Fraudulent behaviour
Complaints to the Metropolitan Police came from all parts of the globe – which was unsurprising given the global nature of Britain’s colonial possessions. Detective Inspector Marshall said that ‘in consequence of numerous complaints by colonial visitors to London the Commissioner of Police had ordered inquiries into the prisoner’s employer’s business.’[1] When the police initially began their investigation Baron quite firmly said, ‘I know nothing about it, it must have been my manager, Cline, and he has put the money in his own pocket; I have got two shops to look after.’[2]
It was reported that ‘if customers wore hats of foreign or colonial make and seemed to be strangers to London, they were invited to have their teeth cleaned.’[3] Likely victims were selected by checking the makers’ addresses in their hats or by asking seemingly innocent questions about the weather in their part of the world. Victims Duncan Cerar and James Arthur Nash were visiting from Glasgow were charged 35s for having their teeth scaled. Aubrey Taunton Eton was a local theological student from Stephney who was charged £6 10s for teeth cleaning. Among the global customers of Barron for teeth cleaning, included Benjamin Prince, a timber merchant from Canada who was charged £4, and Chengalath Krishna Menon, a lecturer at the Madras College of Agriculture who was charged £2. At the end of their investigation the police had a list of over 100 victims.[4]
Baron was charged, alongside his accomplice Henry William Browett with ‘conspiring with others to obtain money by false pretences.’[5] One of their victims Albert Anstell referred to Baron and Browett as ‘the biggest frauds in London.’[6]
Later it was revealed that despite claims from Baron’s assistants that he was a qualified dentist, Baron was in fact impersonating another dentist Dr Edward James Bromley, who was a registered dentist under the Dental Act 1875. Baron was introduced to Bromley by another dentist Dr Rosenberg. Baron offered to put up a show case of Bromley’s practice in each of his shops so that he might send clients to Bromley. Baron was to have a commission on any business he introduced to Bromley, but he was not authorised to represent Bromley in any way. Baron never sent any customers to Bromley and operated his shops under the alias ‘Dr Bromley.’ In the aftermath of Baron’s arrest, Bromley had no knowledge that Baron was in the habit of impersonating him nor that he was engaged in the business of a dentist.[7] Interestingly, one of the victims, Reverend William Coleman Williams, who was charged 15s for two minutes of having his teeth scraped was told by Browett that he ‘was a professional dentist from Vienna.’[8] When questioned about his dental qualifications, Baron later admits that he had none.[9]
[1] Glasgow Evening Post, 28 October 1895.
[2] Old Bailey Proceedings, 18th November 1895, https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?name=18951118 [Accessed August 2022].
[3] Leominster News and North West Hertfordshire and Radnorshire Advertiser, 11 October 1895.
[4] Eastern Evening News, 28 October 1895.
[5] Old Bailey Proceedings, 18th November 1895, https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?name=18951118 [Accessed August 2022].
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.
In this exhibition
- Artistic Representations of the Strand by Theo Roberts
- Horological Culture
- The London Burkers
- The Demon Dentist’
- The operation
- Fraudulent behaviour
- Victims accounts from the Old Bailey
- Representations in popular culture
- Gender Performance on the Strand
- Female agency on the Strand
- Strand Life in Trade-cards and Receipts
- Exhibition Bibliography