The 117-year mystery of Ireland's missing crown jewels – Sherlock Holmes author help, graveyard digs & inside man theory
But to his shock when he arrived, the door was already unlocked and the Irish Crown Jewels, the most precious items in the country, were missing.
Advertisement
5
The items were stolen from their safe in the Bedford Tower in Dublin Castle
Credit: Getty Images - Getty
5
A reward poster offering £1,000 for the return of the jewels, worth over €170,000 today
The Irish Crown Jewels were the ceremonial regalia of the Order of St Patrick, a chivalric order established in the 18th century for Anglo-Irish nobility.
On 6 July, 1907, just four days before
The set, which consisted of a jewel-encrusted badge and a star, would be valued at several million euros today.
Advertisement
On the surface, this might sound like any other famous jewel robbery.
But, Ireland's version of Ocean's Eleven holds more twists and frankly bizarre moments than even the best Hollywood blockbuster.
It all starts with the man responsible for the safekeeping of the jewels - Arthur Vicars.
Vicars was the
Contemporaries described him as being eccentric and as having a drinking problem. However, he was well-connected within Anglo-Irish society.
Advertisement
Vicars was surprisingly lax in his role as custodian of the jewels.
Historian and broadcaster, Myles Dungan, explains: "The jewels were discovered to be missing completely and utterly by accident. It wasn't that somebody said, 'We'd better go and get that badge and star for Aberdeen so that he can wear it', and then they discovered it.
"They discovered it because one of the gold collars, had been cleaned by weirs of Grafton Street, and was being brought back to be put in the safe."
'HISTORY OF SCANDALS'
Vicars would host parties in the office of arms, which were often attended by various aristocrats.
Many believed Vicars was homosexual.
Advertisement
And rumours swirled that these lavish parties were actually sex parties or orgies.
Myles said: "There was a history of these kind of scandals in Dublin Castle in the 1880s. The Parliamentary Newspaper of the United Ireland had exposed the Director of the Royal Irish Constabulary and the Secretary of the Post Office as homosexual.
"Then you sort of fast forward by about 25 years, and Vicars was supposed to have hosted these parties."
EASILY DRUNK
Regardless of what went on at these parties, Vicars was undoubtedly reckless in his duties.
Myles explained: "He got drunk very, very easily. I mean, a couple of glasses of port and he was anybody's.
Advertisement
"The story goes that he used to keep a key to the safe on himself at all times, and that one night party-goers had taken the key, and taken the jewels out, and promenaded around his office with the jewels in sort of a drunken stupor."
He added: "There was also a claim that one of the people who was involved in these parties, a man called Lord Haddo, had just for a lark, stolen the jewels, and then replaced them the following day."
RIDICULOUS BEHAVIOUR
Vicars was so accustomed to these antics that he brushed off multiple reports of suspicious activity in the week leading up to the robbery.
The Wednesday before the robbery, an office cleaner named Mrs Farrell had arrived at 7am and discovered that the front door of the office of arms was open.
The following Saturday, she returned again to find the front door open, but this time, the strongroom was also unlocked, with the keys still left in the door.
Advertisement
Both incidents were reported to Vicars, who, according to Myles, "took no notice of it at all".
"The jewels were discovered to be missing completely and utterly by accident. It wasn't that somebody said, 'We'd better go and get that badge and star for Aberdeen so that he can wear it', and then they discovered it."
Myles Dungan
Historian and broadcaster
Funnily enough, the safe containing the jewels wasn't even in the strongroom when this occurred.
Myles explained: "Regulations were introduced in the early 1900s, and the rule was that the jewels were to be deposited in the strongroom of the Office of Arms in the Bedford Tower in Dublin Castle.
"The problem was that when the Board of Works, the ancestors of the OPW, and anybody who follows the Leinster House bike saga would not be surprised by this, when they came to put the safe into the strong room, they discovered that it was too big."
Instead, the safe was left unguarded in the library of the Office of Arms.
Advertisement
PSYCHICS ENLISTED
The robbery of the jewels represented a monumental scandal for both Vicars and Dublin Castle.
An investigation was quickly launched in an attempt to identify the culprit. However, like every other part of this story, it was rather absurd.
Vicars was immediately fingered as a top suspect in the case, due to his possession of the keys and his strained reputation.
Desperate to prove his innocence and recover the jewels, Vicars enlisted the help of a number of supposed psychics.
