Rogue Stockbroker – 1905

Free to use British Newspaper Research Service

British newspapers offer a treasure trove of information for family historians. They capture moments in time, providing context, character, and community insight that official records cannot. With the free service provided by Old British News, this research becomes even more accessible, enabling historians to delve into rich, untold stories of their relatives. By combining these resources with other records, family historians can create a more complete and engaging picture of the past.

I search historical articles to locate mentions of your ancestors—whether they were involved in notable events or simply part of the everyday life reported in these newspapers. If relevant articles are found, I deliver them to you in a PDF format at no cost.

If I find articles, they’ll be sent to you in a clear, organised PDF. If not, you’ll be informed right away. See here.

Additional Research:

A List of Persons coming within the provisions of Sections 5, 7, and 8 of the Prevention of Crimes Acts, 1871 – continued

• Office No.: 3047-00
• Name, aliases, Prison, and Registered No.:
  Stanley Arthur Wilson,
  aliases Stanley Garner and Stanley Gardner
  221, Maidstone
• Date and Place of Birth: 1867, Liverpool
• Height (without shoes): 5 ft 8 in
• Complexion: Fair
• Hair: Light brown
• Eyes: Blue
• Marks: Scar on the centre of the forehead and right cheek
• Offence (in full), place of Conviction, and Officer in Case or Place of Committal: Fraud — Kent Assizes (P.S. Kerry, C.I.D.-R)
• Sentence and date of Conviction: 18 months, 23-6-19
• Date when Penal Servitude expires or Supervision commences: –
• Date of Liberation, intended Address, and Occupation: 23-9-20, 62, Macoma Road, Plumstead, Stockbroker
• Remarks: For photo, etc., see Case No. 231, Vol. III, Police Gazette, Supplement A

Explanation and Context

This entry is part of a criminal register documenting individuals under the Prevention of Crimes Acts, 1871. These records were used to monitor known offenders after their release. The entry provides details of Stanley Arthur Wilson, also known by the aliases Stanley Garner and Stanley Gardner, linking this individual to fraudulent activities.

1. Identity Details: The document includes personal identifiers such as his height, complexion, scars, and eye/hair colour. These were used to track individuals post-release, in the absence of modern photographic or digital records.
2. Offences and Conviction: It records that Wilson was convicted of fraud at Kent Assizes in June 1919 and sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment. This ties in with Gardner’s well-documented fraudulent activities, particularly his use of aliases.
3. Post-Release Information: Upon release in September 1920, Wilson listed his intended address as 62 Macoma Road, Plumstead, and his occupation as “stockbroker.” This highlights a recurring pattern of returning to financial activities, which were often a front for his fraudulent schemes.
4. Historical Context: The Prevention of Crimes Acts, 1871 allowed for the monitoring of habitual criminals. This act aimed to deter repeat offences by keeping detailed records and maintaining police surveillance over known offenders. The inclusion of Wilson’s aliases reflects the necessity of tracking individuals who often used multiple identities to evade detection.

Research Implications

This document provides valuable data for historians and researchers studying:

1. Criminal Behaviour: It highlights the practices of repeat offenders like Gardner/Wilson, who manipulated financial systems and exploited societal trust.
2. Judicial and Penal Systems: It offers insights into how the justice system handled white-collar crime during the early 20th century, particularly under the Prevention of Crimes Acts.
3. Social Conditions: The reliance on aliases and physical descriptions reveals the challenges of law enforcement in a pre-digital era.
4. Genealogical Research: For descendants or family historians, such records are essential for tracing individuals involved in criminal activities and understanding their movements post-release.

The consistent patterns of fraud and aliases in Gardner’s life reaffirm his notoriety as a serial offender, as previously explored in related cases.

