.
Rose and Johann had a daughter, Anne Marie who died in 1943. During the war Rose returned to England and lived with her son. She lived to the age of 98 and died in 1961 in Germany. On her death certificate her maiden name is given as Wilmot.
Just 10 days after Rose’s wedding Charles Howard was on trial again!
Charles Howard 58 (born about 1827) a retired Captain ‘with property In Italy’ conned several people into sending him money by postal orders telling them they were potential heirs to a deceased American millionaire and were in line to inherit £3000.’ (I think Charles would have loved the internet!)
He was sentenced to another five years in prison.
We don’t know where he went after his release from prison but by 1893 he was again on remand.
On 2 Feb 1893 Catherine Bennett Wilmot petitioned the divorce court to protect her earnings and property earned by working as a professional nurse. She didn’t use the surname Gould or Howard and no mention is made of her second marriage.
The affidavit states that she was married in 1862 a year earlier than they actually married.
Charles Howard was on remand for obtaining money under false pretences and perhaps she was worried that her assets were at risk if he was found guilty.
On 17 Jun 1893 Charles Mowbray Fitzallen Howard married Florence Ethel Fulton. Their marriage announcement describes his father as “The Late Captain Charles Temple Howard of the Royal Horse Artillery” but that’s not true, he’s still very much alive and in Holloway prison!
Charles ‘junior’ was working as a journalist and sang in the church choir. By 1939 Charles was working as an actor which seems fitting. He and Florence had four children: Florence, Glory, Catherine and John (Jack). John Mowbray Temple Howard was killed on HMS Invincible at the Battle of Jutland in 1916. Charles died in 1943.
Charles’ brother Thomas David Kenneth Howard married Mary Julia Dennis on 22nd Sep 1900 at Lexden in Essex. His father is recorded as Captain Temple Howard on the entry in the register.
Thomas was a furniture store manager. He and Mary had three daughters: Mary Catherine, Marjorie and Joan. Thomas died in 1944.
And what of Catherine? She died on 24 Jan 1935 at Great Yarmouth. She had been living with her son Thomas. Her probate lists her as Catherine Bennett Gould and she left an estate worth £1100 to her son Thomas.
What happened to Temple Wilmot/Charles Howard?
On 25 Nov 1893 Charles Howard died of pneumonia and bronchitis whilst on remand in Holloway Prison. His death certificate states he was age 78 therefore born in 1818.
His newspaper death notice states that he was aged 70 (born about 1823). it also states that he was the son of wealthy parents and had received an excellent education but had squandered his money.
So who was Temple Wilmot aka Charles Howard?
Clearly Temple was an educated man who had sufficient skills to pass as a member of the gentry or aristocracy. Perhaps he was from a wealthy family. He claimed to have been a Captain in the army and a diplomat in the War Office and this was accepted. He seems to have been popular with ladies too! It’s not clear if he was married to them but so far I have found at least five relationships: Catherine Somerville, Louisa Heminger, Marian Davenport, Catherine Boase Bennett Bosustow and Ana Von Zobeltitz.
We don’t have any photos of Temple but the photos of his two sons hint at his appearance. We do however have a physical description from the UK Register of Habitual Criminals and Police Gazettes.
The two entries describe his place of birth as Virginia America! Born about 1818 & 1828.
It describes his occupation as a labourer and gives the following physical description: Fair complexion, grey hair, blue eyes, 5ft 5 1/2”, proportionate build with a long face. Right shin was fractured, scars on forehead, over right eye, right groin and left arm. Lost left thumb and left fingers crippled, birthmark on left arm. (That’s a pretty distinctive appearance!)
I don’t think he was American, I think he was good with accents and I think he liked pretending to be someone he wasn’t.
Catherine’s affidavit of 1893 gives us some clues to pursue.
