The dog-thieves and the detective

One 1860s detective was tasked with finding a marquis' dog after it went missing on a walk...

It was 11 November 1867. The Marquess of Graham - James, the 20-year-old son of the Duke of Montrose - was walking down Duke Street, in London's St James' district, an area popular with dog-walkers. And the marquis was one of them, walking with his little black and tan colly dog, smart in his collar with the marquis' name and address on it. The marquess got distracted, and suddenly noticed that his colly was no longer with him. The dog was lost.

After James Graham’s early death in 1872, his younger brother Douglas, pictured, took his title of Marquess of Graham, and later became the Duke of Montrose on his father’s death

After several weeks, the marquess was desperate. He decided to employ a private detective to locate his lost dog, and chose 30-year-old James Avis Tucker as his private eye. James was originally from Harlington in Middlesex. By 1861, he was living in Soho, and working as a shoemaker. He had married Matilda Unwin in Clerkenwell in 1863, and by 1865, he had become a private inquiry agent, working from his home in Haymarket. Although from a humble background, James was an intelligent man with beautiful handwriting, and wanted to do a more interesting job than cobbling. By 1867, he had moved house again, settling at 9 Palace Street in Pimlico, and it is at this address that he was commissioned by the marquis to find his dog.

On 7 January 1868, nearly two months after the dog was lost, James Tucker turned up at his employer's house, with the marquis's dog in his arms. He appeared to be fit and well. He had tracked down two suspects: Thomas Atherton and John Barratt. Barratt was a shoemaker so may have been known to Tucker through his former occupation - Atherton was a known dog dealer. Tucker had paid the men £5 to receive the dog back.

Haymarket: former home of detective James Tucker, and close to where the marquess’s dog was stolen (image by The Lud)

The men were charged for corruptly receiving the money from Tucker; the prosecution argued that the dog had simply been lost (either because it was a country dog that was not used to London roads(!) or that he was trying to find a bitch to mate with and so had run off from his owner). They also alleged that Tucker, the main witness on whose evidence the 'entire case rested', 'was not to be believed'. Luckily for Tucker, however, both of the accused had track records in dog-stealing, with Barrett having been known to the courts since 1840 for similar offences, and having served three years for dog-stealing previously. Both men were found guilty: Barrett received 18 months' hard labour, and Atherton 12 months.

James Avis Tucker stopped work as a private inquiry agent shortly afterwards. His wife made waistcoats for a living, and James now joined her, the couple working from home as waistcoat makers and tailors - joined by their married only child, Matilda - until James's death in 1908. The censuses make no mention of James's career as a private detective, as it began after the 1861 census was taken, and finished before the 1871 census. However, other records show that he was working as such between 1865 and 1868, and that in 1866, he gave evidence in another case, where three medical students were charged with 'acting in a riotous manner' at the seven-year-old London Pavilion Music Hall.

His three year career shows how individuals from all backgrounds could make a living as a private detective, facing character assassinations in court, but, conversely, able to get commissions from those at the other end of the social ladder to them. It seems that James was able to use his connections and his knowledge of central London to track down dog thieves, but that he ultimately decided that this way of life was not for him.