Charles Bailey

Charles Bailey was born about 1826 in Lambeth, London to Joseph and Jane Bailey. Nothing much is known of his early life other than that he grew with one brother, Henry, and five sisters, Elizabeth, Jane, Eliza, Louisa, and Emma Charles Bailey 3 convictions 2 April 1840 - Middlesex Westminster Sessions 3 months - Larceny Age 11 (should read 14) 3 July 1843 - Surrey County Adjourned sessions 6 months and whipped - Larceny Aged 16 7 Feb 1844 - Middlesex Westminster City Sessions 7 years transportation - Larceny Age 18 Convict no 2350 Arrived on the Marion (2) Departed from London 14/6/1845 Arrived VDL 16/9/1845 Conduct record CON 33/70 Indent CON 14/31 Description list CON 18/46 Appropriation list CON 27/11 Sentenced to seven years transportation for stealing cigars Application to marry Frances Stockdale - TAS Archive Office - 1849 Convict musters 1846 - 3rd class pass - Mr Dudsson Hobart 1849 - Ticket of Leave 1903 Electoral Roll Charles Bailey - Dealer Frances Bailey Charles Bailey (son) - Labourer Florence Bailey (daughter in law) 78 Perry St, Collingwood Death certificate states 2 years in Tasmania and 65 years in Victoria Witnesses to marriage were Thomas Beasmore and Jonas Howard - both convicts on the 'Isabella 2' - 1842 Charles Bailey arrived in Hobart in 1845 and was assigned to a work gang for the first year of his sentence in Tasmania. As a lathe and tool maker he was assigned to Mr Dudsson in Hobart according to the 1846 muster where he received a 3rd class pass. He received his Ticket of Leave on 7th December 1846. By 1848, it would seem he was working as a coachman in Hobart, possibly for Joseph Beesmore. His marriage certificate of 1849 listed his occupation as coachman. It was a volatile time in Hobart and cab drivers went on strike in 1848. Charles continued to find himself in trouble with the law on three further occasions in Hobart and was admonished on 15th April 1848 for fighting. He was again in trouble on 31 March 1849 for stealing money and property of Byron Robinson. There was a third incident on 27 April 1849 in Hobart for doing something malicious to a horse. It seems that some months were added to his sentence as a result of these incidents. Charles Bailey was freed by servitude on 14th January 1852. Prior to this time he had been working in Hobart for Joseph Beesmore as a coachman for a number of years. On receiving his freedom and thereby permission to leave the colony, I suspect he tried his luck on the Victorian goldfields for a time, based on two pieces of evidence. His insolvent hearing noted that he had left Hobart for Victoria some time prior to the court proceedings but was commended for returning to Hobart to resolve the insolvency case. Secondly, a steerage passenger, Charles Bailey, left Hobart for Melbourne on the 'Victoria' on the 24 January 1852 - this would have been 10 days after Charles Bailey had been declared free by servitude! The urgency is possibly explained by the 'goldfever' sweeping the Australian colonies as news of rich finds brought diggers from all over the world to try their luck. Charles seems not to have made his fortune but returned to Tasmania for a time where he continued to work as a coachman in Hobart. He was well known in the city of Hobart and a number of articles in the Hobart papers make reference to his driving. It is likely he drove a Hansom Cab. The coachman in these cabs were reknowned for fast and reckless driving. Charles was taken before a magistrate for “furious cab driving” in May 1853. 20 May 1853 Brown v Bailey - Furious cab driving Charles Bailey, free, driver of a cab, was charged by chief DC Brown with furious driving and endangering the life of one of her Majesty's subjects in violation of the act of Council. ... At between the hours of 3 and 4 pm on the 9th May near the cabstand on Murray Street, he saw Bailey drive up with his cab - that his (Mr MacDowell's) messenger George Turle, was just then passing with a wheelbarrow, when defendant wheeled around so suddenly and rapidly as to strike Turle with his horse and knocked him down, he however got up again immediately and reached his home, but not without difficulty... Bailey had told him (Mr Knight) that he would rather pay 100 pounds than injure George, to whom he bore no ill-will whatever; and he had, on the occasion in question, shouted to him to get out of the way, instead of which he started back, and thus incurred the injury complained of. Barely two months later, Charles was involved in a second major incident that was reported in the local papers. 