Libellous Letters in Littlehampton

By Victoria Evans, Searchroom Archivist

At the end of this blog, please find an update containing my thoughts on the film and comparisons to the real-life case.

With the upcoming release of ‘Wicked Little Letters’ set for the 23^rd of February; we thought it best to delve into the true backstory of this poison-pen case from 1920s Littlehampton. It was quite exciting for us at the Record Office to learn that a film about a case that happened within our borders, but I had not heard of it before. This sent me down a rabbit hole of exploration and, as blog topics usually go for me, my curiosity took over.

Imagine being framed for the crimes of writing libellous letters to those closest to you and to those in your neighbourhood. The respect that your peers once held for you lost and the little social standing you had gone. You would hope that the police would see through the false claims brought against you, but even with the little evidence that could easily be torn apart you were still convicted twice for the same crime: first sent to Portsmouth Prison for 2 months and 2 weeks, and the second sentence being 12 months with hard labour in the same prison as before.

This is exactly what happened to Rose Gooding in the early 1920s.

Rose Gooding and Edith Swan were once friendly neighbours, with Rose, her husband, Bill, and sister, Ruth Russell, in 45 Western Road and Edith, her father, mother and two brothers in 47 Western Road. As you can see in the map below, they shared a passageway and a garden which became places of frustration between the neighbours.

Injustices

It appears that after Easter of 1920 the friendship between Rose and Edith soured. Edith reported Rose to the NSPCC and soon after libellous letters began popping up. They first attacked the Swan family and then soon after letters and postcards would make their way to others in Rose’s circle. It would have been easy to instantly point the finger at Rose, especially as some of the letters were signed “R. G.” and it might have been easy to think of reasons for her to do such a thing.

With the little evidence that Rose actually wrote these letters in July 1920 Edith sought advice from the local justices of the peace and was told to seek the help of a solicitor. Here they readied to privately prosecute Rose in September and after this, until December, Rose was held in Portsmouth prison while they waited for the case to go to court in Lewes. Subsequently, even with no expert evidence being submitted to prove the handwriting belonged to her, Rose was found guilty and sentenced to a further two weeks considering she had already spent two months in prison. This meant she was released just before Christmas, but it was far from over.

Within the last couple weeks of December, letters began making their way out again and seeing as Rose had only just returned to Littlehampton, it would be easy to conclude it must have been her. Only a few days into January of 1921 Edith reported the letters to the police and Rose was under heavy scrutiny again. This time the police were much more involved in the case and Rose was brought to court again. With circumstantial evidence and witness testimonies, the jury began deliberating and had requested to actually see Edith’s handwriting, but this was denied. This might allude to doubt in the minds of the jury but still they concluded that Rose was guilty of writing the libellous letters to Edith and she was sentenced to 12 months in Portsmouth prison with hard labour. Below you can see Rose’s charge and arrest noted in the police occurrence book.

Transcription of POL/W/AL/1/2: Inspector Thomas reports apprehending on a warrant Rose Emma Gooding of [45] Western Road Littlehampton charging her with publishing a defamatory libel concerning Edith Emily Swan of 47 Western Road Littlehampton. She was brought before a special bench on 16th inst. and committed for trial at the next Assizes.
Sentenced to 12 months H.L.

The long road to Justice

Whilst Rose was in prison letters still circulated to the surprise of many. Letters would not have been able to get past the prison’s walls as everything going in or out was checked, and yet the letters were in the same hand as the ones that were said to have been written by Rose. Concrete suspicions against Edith finally began to take form.

First, a notebook filled with obscene language directed towards Edith Swan was found in Littlehampton. Next, during an unexpected search of the Swan’s house, blotting papers were found and the police were able to single out certain words and could determine that they were in Edith’s hand. So clear were some of the words that they could pinpoint which letters they corresponded with.

With the mounting evidence to prove that Rose Gooding did not write any of the libellous letters, it was only a matter of time before her conviction was overturned and she would be released from prison. After serving about two months of her sentence, Rose’s conviction was overturned by the Court of Criminal Appeal, and she was awarded £250 in compensation (worth about £10,000 in 2024 according to the Bank of England inflation calculator).

With Rose returning to 45 Western Road the letters would still pop up and had started to target the new neighbours, Violet and P.C. George May, that had just moved into the police cottage at 49 Western Road. Edith had begun befriending Violet quickly and drew her in with talk of gossip about the libellous letters. However, when Violet received a letter herself, she felt that it could not have possibly been Rose who wrote them, but rather Edith. Violet handed this letter to her husband, and this was the spark to start a wider investigation into Edith and keeping tabs on her.

In August 1921 PC Gladys Moss (who was actually the first female police officer appointed in Sussex in 1919), was sent to Littlehampton to begin observations of the Gooding and Swan families. She was able to do her observations from 49 Western Road, where George and Violet lived. Nothing of note was observed until the 27^th of September when Gladys witnessed Edith throwing a piece of paper at the back of the police cottage. Violet was instructed to retrieve the piece of paper so that it could be examined. The letter was specifically addressed to Violet and made offensive comments about her husband. Gladys then confronted Edith with what she had seen. What Gladys had witnessed was not enough to secure a prosecution, more evidence was needed to do so. The police quietly kept working at this until they arrested her on the 21^st of October 1921 for one count of criminal libel against Violet May. Below you can see Edith’s charge and arrest recorded in the police occurrence book.

