William Wheelock the violent thug?

 If you read the previous post about William's life you may well assume that William was a dangerous man to know. The records certainly give that impression. However, the only record of this type that I can definitely tie to William is the 1870 news report about him assaulting his wife. In the other instances the link is less certain. 

Let's look at each in turn. We'll start with the one we know for sure is the right man.

The Birmingham Daily Gazette (1870)

 On this occasion William was drunk and his wife was staying with neighbours who lived in the same Court, though it does not say why she was doing so. We are presented with a man who did not hesitate to strike two women. As there is no mention of an altercation with John Brown we can perhaps assume he was not home. William also threw a chair and broke a table, and importantly, it states he had been previously convicted on several occasions. It does not say what he was previously convicted for, but reading between the lines the article seems to suggest that this was habitual behaviour.

So, pretty deplorable behaviour, and a pretty lenient two month sentence. William seems to have been a man of considerable physical strength. It is unsurprising that his wife distanced herself from him. 

The Birmingham Daily Gazette (1880)

 This report tells us that a man by the name of William Wheelock was drinking in the Grosvenor Arms in Aston when he was assaulted. It seems to have been a vicious attack. Two against one, with glasses shattered in the process. The penalty for this assault was 10s and costs, or 14 days hard labour. Again pretty lenient. Now I can't say for sure that this is my William. No age or address is given. It is perfectly believable that he could have been a labourer, and perfectly possible that he could have been drinking in Aston. Frustratingly there is no motive given for the assault. I do not know the relationship between William and James. If it is my William he'd have been 63, so certainly past his prime for defending himself in a fight.

Birmingham Journal, 21st July 1849

This report of the violent actions of a man named William Willock could well be about my William. He'd have been 32 and his son John 7 months old.  As stated once before, the surname Wheelock occurs in a whole variety of spellings, which can make finding ancestors in the papers tricky. The report tells us that this William held grudges, acted rashly, assaulted a man, and intended to do so again at the first opportunity. He seems quick to temper and violence, and if this is the correct William, gave scarce thought to his newborn son, or to the support that Hannah needed to raise him. The phrase "he knew that nobody would be bound for him" is pretty telling. This was a man who clearly felt abandoned, even he knew his own behaviour was responsible. If his own family wouldn't vouch for him, then he had clearly demonstrated that he was unreliable. We get a picture of WIlliam as a live wire, and almost certainly a dangerous man to form a relationship with. The fact that the altercation took place on Weaman Street, which is where William lived, adds weight to the possibility this is indeed the right man. The implications are pretty bleak for John as it suggests his father was in prison for assault and willful damage for the first months of his life. Not exactly a role model then. 

Birmingham Journal, 16 June 1849

Edit: I have since found the above cutting dated 16th June 1849. This provides further details about the violence directed at Mr Williams and states that the perpetrator was a gun furniture filer, the same profession as my William at the time, so it seems likely this is my ancestor. It is interesting, however, that it states “the singular manner in which [William] had been behaving for some time, his friends suspected that he was somewhat deranged”. Does this suggests that his behaviour was viewed as out of character by his friends? So perhaps there was a catalyst to this destructive behaviour?

Birmingham Journal, 21 May 1853

The above report on the events of Thursday 19th May makes difficult reading. There are a lot of details to unpack here. Elizabeth Payne was a former housekeeper to William. If, as I suspect, this is my ancestor, it would suggest that Hannah Genders and he were living separate lives (or that Hannah had died). The fact that William’s residence seems to be elsewhere than Weaman Street is consistent with what I know about the Wheelock household dispersing on the death of William’s father, Thomas on 12th January 1852. 

The article also states that William had several aliases. This is the first time I have found these mentioned. They suggest a habitual criminal keen to evade the law. They may also explain why William has been tricky to trace. I had suspected William was trying to remain under the radar since I found him in the 1861 census. His name is given simply as Wheelock. No first name. In any case, if the police were aware of several aliases then clearly his volatile nature did not permit him to avoid capture for long. 