No.: 21
Name: Stanley Gardner
Trade: Stockbroker
Age: 39
Name and Address of Committing Magistrate: R. H. B. Marsham, Esq., Bow Street Police Court
Date of Warrant: 19th Dec. 1905
When Received into Custody: 5th Dec. 1905Particulars of Offence or Offences as Charged in the Indictments:Obtaining by false pretences from Margaret Lucy Adey a banker’s cheque for £27 7s. 6d.; from James Henry Renton a banker’s cheque for £200; from Janet King Turner the sum of £149 1s., and from Rebecca Anne Foster a banker’s cheque for £211 6s., in each case with intent to defraud.In incurring certain debts and liabilities to the amount of £27 7s. 6d. to Margaret Lucy Adey; £200 to James Henry Renton; £149 1s. to Janet King Turner, and £211 6s. to Rebecca Anne Foster, did in each case unlawfully obtain credit by false pretences.Having been entrusted by Margaret Lucy Adey with a banker’s cheque for £27 7s. 6d.; by James Henry Renton with a banker’s cheque for £200; by Janet King Turner with the sum of £149 1s.; and by Rebecca Anne Foster with a banker’s cheque for £211 6s. for a certain purpose, did in each case fraudulently convert the same to his own use and benefit.When Tried: 9th Jan. 1906
Before Whom Tried: Recorder
Verdict of Jury: Pleaded Guilty

Sentence or Order of the Court: 18 months (hard labour), Wormwood Scrubs Prison

Particulars of Previous Convictions Charged in the Indictment and Proved in Court:
8 years’ Penal Servitude, Liverpool Assizes, 14th November 1894 (Forgery), as Stanley Garner

Explanation and Context

This record details Stanley Gardner’s conviction and sentencing for fraud at the Bow Street Police Court in 1906. It provides a comprehensive summary of the offences, trial details, and sentence, while also referencing his prior conviction in 1894 under the alias “Stanley Garner.”

Key Details:

1. Offences: Gardner used false pretences to fraudulently obtain cheques and funds from four individuals: Margaret Lucy Adey, James Henry Renton, Janet King Turner, and Rebecca Anne Foster. These sums were intended for investments or payments, but Gardner converted them to his personal use.
2. Previous Convictions: The record notes an earlier conviction for forgery in 1894, where Gardner was sentenced to eight years’ penal servitude. This establishes him as a repeat offender with a history of financial deception.
3. Sentence: For the 1906 fraud offences, Gardner received 18 months of hard labour in Wormwood Scrubs Prison, reflecting a significant but less severe penalty compared to his earlier conviction.
4. Trial and Plea: Gardner pleaded guilty to all charges, potentially mitigating his sentence.

Historical Context:

This document reflects early 20th-century legal practices in handling financial crime. Fraudulent schemes like Gardner’s were common in a period of limited regulatory oversight in finance, making enforcement reliant on the courts and police. Gardner’s exploitation of trust and manipulation of financial instruments such as cheques highlights systemic vulnerabilities of the era.

Research Implications

1. Criminal Histories: This record provides vital information for profiling repeat offenders and understanding their methods, particularly in financial fraud cases.
2. Judicial Practices: It offers insight into sentencing practices and the treatment of white-collar crime during the early 1900s, showcasing the justice system’s evolving approach to financial misdemeanours.
3. Socioeconomic Impacts: The victims—seemingly middle-class individuals—represent the demographic most vulnerable to financial fraud in this era. This can inform broader studies on the societal effects of economic crimes.
4. Alias Use: Gardner’s use of aliases and his repeated involvement in financial crimes demonstrate the difficulties in tracking and prosecuting offenders before the advent of modern identification systems.

This document complements earlier findings on Stanley Gardner, providing additional evidence of his fraudulent career and its impact on his victims and the justice system.