Transcription of POL/W/AL/1/2: Inspector Thomas arrested on a warrant Edith Emily Swan of 47 Western Road Littlehampton for publishing a defamatory libel against Violet Lily May of 49 Western Road Littlehampton.
Brought before W. Harwood Esq. & H. Henning Johnson Esq. on the 22nd inst. when evidence of arrest was given and prisoner remanded on bail till 11am on Jul inst. at Arundel. Committed for trial at the next Assizes.

On the 27^th of October Edith’s pre-trial hearing took place at the Arundel Town Hall and the photographs below were taken by the press and appeared in the Daily Mirror. The attention from the press shows how there was quite the buzz around this case at a more national scale.

From this Edith went to trial at Lewes in December but she was found not guilty by the jury. With all of the hard work put in by police, especially Gladys Moss, this must have been quite the slap in the face. From then on Edith could believe she had gotten away with it and the letters began circulating again. Furthermore, it was still widely believed that Rose was the author of the letters and she continued to live in the shadow of this. However, the truth could not evade the light of justice forever.

Steps were taken again in mid-1923 to gather evidence against Edith to try and bring her to justice once again. A collaboration between the police and the General Post Office (GPO) was put in motion. The GPO sent out two Special Investigation Branch clerks to set a trap for Edith. First, a sample of stamps were marked with invisible ink and the Beach Town sub-post office were to sell them to Edith as it was believed this was the post office that she used at the time. She subsequently purchased those marked stamps on the 23^rd of June and then all eyes were on the post box just outside of the post office as they waited for Edith.

One of the Special Investigation Branch clerks saw Edith post two letters and they retrieved them to investigate. One addressed to her sister was not of interest, but the other was addressed to Littlehampton’s new sanitary inspector. Opening this letter, it revealed inappropriate words and without missing a beat Edith Swan was asked to join them in the post office. And there, right in front of her eyes, giving her nowhere to hide, the invisible mark on the stamp was revealed. Edith denied everything, of course, but was still charged on the 4^th of July.

Finally, after Edith’s trial the jury found her guilty. However, the judge still could not grasp that Edith would have been able to write such foul language but as he had to respect the jury’s verdict, Edith was sentenced to twelve months in prison with hard labour (just as Rose had received). After years of proclaiming her innocence Rose and her family were finally able to move on from this nightmare.

If you’re looking for further readings on this case, please take a look at ‘The Littlehampton Libels’ by Christopher Hilliard and ‘Penning Poison’ by Emily Cockayne. I found both of these books very useful and engaging when researching for this blog post.

---

Update: my thoughts on the film

Spoilers ahead!

Following on from writing this blog, I have now seen the film, and thought it would be fun to share my review (although, I am no film critic in any sense, so these are just my opinions!). I should preface this by saying that knowing the real-life case before seeing the film was quite distracting, as it didn’t allow me to enjoy the film for what it was and be fully immersed in the story.

My first point is a little pedantic, but straight away I was struck by the inaccurate depiction of how Rose’s and Edith’s houses were portrayed. Rather than having a shared passageway between their homes, the film depicts terraced houses. From my own readings, this passageway was the scene of many confrontations between 45 and 47 Western Road. Additionally, the passageway was not as public as the road itself, so it allowed for entanglements away from the public eye. However, I do appreciate that they still shared a washhouse and an area to dry clothes, as this was a place that would have sparked contention between the neighbours.

The years in which this case took place felt very condensed in the film, with the most obvious event skipped, which was Rose’s second conviction and being sentenced to 12 months with hard labour at Portsmouth prison. Understanding that for the continuity of the story they crafted for the screen, it made sense to only include the first conviction. On the flip side of this, it sacrificed a deeper understanding of the turmoil that Rose was put through. Further, it gives reasoning for why Edith was sentenced to 12 months with hard labour at the end of the film.

The portrayal of PC Gladys Moss was most likely my favourite aspect of the film, even if it is not true to life! This depiction of Moss seeks to uplift her as a police officer and displays the sexism that she would have most likely dealt with on a daily basis while serving in the Sussex police force. However, one thing I would have liked to reflect real events would be the involvement of the GPO Special Investigation Branch. Although the film does include a postal worker who does sell the invisible ink marked stamps to Edith, I would have personally appreciated more of a nod towards the GPO.

My last points will focus on how Edith and her circumstances were portrayed. Although it is not completely clear from research into the family dynamics of the Swan household, there are clues that point towards her father holding sexist views towards women and would have most likely believed that women belong in the home to serve men. Edith also never wrote letters directed at her father in real-life, which could point to her being afraid of him, and even in secret, she could not say a bad word about him. Therefore, the film crafted a realistic motive behind Edith’s actions. Feeling controlled by her father and not knowing how to (or not allowed to) express her feelings of anger in any manner resulted in her expressing them in a manner that could be controlled and kept hidden.

Following on from this, in the film Edith admitted to what she did, and she was finally able to stand up to her father in the best way possible; to shatter his feeble image of his youngest daughter. This, of course, was the best way to neatly wrap up the film and allow it to have a happy ending for Rose and somewhat Edith too. Yet, in real-life, Edith never admitted to what she was convicted of and continued to proclaim her innocence from prison. Therefore, I do prefer the film’s ending to what happened in true events!

Overall, this was a very enjoyable film to watch, and I would recommend giving it a watch if you haven’t done so already. The creative array of obscenities that do appear to be very accurate, are amusing, especially hearing them come from Olivia Coleman’s portrayal of Edith; a God-fearing woman who had never questioned the authority placed upon her before until she could not take it anymore.

---

Stay up to date with WSRO – follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube