William HORSPOOL was born in Southwell, Nottinghamshire in 1850, the eldest son of Charles Horspool and Ann Alvey. William married Emily Poppleton in 1875 in Lincoln, England and emigrated to Australia in 1877 with their son Charles Alvey Horspool. They sailed aboard the Corona leaving the port of London bound for Sydney, New South Wales and arriving 25th July 1877. Whilst in New South Wales William and Emily had three more children; Frederick W. (born in 1878), Bernard Harry (born 1880 but died as an infant) and Joel (born 1881).
Some time after 1881 William returned to the UK and the 1901 census finds him in Derbyshire with a new partner Maud and his son Joel. So far there is no record of a marriage between William and Maud in the UK, nor a death record for his first wife Emily.
The following newspaper articles also seem to refer to William and indicate that he worked as the manager of a travelling theatrical company. In the reports it is mentioned that the company is being financed by his brother in London and this would most likely be Joel Horspool who is known to have moved in such circles.
"A SLIPPERY ACT" IN AN AUCKLAND DRAMA.
At the Auckland Petty Sessions yesterday, Wm. Horspool, described as the acting manager of a theatrical company touring the provinces with the " Shaughran," was charged as bailee with the larceny of £17 4s 8d, monies belonging to John William Braithwaite and other members of the company. — Mr T. W. Jennings prosecuted, and Mr J. G. Thomlinson defended. — The facts were that the company visited Bishop Auckland a fortnight ago, and the defendant was then acting as manager, and on the Friday night before the close of the week's engagement he went to the manager of the theatre (Mr Huntley) and obtained from him certain monies. During the week he got a sum of £3 from Mr Huntley. When he made the last application the defendant mentioned that the money was required for the payment of salaries. He further requested that Mr Huntley should advance a further sum of £5 to make up deficiencies. On the Saturday morning one of the company, named Kennedy, happened to be at Bishop Auckland Railway Station when he noticed some luggage belonging to the defendant labelled for London. His suspicions were aroused and he went to the lodgings of the defendant, when he found out that he was not at home. Kennedy returned to the station and took the train for Shildon. On the platform at the latter place be saw the defendant ready to join the train. He detained the defendant, and after some haggling the defendant paid him 50s, his salary, when the defendant joined the train and went off. Kennedy then sent for the other members of the company, but they arrived too late to see the defendant. The defendant went to London, where he was apprehended. — John Huntley, the manager of the Eden Theatre, said the money he paid over to the defendant was £14 14s 8d, exclusive of the £3 advanced earlier in the week. The defendant asked for another advance of £5, but was refused.— Joseph Patrick Kennedy, one of the company, described his journey to Shildon after the defendant — John W. Braithwaite, who laid the information for the warrant, was next called, and put a bit of life into an otherwise dull case by his humorous answers to counsel. He said he was engaged by Mr Matthews in the Bedford Hotel, London. Mr Matthews told him that he had a financier behind him worth thousands, and witness at once shook hands and asked him what he was going to have to drink. (Laughter.) At Huddersfield witness received his salary from the defendant in an envelope for which he thanked him. (More laughter.) The following week witness was paid £2 short, with a promise that it would be paid afterwards. On the Saturday morning he saw the defendant at the police station at Auckland before Matthews was taken away. The defendant said he had no money on him then, and went away home to get some and the witness added. "We did get it too." (Laughter.) At the railway station the defendant did not appear. The boys and girls were quite willing to forego their salaries for that week. He got a wire from Shildon from Kennedy saying that the defendant was detained, and the company went to that place, but did not get their money, and witness added that the defendant "did a slippery act." (Laughter.) Asked if he looked to the manager for his salary or not. He said he looked to the defendant, who was (the "financier" of the company, otherwise what was the use of having a financier. (Laughter.) If the salaries were not paid there could be no "show." (Laughter.) — Mrs Matthews, the wife of the "boss" of the company, said the defendant took all receipts, and paid all salaries. She had to be paid a salary, but got none at Auckland. — Sergeant Adams spoke to receiving the defendant into custody in London, and on the warrant being read over to him, he said : "I did not put the money to my own use." — P.C. Barnett spoke to hearing the defendant say to Kennedy at Shildon : "You can tell them I will pay them their money"— The defendant was committed to take his trial at the next Durham Quarter Sessions, bail being allowed, himself in £50, and one security of £50, or two in £25 each.
Daily Gazette for Middleborough - Friday 6th April 1900
DURHAM QUARTER SESSIONS.
The business of the Durham Midsummer Quarter Sessions was resumed to-day at the Courts, Durham, before the Right Hon. John Lloyd Wharton, M.P. (chairman), His Honour Judge Greenwell, presiding in the Second Court.
CHARGE AGAINST A THEATRICAL MANAGER.
William Horspool (49), theatrical manager, was charged with embezzling £117 14s 8d, received by him on account of John William Braithwaite and others at Bishop Auckland, on March 24th.— Mr Robinson prosecuted, and Mr Shortt defended the accused, who was a man of very respectable appearance, and was described as of superior education. Mr Robinson, in opening the case, said the accused was the manager of a travelling theatrical company which was performing at the Eden Theatre, Bishop Auckland, during the week ending March 24th. The business manager was a Mr Huntley, and the artistes were engaged by a Mr Matthews, who had to take from the receipts an amount sufficient to pay the artistes, and hand over the balance to the proprietor. On March 23rd the prisoner asked Matthews to hand him over the takings to pay the artistes. On the same day a misfortune befel the company, for Mr Matthews was arrested on some civil charge, and accused, it was alleged, had then got hold of the takings earned through the week and bolted with it. On Saturday morning, March 24th the accused sent his luggage to the station at Auckland to be forwarded by train, and he himself had gone to Shildon, the next station, where he joined the train which was conveying his luggage. It happened, however, that a member of the company, named Kennedy, wanted to see the accused on Saturday morning, and finding he had left his lodgings, Kennedy ran to the station, where he saw the accused's luggage put into the train. The accused himself was not in the train, but Kennedy, thinking it was a good plan to follow the luggage, jumped into the train, and went to Shildon, where the accused was waiting to join the train. An altercation took place, and ultimately Kennedy received from Horspool 50s for a week's wages. Kennedy then wired to the other members of the company to come on to Shildon, but when they arrived Horspool had gone, and the present proceedings were taken. The witnesses for the prosecution were cross-examined by Mr Shortt with the object of showing that Matthews was responsible for paying the artistes, that the brother of the accused advanced money to enable the tour to be carried on, and that the accused accompanied the theatrical company on behalf of his brother. It was admitted that the tour had not been a success financially, but the witnesses could not say whether the accused, seeing his brother was going to lose all, had taken the last weeks takings to his brother in London. The Bench intervened before the close of the case for the prosecution, the Chairman intimating that this was not a case of embezzlement. The accused was found not guilty and discharged.
Daily Gazette for Middlesbrough - Tuesday 3 July 1900