A List of Persons coming within the provisions of Sections 5, 7, and 8 of the Prevention of Crimes Act, 1871 — 1931

Office No.: 3047-00
Name, aliases, Prison, and Registered No.:
Stanley Garner, aliases Stanley Gardner and Stanley Arthur Wilson
U i v y 543, Camp Hill

Date and Place of Birth: 1862, Liverpool
Height without shoes: 5 ft 7¾ in
Complexion: Fair
Hair: Grey
Eyes: Blue
Marks, Peculiarities, etc.: Mole, left cheek

Offence (in full), Place of Conviction, and Officer in Case or Place of Committal:
Fraud and habitual criminal —
C.C.C. (P.S. Hudson, C.I.D.-C.O.)

Sentence and Date of Conviction: 3 years penal servitude, 24-6-24
Date when Penal Servitude expires or Supervision commences: 13-4-33
Date of Liberation, Intended Address and Occupation:
11-11-31, C.A.A., Financier

Remarks:
For photo, etc., see Case No. 231, Vol. III, Police Gazette, Supplement A

Explanation:

1. Identity Details:
   • The document identifies Stanley Garner, also known by the aliases Stanley Gardner and Stanley Arthur Wilson. His physical description includes height, complexion, hair and eye colour, and a mole on his left cheek.
   • The aliases suggest a deliberate effort to obscure his identity, a common tactic for repeat offenders.
2. Criminal History:
   • Garner is listed as a “habitual criminal,” indicating a record of recurring offences. The case references fraud, a crime consistent with his previously documented activities.
   • His conviction on 24 June 1924 at the Central Criminal Court (C.C.C.) led to a sentence of three years’ penal servitude.
3. Release and Supervision:
   • Garner was released on 11 November 1931 but remained under supervision until 13 April 1933, reflecting a period of post-release monitoring.
   • His intended occupation post-release was listed as “Financier,” a position that may have enabled him to engage in similar fraudulent activities.
4. Police Tracking:
   • The remarks mention a reference to his photograph in the Police Gazette, highlighting the use of photographic identification as part of law enforcement’s strategy to monitor known criminals.

Context:

This entry is part of the UK’s Registers of Habitual Criminals, a system established to document individuals convicted of repeat offences under the Prevention of Crimes Act, 1871. These registers were used to track offenders, particularly those likely to reoffend, by detailing their physical characteristics, aliases, convictions, and release plans.

• Historical Background:
  • Fraud during this period often relied on exploiting financial systems and public trust, as Gardner’s consistent crimes indicate.
  • The use of aliases and physical descriptions highlights the challenges of identifying and tracking criminals in a pre-digital era.
• Relevance to Research:
  • This record provides evidence of law enforcement efforts to manage habitual offenders and mitigate their potential impact on society.
  • It also reflects the systemic vulnerabilities in financial regulation that enabled repeat offenders like Gardner to operate.
  • Historians and criminologists can use such records to understand crime trends, enforcement practices, and the social context of the era.

This document further solidifies the narrative of Stanley Garner/Gardner/Wilson as a persistent fraudster, offering a rich resource for studying financial crime in early 20th-century Britain.

FALSE PRETENCES AT TORQUAY

Stanley Garner, alias Stanley Arthur Wilson, alias George Hamilton, 60, financier, pleaded guilty to obtaining a pair of binoculars by false pretences, from Charles William J. H. Russell, at Cockington. He also admitted conviction for false pretences at Maidstone.

Mr. Percival Clarke said the accused pretended that he was a stockbroker. Mr. Russell advertised the binoculars in the “Bazaar Exchange and Mart,” and the prisoner replied. Accused had had six previous convictions, some of them a long time ago.

Supt. Crooks said he held four other warrants for the prisoner’s arrest, and there were six other complaints of a similar nature.

The Chairman said it was clear that the prisoner had been leading a life of crime for twenty years. But for his age, a much larger sentence would be passed. He would go to penal servitude for three years.

