ONCE SCOTLAND YARD’S Crime Museum had been established, it rapidly became a popular place to visit for those both within and outside the Metropolitan Police. Because it has always been a private museum located within the secure perimeter of the Scotland Yard building, there have invariably been difficulties in granting all the requests to visit, even for some police officers. However, distinguished and famous people have visited and recorded their names in the Visitors’ Book.
Several members of the Royal Family have seen the museum, such as the Prince of Wales, later King Edward VII, Princess Diana, and most recently, the Duke of Cambridge. The King and Queen of Belgium both signed the book. Arthur Conan Doyle no doubt gained more inspiration for his Sherlock Holmes stories than did Gilbert and Sullivan for their light operas. The museum was, in fact, mentioned in passing in ‘The Adventure of the Empty House’ published in The Strand magazine, in October 1903, when Holmes concludes the case by saying, ‘The famous airgun of Von Herder will embellish the Scotland Yard museum.’ Jerome K. Jerome attended with E.W. Hornung, who later published tales of the cracksman Raffles. Laurel and Hardy and the 1893 visiting Australian cricket team are recorded. One entry, in 1913, simply states ‘The Man Who Knows’, perhaps the famous mentalist Claude Alexander. Lloyd George gave his address as No. 11 Downing Street, whilst Stanley Baldwin simply wrote his address as Stourport. The signatures of famous barristers and judges appear, including the famous Travis Humphreys, who was involved in the cases of Dr Crippen, John Haigh and Oscar Wilde.
Perhaps, however, the most intriguing signature is that of Harry Houdini, the famous escapologist who would no doubt have been intrigued by the handcuffs on display. William Melville, the distinguished head of Special Branch, hosted Houdini’s visit to Scotland Yard in 1900. Houdini was apparently handcuffed in Melville’s office and given the prospect of joining his hosts for lunch if he could escape from his manacles in time. There is no doubt that courtesy and hospitality eventually prevailed for the lunchtime appointment, but the truth of whether Houdini had been able to escape from the handcuffs is now pure speculation. One interpretation of the incident, set out in The Secret Life of Houdini by William Kalush and Larry Sloman, was that the incident had been Melville’s way of testing Houdini’s character prior to his becoming an informant. Houdini travelled widely, spoke German and mixed with a wide variety of characters on an international basis. Being able to record ‘Scotland Yard’s astonishment’ about his ability to escape from custody created great publicity for Houdini’s career, and perhaps there was reciprocal assistance in Houdini providing information to Scotland Yard. If true, Houdini’s visit was not merely for his entertainment.
Around 1890, an officer involved with the museum wrote a report about its importance to the training of police officers, but the surviving page of the handwritten report breaks off in the middle of a lament:
The object of its original formation was for the purpose of instructing young constables as to the appearance of burgling tools, but it has since degenerated into a –
One may speculate about what the details of the unknown officer’s complaint would have been, but it may have been connected with the museum becoming part of the itinerary for important and influential visitors to New Scotland Yard’s fine new headquarters, such as the well-dressed ladies shown in one contemporary drawing. The issues about public access would have been the same as they are today and have also been taken into account in the production of this book.
In his annual report for 1951, Commissioner Sir Harold Scott stated:
Applications from members of the public for permission to visit Scotland Yard have always been numerous. A drawing in one of the illustrated weekly papers of the eighties shows a number of fashionably dressed ladies enjoying the sights of the ‘Black Museum’. But it has for many years been necessary to restrict visits almost entirely to police officers or other persons with a professional interest in police work.
The public have an interest in crime and it is important to understand what happens on the streets and how the police deal with it, but the museum needs to ensure that it is not feeding interests that may be merely prurient. Neither does it wish to create any inspiration whatsoever for those intent on illegal activities or to recreate the trauma suffered by victims of crime.