A (27:38)
At the crack of dawn on March 21, 1831, 34 year old James Honeyman and his partner, 36 year old William Murray, strolled out of Manhattan's Citibank. Both were wearing large capes that concealed the bags of cash they'd just stolen. As planned, they brought the loot to William's house where they divided their shares. Then James took his portion of the money to a room he'd rented at a boarding house where William joined him later. But there wasn't much time for them to sit back and admire their handiwork. Back at the bank, a teller had arrived to start his workday. There was no sign the robbers had been there, so he didn't realize anything was wrong. That is, until he went into the vault. It must have been obvious that there was a bunch of money missing because he reported the robbery right away. The press caught wind of the crime the same day it was discovered and quickly printed headlines about the heist. They even promised a reward for anyone who could bring the thieves to justice. But at some point, New York's high constable Jacob Hayes heard about it too. Without a formal police force to rely on, it was up to him to uphold the law in Manhattan. Hayes knew there was a chance the thieves might make a run for it. So one of the first things he did was reach out to constables, including one in Philadelphia. Hayes asked him to keep an eye on anyone arriving from out of town in case the criminals fled there. Then Hayes started to build a suspect list. He had years of experience with New York's criminal underbelly and all its biggest players. One of those people was James Honeyman, one of the robber's many aliases. He was on Hayes radar for the robbery he'd recently committed in Brooklyn. And Hayes suspected James had robbed the bank in Manhattan too. Within the next few days, Hayes got a warrant to search James home. But he didn't find find the cash there or James. He also didn't find any evidence that connected James to the robbery. It may have felt like a dead end, but it wasn't long before Hayes caught a lucky break. A few days after the heist, an accomplice who'd helped William and James make the duplicate keys ratted the robbers out. That meant the thieves identities were no longer a question. Now all Hays and his crew had to do was find them. Back at the boarding house, James and William were still biding their time and getting their affairs in order. Five days after the robbery, on a Thursday, James moved about a third of his share to the home of his brother in law, William Parkinson. He told Parkinson to watch over the money and keep it safe. Park Parkinson was happy to oblige and hid the cash under a brick in his fireplace. On Saturday, almost a week after the heist, James moved some more of the money. He took one of the trunks full of cash from his room as he left the boarding house. He told the landlord he'd be back soon. For the others, he had no idea this small interaction would have devastating repercussions. James, landlady at the boarding house, Mrs. Bangs, had heard about the robbery and was already suspicious of her tenant. James only left his room at night. And the same man, William, visited James every day, sometimes twice. It was certainly odd, but the kicker came when one of Mrs. Bang's maids told him she looked through James keyhole the other night and she she saw the men counting cash. Now when she heard James was taking a mysterious trunk away and intended to move the others, she worried the bank's cash was inside. At that point, she contacted Constable Hayes. Hayes and his son, who was an aspiring detective, rushed to the boarding house. James was still out, so they went into his room and picked the lock on one of the trunks. When they opened it, they found a bunch of James's clothes and under that was a pile of cash. Bank officials would later confirm it was their missing money. But at that point Hayes didn't need confirmation. He knew they'd found the stolen loot and he was about to arrest the man who'd taken it. Hayes and his son stayed in James room for three hours while waiting for him to return. Eventually he swung the door open, waltzed inside and walked right into Hay's handcuffs. He was hauled out of the boarding house and brought straight to a judge. James refused to talk to Hayes or anyone else and asked to see a lawyer because of his tight lips. Authorities also arrested his wife as a suspected accomplice and questioned her too. She was adamant that she didn't know about the robbery. But she was still thrown in a cell for some time. And thanks to their silence, James, partner in crime, was able to make a break for it. It's not clear how, but William Murray got wind of his partner's arrest before Hayes could get to him. When he did, he got out of town as fast as he could. But Hayes was right on his tail. When he went to Williams last known address in New York, Hayes was told he'd gone to Philadelphia. By this point, it was April 1831. At least 10 days had passed since the robbery. They'd recovered most of the money in James's room, but there was still some missing. Hayes assumed William had it and wanted to catch him before he spent it. So Hayes made the trip to Philadelphia himself. He tracked William down fairly quickly and brought him back to New York. But just like James, William refused to talk. So even though Hayes had a big victory on his hands, he had another problem. A chunk of the money was still missing and some city officials accused him of stealing it. Ironically enough, Hayes biggest defenders were the two men he'd just put behind bars. Both William and James basically said the accusation was ridiculous. They even admitted they'd hidden the money themselves before William was caught in Philly. They still wouldn't say where they'd stashed it though. And that didn't change when their trial started a few weeks later, on May 13, 1831. The Cash Hayes found in James trunk was enough evidence for the jury to find James and William J. Guilty. According to one source, the jury didn't even leave their seats to confer. Both men were given five years of hard labor at the maximum security Sing Sing prison in upstate New York. It was the most severe sentence available for grand larceny. And that was that. James and William were shipped off to serve their sentences and life in New York went back to normal, with many assuming the remaining cash would never be found. Only that wasn't the case later that year. In September 1831, James Brother in law William Parkinson made a huge mistake. He brought the money James had given him to a bank. He was trying to exchange big bills for smaller ones. The money money must have had some distinguishing mark on it, because the teller recognized it as the stolen cash. Someone at the bank called Hayes and Parkinson was quickly arrested. His confession was just as fast. In exchange for immunity, he admitted that James had given him $37,000 and told Hayes he'd hidden it in his tool chest. But just because the case was closed, that didn't mean it was forgotten. Many consider it to be the first ever bank heist in the United States, although others claim there was one in Philadelphia even earlier. But regardless of its place in the lineup, it had a big impact on New York City and the country. At least one element changed in banking as a result. The fireproof metal safe was introduced just three years later in 1834, and became a staple in the American banking system. Until that point, vaults were simply protected by locked doors. But the extra security hasn't stopped would be bank robbers looking for a massive score. If anything, it's just made them even more desperate. Despite how it's portrayed in the movies, bank robberies aren't usually the work of quick witted criminal masterminds. For people like David Cotton and Jonathan Skinner, it may be a crime of impulse. For James Honeyman and William Murray, a crime of last resort. But most of the time, robbing a bank just isn't worth it. A 2006 analysis revealed that bank robberies are some of the most frequently solved crimes in America. So that begs the question, why do it? William Murray and James Honeyman robbed their bank at a time when almost no one had ever done it. Why would they choose a bank? Was it only the money or was there something else at play? And when it comes to David Cotton and Jonathan Skinner's story, it's clear they didn't need the money they stole to survive. So it's possible the robbery fulfilled something else in them. Maybe a thirst for adventure. Or maybe the long odds are what excited these criminals to begin with. But as all four of these robbers found out, it's not a gamble worth taking. Thanks so much for listening. I'm Vanessa Richardson and this is Scams, Money and Murder. If you enjoyed this episode, you can check out more just like it by searching for Crime House the show wherever you get your podcasts. Scams, Money and Murder is a Crime House original. Here at Crime House, we want to thank each and every one of you for your support. If you like what you heard today, reach out on social media, rimehouse on TikTok and Instagram. Don't forget to rate, review and follow Scams, Money and Murder and Crime House the show wherever you get your podcasts. And to enhance your listening experience, subscribe to Crime House plus on Apple Podcasts. We'll be back next Thursday.