25 June 1853 Last night a valuable cab horse, the property of Glazier (Glaysher) was killed at the corner of Collins and Harrington Streets, through the reckless driving of Charles Bailey, another cabman. The horse had his ribs broken by the pole of Bailey's cab. Glaysher took Charles Bailey to court over the incident. Based on the court case it would seem that while Charles had owned his own horses and cab after borrowing money from Joseph Beesmore, he had got into financial trouble and sold the horses and cab and was, at the time of the accident, driving for Joseph Beesmore. Or this is what Charles Bailey later wanted the Insolvency Court to believe! The magistrate found in favour of Charles Bailey but the issue didn't go away. Colonial Times 13 Sept 1853 Glaysher v Bailey - The parties are well known as cab proprietors and drivers in this city. Their cabs came in collision in the month of June last in Harrington Street and one of the plaintiffs horses was killed and his cab damaged. The action was brought to recover the damages this sustained which were laid at 200 pounds. Verdict for defendant. It would seem that Charles continued to endure financial problems that resulted in his arrest and appearance before the Insolvency Court on 9 March 1854. A meeting of creditors concluded the following: Joseph Glaysher, £91 Os 1d. for damages in an action for collision with his cab, and costs: Joseph Beezemore, £100 for cash lent, and board and lodging, for insolvent's wife; Thomas Self, £56 16s, hay and corn. Insolvent's assets consisted of his clothes only, valued at £5. Joseph Beezemore (Beesmore) was Charles' former employer and it is interesting that a witness at Charles' marriage also had the surname 'Beasmore'. The complication with the case seems to have been caused by the fact that insolvency proceedings had previously ordered Charles to file an account of receipts and expenditure for the last twelve months and in the meantime he had sold significant assets; the account stated, that the insolvent was possessed of a cab, but it belonged to Joseph Beesmore, during the early part of the said twelve months, he also had three horses in his possession, but for the last eight months or thereabouts he had only two horses. His household furniture and effects consisted of five chairs, two tables, a bedstead, some crockery, and sundries. Charles had sold the cab and two horses by auction by Mr D. Taylor, on the 6th September, 1853, a week before the accident. It would seem that he sold the assets before they could be repossessed by creditors. The commissioner at the Insolvency Court was unimpressed and stated “If the man was here under ordinary circumstances, so little am I satisfied with his transactions that I would not give him his discharge for some time; but now it would be calling on me to commit him; and if I were to do that, I would rather commit him for some offence: at present I do not see that he has violated any one of the sections in the Act ; although, as I said before, I am far from being satisfied with his accounts.” The commissioner ultimately relented and released Charles from custody. On the 25 November 1854 Charles Bailey was charged with being an idle and disorderly person with being concealed in the yard of Mr James house at Newtown at 11 o'clock at night with some unlawful intent. Mr James deposed to finding the defendant on his premises at the late hour mentioned, and stated that he must have got over the fence, he appeared to have been drinking but was not drunk at that time. He was sentenced to 3 months in the house of corrections. Having gone broke and sold his cab and horses, Charles and Fanny decided to make a fresh start in Melbourne and moved to Collingwood some time after 1854. Melbourne was a booming town full of opportunity and Charles and Fanny Bailey probably moved to Collingwood in early 1855 at the latest. He initially worked as a poulterer and was living in Perry Street Collingwood at the time of the 1856 Electoral Roll. That he appears on the roll indicates that he both owned his home freehold (likely purchased with money tucked away from the sale of the horses and cab!) and had been in Collingwood at least 12 months as these were requirements for being eligible to vote. He continued to live in Perry Street for the rest of his life where he worked as a dealer. Interestingly, Charles Bailey's death certificate states 2 years in Tasmania and 65 years in Victoria. This is obviously incorrect and seems an attempt to hide a convict past. It is true that Charles probably spent about two years in Tasmania as a free man at the conclusion of his sentence.