I came upon another court case in the yellowed pages of an old newspaper the other day – one that, just like the appearances by the likes of Tottie Fay and Shiner Bob, made me wish I could have been a fly on the wall in the court – or at least sat in the public gallery.

Just by way of a brief explanation, Lord John Russell, the subject of this article (well, to be precise his hat was the actual subject) was a major political figure of the 19th century, who held numerous high offices of State, including serving two periods as Prime Minister.

However, the following story, which appeared in The Kendal Mercury on Saturday the 17th of February 1838, was actually about his hat, rather than about him, and I am unable to provide even the briefest biography of said apparel as it, outrageously, doesn’t have a Wikipedia page:-

LORD JOHN RUSSELL’S HAT

On Wednesday, a poor woman named Mary Ann Blay, who stated that she was residing in Limehouse, applied to Mr. Ballantine and Mr Broderip, the Thames Police magistrates, to request their interference under very odd circumstances.

The applicant stated that about three or four months ago she was on her way home from Poplar, where she had been purchasing some vegetables, when she saw something black lying on the ground, opposite the house of Mr Tardell, the butcher.

She first supposed that it was a piece of coal; but, on stooping to pick it up, she discovered that it was a hat.

ARRESTED BY A POLICEMAN

She walked onwards with the hat in her right hand until she reached the Commercial-road, when she was met by a policeman, who asked where she had got the hat.

She informed him that she had picked it up at the corner of the New Road, and the policeman looked at it, and saw the name of Lord John Russell in the inside.

He demanded the hat of her, and, on her refusing to give it up to him, he seized the hat, and took her into custody.

She was locked up in the station-house, and on the following morning was brought before the sitting magistrates at that office.

SHE WAS DISCHARGED

The justice, after hearing the policeman’s statement, directed her to be discharged, and gave orders that the hat should be detained for a certain time in the station-house, and if no owner was discovered that it should be given up to her.

HOW DID HE LOSE HIS HAT?

She had since made repeated inquiries of the police respecting the hat, but could obtain no information from them, nor any redress for the false imprisonment she had suffered.

Mr Ballantine asked the applicant if she was sure that the hat belonged to Lord John Russell?

The woman said that there had been a white bait cabinet dinner at Mr Lovegrove’s West India Dock tavern, at Blackwall, on the night she found the hat, and that Lord John Russell was one of the party.

Mr Ballantine:- “Well, I don’t understand how his lordship could lose his hat at the corner of New Road.”

The applicant said that it was supposed that Lord John Russell put his head out of his carriage window, and looked back to see if his friends were following him, when his hat fell off his head, and as he was a lord he would not stop until it was picked up again (laughter.)

TO WHOM DOES THE HAT BELONG?

Mr. Ballantine:- “What do you want me to do in the matter?”

The applicant said that she wanted to know to whom the hat belonged.

Mr Ballantine:- “Why, I should say it belonged to Lord John Russell.”

SUBJECTED TO SUCH TYRANNY!

The woman said that the hat was worth a guinea, and that if she had accepted five shillings from the policeman and given it up to him, he would have taken her into custody.

She thought it was very hard to be subject to such tyranny, because she had picked up Lord John Russell’s hat, for she had done no harm to the owner of it (a laugh.)

EATING AND DRINKING MINISTERS

She supposed that Lord John Russell was in liquor, or he would have ordered his carriage to stop and would have picked up his hat (roars of laughter, in which the Magistrates could not help joining.)

“You may laugh,” said the woman, “but it’s all true what I say. The ministers don’t eat whitebait without drinking plenty of wine after it you may be sure.” (Increased laughter.) “I don’t know why the gentlemen laugh, I’m sure. I was locked up all night away from my husband and children.”

THE FACTS ESTABLISHED

Mr. Ballantine said that it was very singular that the woman could not recollect what night it was she picked up the hat, and the letter and number of the policeman who took her into custody.

The applicant said that she was too much alarmed at being locked up in the station-house, and brought before the magistrates, to recollect the night or the policeman’s identity.

A VERY ODD AFFAIR

Mr Ballantine said that it was a very odd affair, and he would direct the books to be searched in order to ascertain when the woman was brought before the Magistrates.

Soon afterwards, the woman was again called into the office, and Mr Ballantine said that it appeared from the minutes that she was brought before him on Tuesday the 3rd of October last, on suspicion of stealing, and that the policeman said that he stopped her at two o’clock in the morning, with the hat in her possession.

It also appeared that he had discharged her, but no mention was made of the hat belonging to Lord John Russell. If that fact had been mentioned to him, he should have ordered the hat to be restored to him immediately.

THE END OF THE AFFAIR

The Applicant:– “I am sure it is his lordship’s hat; there is Lord John Russell inside of it quite plain: it’s a new one.”

Mr Ballantine:- “Very well; an inquiry should be made about the hat, and we will let you know what has become. I think Lord John Russell has the best claim to the hat, if he has not a’ready got it.”