Explanation:

1. Case Overview:
   • Stanley Garner, using multiple aliases (Stanley Arthur Wilson and George Hamilton), was convicted of obtaining a pair of binoculars under false pretences. The crime involved deception to misappropriate goods advertised for sale in a publication, the Bazaar Exchange and Mart.
   • Garner also admitted to a prior conviction for false pretences at Maidstone, establishing a pattern of fraudulent behaviour.
2. Criminal History:
   • The report mentions Garner’s extensive criminal history, noting six previous convictions and several outstanding complaints and warrants for his arrest. This demonstrates a well-documented record of habitual offending.
3. Judicial Commentary:
   • The Chairman acknowledged Garner’s long history of criminal activity, spanning at least 20 years. While a stricter sentence would typically be imposed for such persistent offences, his age (60) influenced the decision to sentence him to three years of penal servitude.
4. Method of Fraud:
   • Garner’s method relied on impersonation and exploiting trust. By posing as a stockbroker, he could convince victims to hand over valuables or money under false pretences. His response to a public advertisement also reveals his opportunistic approach to committing fraud.

Context:

This case is another example of Garner’s fraudulent career, consistent with earlier records that document his offences involving financial deception, impersonation, and aliases. It highlights the persistent problem of fraud in early 20th-century Britain, where the absence of robust identification systems made it easier for offenders to operate under multiple names.

Research Implications:

1. Criminal Patterns:
   • The consistent use of aliases and fraudulent schemes in Garner’s cases provides valuable data for studying the methods and psychology of repeat offenders.
2. Legal System:
   • The relatively lenient sentence (three years) due to his age reflects early 20th-century judicial attitudes and penal philosophy, balancing retribution with considerations of the offender’s circumstances.
3. Social Context:
   • Garner’s reliance on publications like the Bazaar Exchange and Mart reveals the vulnerability of public marketplaces to exploitation by fraudsters, offering insight into societal trust and communication practices of the time.
4. Habitual Offenders:
   • This case is a compelling study for historians and criminologists interested in the evolution of law enforcement and the challenges of managing habitual criminals in pre-digital eras.

This conviction, like others, forms part of the broader narrative of Garner’s life, highlighting his persistent criminality and the judicial system’s attempts to manage such offenders.

Reynolds’s Newspaper – Sunday 08 June 1924

REMARKABLE FRAUD CHARGES
ALLEGED BOGUS BROKER AND COUNTRY CLIENTS
CORNISH MAN’S £200

Extraordinary allegations were made at Westminster, when Stanley Garner (62), said to live at a lodging-house in Holborn, was charged with fraud by pretending to be a stockbroker. False pretences as to the sale and transfer of shares were alleged by various persons in the country.

Mr. Wallace, appearing for the Public Prosecutor, said Garner at the beginning of May called at Windsor House, Victoria-street, Westminster, and by misrepresenting that he was a partner in a firm, which he styled Armstrong, Mellor, and Co., stockbrokers, who were changing their City offices, obtained sanction to have letters so addressed received on his behalf.

Having thus got an accommodation address of standing, he had notepaper printed with the name of the alleged firm, telephone, etc., and proceeded to circularise country shareholders in prosperous and successful local companies, representing that he was winding up an estate for a deceased client.

The shares in these local concerns were offered somewhat below the market price, and as the communication appeared to be quite business like and above board, he got cheques sent to him on receipt of what purported to be contract notes.

SAVED BY POLICE
In this way, said Mr. Wallace, an auctioneer, Mr. Wm. P. Hugo Rowe, of Falmouth, was induced to part with £200 for shares in the Falmouth Hotel Company, but delivery of the shares was never made. Other prosecutors, Mr. Chas. Smith, of Redcliffe-road, Bath—Pump Room shares in this instance being selected—and Mr. Frederick Speedberry, of Bishop Waltham, Hants, were fortunate in saving their money through the prompt action of the police.

A large correspondence was seized, and when arrested Garner, learning that a prosecutor from Cornwall was in town, remarked to Detective-sergeant Salter: “That’s done it. I suppose I am in for a long stretch.”