The psychics told him that the jewels were buried in a graveyard, so Vicars proceeded to dig up several graveyards fitting the description given.
Advertisement
AIDED BY AUTHOER
To his disappointment, nothing was found.
The author of Sherlock Holmes, Arthur Conan Doyle, even offered his services, as he was a distant cousin of Vicars.
Doyle, however, was not a detective; he was a doctor and proved to be utterly useless when it came to actual detective work.
Vicars would later come to blame Francis Shackleton, brother of the famous Antarctic explorer Ernest Shackleton, for the robbery.
Shackleton worked under Vicars at Dublin Castle and was known for having a lavish lifestyle despite being heavily in debt.
Advertisement
AN INSIDE JOB?
He was also later convicted of financial fraud in 1913, in a separate case.
Shackleton, however, had an alibi. He was out of the country the day of the robbery.
Myles, however, explains that Shackleton may still have had a role to play in the robbery, as an inside man.
He said: "The main suspect in that sense is Shackleton, and Shackleton was the inside man. The outside man was somebody who may or may not have been his lover, who was a man called Captain Gorges.
"So the assumption is that Gorges actually, because Shackleton shared a house with Vickers, had access to all the keys. And that he created or he made copies of the keys for Gorges, and that Gorges then did the actual deed, he actually stole the jewels."
Advertisement
"There was also a claim that one of the people who was involved in these parties, a man called Lord Haddo, had just for a lark, stolen the jewels, and then replaced them the following day."
Myles Dungan
Despite such speculation, the investigation ultimately stalled due to a lack of credible evidence.
Some believe the case was deliberately covered up by the crown after the investigation revealed a "ring of debauchery" at work within Dublin Castle.
IT MIGHT BE ON YOUR FINGER
As for the jewels, some speculate that they are still hidden or even secretly in the possession of the royal family.
More likely, however, the jewels were broken down and sold off individually after the robbery.
Myles explains: "The supposition is that the jewels that were stolen were smuggled out of the country to the Netherlands and were broken up.
Advertisement
"I mean, it's always going to be a mystery. It's always going to be susceptible to any conspiracy theory you want."
Myles Dungan
Historian and broadcaster
"It's worth saying that you know any of your readers who have a diamond engagement ring could feasibly, depending on the age of the diamond, actually be wearing a small part of the Irish Crown Jewels; I strongly suspect lots of people are."
Vicars held on in his position for some time after the robbery, refusing to take blame for the loss of the jewels.
Feeling scapegoated, he even requested a royal commission trial so he could defend his character.
Eventually, however, he was found to have been negligent and fired.
He would never fully recover from the scandal and in 1921, after returning to his home in County
Advertisement
UNSOLVED MYSTERY
It's been 117 years since the jewels went missing, and experts are nowhere near close to solving the mystery.
It is likely we will never know what truly happened that day, but according to Myles, that's what makes the story so interesting.
Myles said: "I mean, it's always going to be a mystery. It's always going to be susceptible to any conspiracy theory you want."
He jokingly added: "You know what I think? I think the crown jewels were stolen by aliens. Yeah. I think they were brought to New Mexico, and I think the US government basically is hiding the crown jewels because they were stolen by aliens"
To learn more about the robbery, Myles Dungan's The Stealing of the Irish Crown Jewels is available for purchase online.
5
An image of The Irish Crown Jewels published by the Royal Irish Constabulary and the Dublin Metropolitan Police after the theft was discovered.