Reports such as these make me concerned for Eliza and Hannah's wellbeing. Knowing how William treated Elizabeth Payne and later Mary Ann Maydon and her neighbour, it seems probable that Eliza and Hannah would have been in similar peril. But I know nothing thus far about the dynamics of the relationships between William and Eliza and Hannah. 

Nobody is born a violent thug, and it is impossible to say when the rot set in. His siblings were not all impeccably behaved. His younger brother John (1819-?) was arrested in 1839 and transported to Van Diemen’s Land in 1840 for a hefty 15 year sentence. His crime was striking a man on the head and stealing his hat. Considering William received 6 weeks imprisonment for the brutal assault of Elizabeth Payne, John’s sentence was harsh indeed. WIlliam’s older brother, Thomas (1815-1863), was also arrested aged 12 and imprisoned for one week for stealing a man’s cap. I haven’t found any other instances of the Wheelock siblings on the wrong side of the law, however, and these actions don’t amount to more than petty crime compared to William. His brothers and sisters all seemed to head tight-knit families of their own, and would inevitably have assisted with the raising of WIlliam’s son, John. 

Why is William the outlier then? What happened to him? One interesting fact about William is that he is the only one of the siblings to consistently sign documents with his name rather than leaving a mark. He was educated then. Perhaps the route of his behaviour lies in some misfortune from his youth. His marriage to Eliza is a period of which I know almost nothing. 

The Birmingham Mail, 23rd November 1887

 

This report tells a very sad story. Again there is nothing in it to say for sure that this is my William, except for the fact it calls him an old man and WIlliam would have been 69 at the time. Here we have a man who has no home, who has discharged himself from the workhouse to collect tobacco from his nephew. He was found sleeping in a doorway at 4 in the morning in late November. It would certainly have been freezing cold. This William clearly has nothing to his name. It is heartening that he has a nephew who is willing to provide him with some assistance. If this is my William there are only a few men that he could have been referring to, as most of Williams nephews and nieces had died in infancy. The sad situation he has found himself in might suggest he had burnt his bridge with his son John. Perhaps John felt he needed to protect his own children from a dangerous man. I have no idea if William had any relationship with his grandchildren.

Whatever our opinion of William Wheelock, who was undoubtedly a violent man, it is impossible to read his story and not see it as tragic. Nobody sets out in life hoping to be in and out of prison, to become estranged from family, to have a series of failed relationships, to end up in the workhouse, and to die alone in a lunatic asylum. It makes me think of 17-year-old William on his wedding day in Handsworth and the hopes and dreams he may have had.

I do wonder to what extent his life was a product of his environment. From the mid-nineteenth century a culture of violence permeated Birmingham's working classes, culminating in the menacing slogging gangs that were widely reported in the 1870s. Carl Chinn discusses some of the causes in Peaky Blinders The Real Story: The True History of Birmingham's Most Notorious Gangs (2019). He describes a culture of street loyalty, a long-held antagonism towards the police, who were viewed as attacking popular culture, a lack of spaces for the working classes to congregate other than street corners, and a liking for gambling and rougher, illegal amusements. There was a culture of aggression, particularly towards enforcers of the law. Hostilities between rival street gangs were fierce and the Wheelocks were living right in the epicentre. Many of the slogging gangs were associated with the streets on which they lived. It was a volatile place to be brought up. William's son, John, would have been in his prime at the height of the slogging gang violence, but I have found no evidence that he was caught up in it. His father's repeat offending, however, may well have been influenced by it. When your local area is constantly subject to murderous assaults with belt buckles, police officers being attacked with sticks and stones, and criminal damage, you'd need a certain degree of swagger on the streets to not become a target. There was safety in numbers so the gangs must have held a certain appeal. Anybody who tried to police these streets has my total respect. It must have been scary.