Catherine stated “The said Temple Bouverie Cleveland Wilmot informed me he was connected with the English family of Eardley Wilmot but he never introduced me to any member of his family. I have made several enquiries with the view of finding out who were his relations but have not been able to ascertain. Previous to his trial similar enquiries were made by the police but they were unable to find out to whom he was related.”
The family of Eardley Wilmot proved to be a very interesting line of enquiry.
Eardley Nicholas Wilmot (1752-1834) was the son of Sir Robert Eardley Wilmot, 2nd Baronet of Osmaston Hall in Derby. Sir Robert Wilmot was married to Mariana Howard, the heiress of Charles Howard of Stafford (1742-1791). The chance of a family having the names Wilmot, Charles and Howard seems to be too much of a coincidence.
I suspect that by 1851 Temple had already tired of his real name, perhaps he already had a criminal record and a change of name was necessary to find work. Perhaps a newspaper article about the Wilmot family (who had a protracted legal case) inspired his choice of name or perhaps Temple looked through John Debrett’s ‘The Baronetage of England’ and spotted some names he liked. There is no record of a Temple Wilmot on the 1841 census. In fact in 1841 there are only 29 people called Temple in the whole of the country and some of them are women.
In August 1853 the ‘Journals of the House of Commons’ reported the following and that may have given Temple an idea for some new middle names! Voila, Temple Bouverie Cleveland Wilmot was ‘born’!
In 1855 Edward St Maur, 11th Duke of Somerset died. No doubt this was listed in the journals of the day and that may have given Temple the inspiration for his ‘father’s name’ ‘Somerset St Maur Wilmot’!
Temple even featured in a book: ‘Mysteries of Police & Crime’ by Arthur Griffiths.
“BURTON, ALIAS THE COUNT VON HAVARD.
Compared with these top-sawyers and high-flyers in crime we have little to show on this side of the Atlantic; but I may mention one or two notorious swindlers of these latter days, remarkable in their way for the dexterity and the pertinacity with which they pursue their nefarious trade. Every now and again the police lay their hands on some fine gentleman who is well received in society, like Benson, bearing some borrowed aristocratic name, but who is really an ex-convict repeating the game that originally got him into trouble. There was the man Burton, as he was generally called, who rejoiced in many aliases, such as Temple, Bouverie, Wilmot, St. Maur, Erskine, and many more, and whose career was summarily ended in 1876, when, as Count von Havard, he was sentenced to five years’ penal servitude for obtaining money by fraud. This man’s character may be gathered from the police description of him when he was once more at large. He was described as a native of Virginia, in the United States; was supposed to be a gentleman by birth and education, and spoke English with a slightly foreign accent. The police notice went on to say that he was “an accomplished swindler, an adept in every description of subterfuge and artifice; he tells lies with such a specious resemblance to truth that numerous persons have been deceived by him to their cost. He is highly educated, an excellent linguist, and also skilled in the dead languages, and his good address has obtained him an entrance into the very highest society abroad. By the adroit use of secret information of which he has become possessed he has extorted large sums as blackmail. One of his devices is to enter into a correspondence with relatives of deceased persons, leading them to suppose they are bénéficiaires under wills, and thus obtain money to carry on preliminary inquiries. He frequently makes his claim through a respectable solicitor, whom he first dupes with an account of his brilliant connections and prospects. He represents himself as the son of a foreign nobleman, De Somerset St. Maur Wilmot, and claims relationship with several distinguished persons.”
He was in reality a very old offender, who had done more than one sentence in this country, and had probably known the interior of many foreign prisons. His operations extended throughout Europe, and he had visited the principal health resorts and holiday places of the Continent, such as Biarritz, Homburg, Ostend; and this constant movement to and fro no doubt helped him to elude the police.”
In conclusion
Ultimately we’ll never really know who he was, we don’t know when or where he was born it could have been as early as 1818 making him 45 at the time of his marriage to 16 year old Catherine! We don’t know his real name and with so many aliases we often lose sight of him in the records. Perhaps even his own family never actually knew who he really was.
The Lanyons 