Advertisement
5
Myles Dungan has released a book on the robbery
Credit: Myles Dungan
5
The Stealing of the Irish Crown Jewels details all the bizarre aspects of the crime
Credit: Myles Dungan
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
an hour ago
- Irish Examiner
Media's role in fighting corruption must be defended
This summer marks the 30th anniversary of the enactment of the Ethics in Public Office Act 1995. Although commended for introducing statutory disclosure obligations for designated public office holders, including politicians, and the establishment of Sipo's predecessor, its significance runs deeper. The act ended a 79-year hiatus in Ireland's anti-corruption legislation. From the foundation of the Irish Free State, the legislation governing corruption in Ireland was housed in the Prevention of Corruption Acts 1889 to 1916. That legislation remained unamended on the Irish statute book until 1995, when modest revisions were introduced under the Ethics in Public Office Act. That act was introduced partly as a response to political indiscretions exposed in a number of scandals that gripped Ireland during the 1990s, including the Greencore affair, Telecom Éireann's site purchase, and the Beef Tribunal. But behind that legislative response lay another powerful force — the media. From the 1970s onwards, investigative journalism in Ireland began to develop, which led — among other things — to the exposure during the 1990s of conflicts of interest and ethical lapses among public officials. The media reports unearthed a culture of impunity and lack of oversight, and were significant in embedding corruption in the public discourse. The Greencore affair, for example, which arose out of the privatisation of Súicre Éireann, revealed weaknesses in the anti-corruption legislative architecture that had never been focused on before, namely conflicts between public duties and private interests. It centred on a small number of executives who bought a 49% stake in a subsidiary of the company for £3.2m and sold it back to the State a year later for £9.5m, prompting concerns over corporate governance and abuse of trust. Although statutory investigations found breaches of company law and corrupt practices by some of those involved, no criminal prosecutions followed. Then there was Telecom Éireann, a semi-state company, which found itself the subject of much media attention in 1991, arising from irregularities surrounding its purchase of a piece of land for use as its headquarters. The Beef Tribunal, established in 1991, on foot of an ITV World in Action programme, would go on to reveal questionable and uncomfortably close connections between big business interests and Irish political interests. These revelations helped shift public sentiment, fostering a climate more receptive to investigative journalism and expanding the public understanding of corruption. Before then, corruption was regarded as an overt form of bribery. This understanding was reflected in the legislation criminalising corruption, which dated back to 1889. Events throughout the 1990s showed that corrupt behaviour could constitute more clandestine activities where private interests and public duties collided, and an awareness of the connection between conflicts of interest and corruption. This growing public awareness, aided by the media, created the necessary political pressure for reform. The Ethics in Public Office Act 1995 was the first enacted legislative response. However, it was not the first attempt to introduce accountability into Irish public life. Four years previously, Labour TD Brendan Howlin initiated the Ethics in Government and Public Office Bill 1991 as a private members' bill. Although the bill was defeated, its principles were incorporated into the 1995 act. The Ethics in Public Office Act 1995 sparked a series of incremental reforms over the next 15 years, including the introduction of freedom of information laws, regulation of political donations, and the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Acts 2001 and 2010. Running in tandem with these legislative developments was persistent media scrutiny, reporting on events that formed the subject matter of various tribunals throughout the 1990s and 2000s. The media played a pivotal role in the establishment of the tribunals. However, its influence extended beyond this initial contribution, in that it was instrumental in informing the public about the proceedings and findings of the tribunals. The particular significance of the Moriarty, Planning, and Morris tribunals is that, for the first time, findings of corruption were made against individuals who were the subject of the investigations. The momentum for change, driven by media vigilance and Ireland's commitments under international and European instruments such as the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery, ultimately culminated in the Criminal Justice (Corruption Offences) Act 2018. The 2018 Act repealed Ireland's outdated corruption laws and replaced them with a unified modern framework. It introduced offences of active and passive corruption, trading in influence, knowingly giving gifts or advantages to facilitate the commission of a corruption offence, intimidation, and substantially increased penalties for corruption offences. The legislative inertia that had persisted for most of the 20th century eventually gave way to a resurgence of reform, driven in no small way by the media's persistent focus on corruption. As Mr Justice Humphreys recently observed, the media plays a vital role in shaping public discourse, a role that mirrors Percy Bysshe Shelley's famous description of poets as "the unacknowledged legislators of the world". This is not to suggest that the media alone dictates policy and legislation; rather, media coverage can influence legislators' behaviour, as Ireland's experience with corruption legislation has shown. Irish legislation is a product of the Oireachtas, which essentially comprises directly elected politicians. Dependent on public support, politicians risk losing political power if they ignore public opinion. Media reporting and commentary often guide public opinion, which in turn can influence the legislative agenda. The evolution of Ireland's anti-corruption laws is a testament to the enduring importance of the Fourth Estate. Ireland's path towards transparency and reform may not have been so meaningful without it. In a world facing growing threats of free-speech intimidation, protecting an independent Fourth Estate capable of speaking truth to power is more important than ever. Gail Nohilly is a barrister and knowledge lawyer and recently completed her PhD at the University of Limerick, tracking the evolution of Ireland's corruption legislation and the role of the media.