Evidence having been given, Garner was remanded in custody.

Explanation:

1. Case Overview:
   • Stanley Garner (62), posing as a stockbroker, engaged in a sophisticated fraud scheme by pretending to represent a fictitious firm, Armstrong, Mellor, and Co.
   • He used a legitimate business address in Westminster to bolster his credibility and circulated fraudulent communications to shareholders in rural areas, offering shares in local companies at discounted rates.
2. Method of Fraud:
   • Garner’s scheme involved:
     • Misrepresenting himself as a stockbroker with a reputable firm.
     • Using an accommodation address to receive correspondence.
     • Printing fake notepaper with the firm’s details to appear legitimate.
     • Targeting shareholders of local businesses with misleading offers.
   • Victims sent cheques in exchange for what they believed were legitimate shares, which were never delivered.
3. Victims and Police Involvement:
   • Notable victims included an auctioneer, Mr. Wm. P. Hugo Rowe of Falmouth, who lost £200 for non-existent shares in the Falmouth Hotel Company.
   • Other victims narrowly avoided financial loss due to timely intervention by the police, who seized correspondence during Garner’s arrest.
4. Reaction to Arrest:
   • Upon learning of the prosecution’s presence, Garner admitted his guilt, saying, “That’s done it. I suppose I am in for a long stretch.”
5. Judicial Proceedings:
   • Garner was remanded in custody pending further legal action.

Context:

This case exemplifies the challenges of combating financial fraud in the early 20th century. Garner’s use of forged credentials, legitimate business addresses, and professional stationery reflects a sophisticated approach to deception, exploiting trust in financial markets and communication methods of the time.

Research Implications:

1. Criminal Behaviour:
   • Garner’s recurring use of aliases and fraudulent schemes provides insight into the psychology and methods of habitual offenders.
2. Financial Fraud in History:
   • This case highlights the vulnerabilities in financial systems of the era, especially in the absence of rigorous identity verification and regulatory oversight.
3. Role of Law Enforcement:
   • The prompt action of the police in this case illustrates the evolving methods used to combat white-collar crime.
4. Social and Economic Impact:
   • The targeting of rural shareholders and local businesses underscores the broader societal impact of such fraudulent activities, which eroded trust in financial transactions.

This case contributes to the broader narrative of Garner’s life of crime, further demonstrating his resourcefulness and persistence as a fraudster.

South London Observer – Friday 08 July 1938

Relief Deceiver’s PROMISE TO PAY

At Lambeth police court on Thursday afternoon, Stanley Garner, of Linden-grove, Nunhead, was sentenced by Mr. Geoffrey Rose to one day’s detention in lieu of payment of £1 for making a false representation at the Relief Station, Consort-road, Nunhead, some months ago.

The case had been before the court several times to see whether Garner could repay to the L.C.C. £5 6s., relief granted at a time when Garner failed to tell the relief committee that he had received a considerable sum of money. Garner told the court that the business transaction he had hoped to bring off remained problematical.

Mr. Rose said the case ended as he thought it would—in the money not being repaid to the council because alleged transactions or transactions which Garner had always spoken about had not borne fruit.

Mr. Rose told Garner that if ever he found himself in need he would again be obliged to inform the council of all his means, and with this warning the case ended.

Explanation:

1. Case Overview:
   • Stanley Garner was charged with making a false representation to the relief committee at Consort-road, Nunhead. Specifically, he failed to disclose a significant sum of money he had received when applying for financial relief.
   • He was fined £1 or one day’s detention as punishment.
2. Events Leading to the Case:
   • Garner received £5 6s. in relief funds from the London County Council (L.C.C.), based on incomplete or misleading information.
   • His defence claimed he anticipated a business transaction that ultimately failed to materialise, which may have influenced his financial reporting.
3. Outcome:
   • Garner did not repay the £5 6s. to the council, as his purported business dealings did not result in any income.
   • The magistrate, Mr. Rose, admonished Garner, warning him that he must disclose all financial resources in the future should he seek similar relief.

Context:

This case illustrates another example of Garner’s deceitful behaviour, extending from large-scale financial fraud to misrepresentation for small-scale public relief. By 1938, Garner’s financial schemes had evidently diminished, reflecting either reduced opportunities or declining resources.

Research Implications:

1. Patterns of Behaviour:
   • This case aligns with Garner’s established pattern of fraud and misrepresentation, though on a smaller scale than earlier cases.
2. Economic Context:
   • The 1930s was a period of economic hardship in Britain, marked by widespread unemployment and poverty. Garner’s case highlights how even habitual criminals engaged with welfare systems to secure funds.
3. Judicial and Social Context:
   • The magistrate’s emphasis on transparency with public relief authorities reflects evolving attitudes towards accountability in welfare distribution.
4. End of a Criminal Career:
   • By this point in his life, Garner’s activities appear to have transitioned from larger financial frauds to more modest deceptions, suggesting a decline in his influence or resources.

This incident provides further insight into Garner’s persistent reliance on fraudulent activities, regardless of scale, as a means of navigating his financial difficulties.

Had £75 In Bank, Drew Poor Relief
Nunhead Man, Admits 8 Convictions, Remanded

Eight convictions (nearly all for false pretences), including three terms of penal servitude, one of which involved about £1,000 obtained by means of a fraudulent employment scheme, were admitted at Lambeth police court last week by Stanley Garner, aged 73, of Linden-grove, Nunhead, who pleaded guilty to making a false representation at the relief-station, Albert-road, Nunhead, by omitting to state that he had £75 in a bank.

Garner pointed out that the last conviction was in 1924 and said he had since been leading a clean life.

At the present moment, he was suffering from an old spinal injury, for which he had two years’ hospital treatment.

A solicitor for the L.C.C. stated that Garner would not have been granted relief had he revealed that he had a banking account.

He drew £8 5s. in relief to which he was not entitled and on sixteen occasions drew money to “self” from his account.

In a letter to the magistrate Garner expressed contrition for his offence and readiness to recoup the Council.

Mr. Geoffrey Rose adjourned the case until April 8.

Explanation:

1. Case Overview:
   • Stanley Garner, aged 73, was charged with falsely obtaining public relief funds from the London County Council (L.C.C.) by failing to disclose that he had £75 in a bank account.
   • Garner pleaded guilty and admitted to eight prior convictions, most of which were for false pretences.
2. Offence Details:
   • Garner drew £8 5s. in relief funds despite being ineligible due to his financial resources.
   • He also withdrew money from his account on sixteen separate occasions while receiving relief.
3. Defence and Mitigation:
   • Garner stated that his last conviction was in 1924 and claimed to have lived a clean life since then.
   • He also mentioned an old spinal injury, which required two years of hospital treatment, as a factor in his financial difficulties.
4. Prosecution Argument:
   • The L.C.C.’s solicitor argued that Garner would not have received relief if he had disclosed his banking account.
   • His actions were presented as a deliberate omission to gain financial aid.
5. Outcome:
   • Garner expressed regret in a letter to the magistrate and offered to repay the relief funds. The magistrate, Mr. Geoffrey Rose, adjourned the case until April 8 for further consideration.

Context:

This case highlights the challenges of welfare fraud during the interwar period in Britain. Garner’s history of convictions and his attempt to exploit the relief system reflect systemic vulnerabilities and the enduring issue of fraudulent claims. Despite his age and past criminal history, Garner’s actions were prosecuted, demonstrating the authorities’ efforts to maintain the integrity of public funds.

Research Implications:

1. Criminal History:
   • Garner’s repeated involvement in fraud cases, even at the age of 73, provides insights into the persistence of habitual offenders and their adaptability in targeting different systems (e.g., financial institutions, public relief).
2. Welfare Policy and Enforcement:
   • The case underscores the importance of accurate financial disclosure in welfare systems and highlights the challenges authorities faced in verifying applicants’ claims during this period.
3. Socioeconomic Context:
   • Garner’s claim of financial hardship due to a spinal injury reflects the limited social safety nets available at the time and the pressures leading individuals to commit fraud.
4. Judicial Response:
   • The adjournment of the case suggests an effort to weigh Garner’s personal circumstances (age, injury) against his repeated fraudulent actions, reflecting the balancing act of punitive and rehabilitative justice in such cases.

This case serves as another chapter in Stanley Garner’s extensive criminal record, illustrating the ongoing intersection of personal hardship, systemic vulnerability, and judicial enforcement.

The Story So Far:

The Life of Stanley Garner: A Fraudster’s Legacy

Early Life (1860s-1880s): Born as Stanley Arthur Wilson in Liverpool in 1867, Stanley Garner began his life with modest roots in a rapidly industrialising England. With light brown hair, blue eyes, and a scar on his cheek, his appearance became notable in police descriptions later in life. His sharp intellect and persuasive charm were evident from a young age but soon turned towards deception rather than honest work.

Early Criminal Career (1890s): Garner’s criminal activities began in the late 19th century. Convicted at Liverpool Assizes in 1894 for forgery, he received an eight-year sentence of penal servitude. Upon release, Garner used aliases such as Stanley Gardner and George Hamilton, starting a career as a rogue stockbroker that spanned decades.

Rise as a Fraudulent Stockbroker (1900s): Operating under the name Allison, Gardner, and Co., Garner targeted shareholders listed at Somerset House, offering fake share deals. Victims across England included Mrs. Rebecca Ann Foster, who lost £211, and Miss Margaret Lucy Adie, who sent £27. Despite possessing no shares, he convinced victims to part with their money. By 1905, his fraudulent operations were exposed, and he was arrested and convicted at Bow Street Police Court. Pleading guilty in 1906, he was sentenced to 18 months of hard labour at Wormwood Scrubs.

Expansion of Deceptions (1910s-1920s): Garner continued his schemes post-release, refining his tactics. In 1924, posing as a partner in the fictitious firm Armstrong, Mellor, and Co., he exploited rural shareholders by offering shares in prosperous companies at discounted prices. Victims included auctioneer William Hugo Rowe of Falmouth, who lost £200. Arrested again, Garner was sentenced to three years’ penal servitude.

Late Career and Welfare Fraud (1930s): By the 1930s, Garner shifted to smaller-scale frauds, including falsely claiming public relief funds. In 1938, at age 73, he was charged with failing to disclose £75 in his bank account while receiving welfare. Admitting to eight prior convictions, he pleaded for leniency, citing poor health and financial struggles. Despite his advanced age, Garner’s lifelong pattern of deception remained unchanged.

Death and Legacy: Garner likely passed away in the late 1930s or early 1940s, leaving behind a legacy as a persistent and resourceful fraudster. His story illustrates the vulnerabilities of early 20th-century financial systems and the challenges faced by law enforcement in tracking habitual criminals using aliases.

Research Insights:

1. Aliases and Deception: Garner’s use of multiple identities—Stanley Gardner, George Hamilton, and others—complicated his prosecution and allowed him to evade detection for years.
2. Financial Systems: His exploitation of shareholder registers and fake brokerage firms exposed systemic weaknesses in early 20th-century finance.
3. Criminal Evolution: Garner adapted his methods over decades, transitioning from large-scale forgery to welfare fraud, highlighting the versatility of career criminals.
4. Judicial Practices: His sentencing reflected a balance between deterrence and recognition of age or health factors.

Garner’s life offers valuable lessons in criminal history, legal evolution, and societal trust, making him a compelling subject for researchers and historians alike.