Irish Examiner
an hour ago
- Irish Examiner
Nearly 400 inmates at large in the last decade never returned to prison
Nearly 400 prisoners classified as unlawfully at large over the last decade did not return to custody. It includes 126 people granted temporary release from Irish prisons last year. In total, some 4,178 people were recorded as unlawfully at large between 2015 and 2024. Some 3,815 individuals were returned to custody. This means 363 individuals recorded as unlawfully at large were not brought back to prison. It includes 15 outstanding inmates from 2015. Of 702 people recorded as unlawfully at large in 2024, some 126 did not return to custody, the data shows. The figures were given to Aontú leader Peadar Tóibín following a parliamentary question to justice minister Jim O'Callaghan. Further figures released to Mr Tóibín show that seven people died while unlawfully at large between 2014 and 2025. According to Mr O'Callaghan, a person is deemed unlawfully at large if they have not returned to custody 'before the expiry of their temporary release period or if a condition of their release is breached'. He noted that the 'vast majority' are recorded as unlawfully at large for 'technical breaches whereby they do not return to the prison on their designated date to sign on', adding that 'these numbers are dynamic'. Last year, an average of 506 prisoners were on temporary release each month, according to Irish Prison Service reports. Prisoners can be temporarily released from prison for specified lengths of time for reasons such as for a funeral or family emergency, at Christmas or near the end of a prisoner's sentence. In recent parliamentary questions, Mr O'Callaghan admitted that temporary releases are being used to tackle prison overcrowding. Meanwhile, proximity to buses, rail, and a good road network, along with higher population, has resulted in Mallow and Midleton recording the highest level of crimes in Cork county, according to gardaí. The 'Irish Examiner' is exploring crime data from garda stations in our Cork Crime series in print and online here on Monday and Tuesday, August 4 and 5. Central Statistics Office figures show that Mallow had the highest reported crime level in Co Cork last year. The garda station in the town recorded 792 recorded incidents, including 224 thefts and 135 public order incidents. Midleton was next highest, with 613 in total, again with thefts and public order being the most reported offences.
Irish Examiner
an hour ago
- Irish Examiner
Prisoner died day before his scheduled transfer to psychiatric unit, report says
The death of a prisoner in Cloverhill Prison occurred a day before he was due to be transferred to a psychiatric unit, according to the Office of the Inspector of Prisons. A report into the death of the inmate has been submitted by the office to justice minister Jim O'Callaghan. The prisoner, identified only as Mr O, died on August 10, 2022, at the age of 52, while on remand for minor offences. The report said the man's cause of death is 'a matter for the coroner'. He was arrested in Dublin Airport six days earlier, 'due to his behaviour and for refusing to comply with the direction' of gardaí. The man had arrived in Ireland the previous month from Spain to visit a friend. However, his friend asked him to leave their home 'due to his erratic behaviour' prior to his arrest for a public order offence. He had been granted a nil cash bond and would have been required to sign a bail bond confirming that he would not commit an offence and be of good behaviour following release. However, the report into his death outlined: 'The investigation team were informed by Governor A that he considered that Mr O was not in a fit state of mind to take up his bail bond.' The report said that Mr O's behaviour on committal was 'erratic' and he was accommodated in a 'close supervision cell'. He was medically assessed by the prison's healthcare staff and the Prison In-reach and Court Liaison Service team, whose task is to identify people suffering mental health issues when remanded to prison. The report continued: 'Mr O was scheduled to be released from Cloverhill Prison under the Mental Health Act 2001 to St Vincent's Psychiatric Unit on 11 August 2022. However, Mr O was discovered unresponsive in his cell on August 10, 2022.' The report also outlined that on August 8, a psychiatrist, A, recorded on the Prisoner Healthcare Management System that a call had been received from gardaí saying that the judge 'would be striking out charges' against Mr O 'if treatment could be arranged, given his current mental state'. The investigation team were told that Mr O had spent time in a psychiatric hospital outside the jurisdiction, "and it was believed he had not taken his prescribed medication over the previous 10 months'. A second psychiatrist, B, told the investigation team that 'accessing treatment in a community-based psychiatric facility is extremely challenging'. Referencing the 2006 Vision for Change document on mental health services, the psychiatrist 'pointed out that, 17 years later, mentally ill persons in prison custody still cannot easily gain access to psychiatric community-based facilities', said the report, adding that 'this lack of access results in prisoner-patients not receiving the mental health treatment they require.' The report continued: 'This is consistent with the Inspectorate's findings during its recent thematic evaluation of the provision of psychiatric care in the Irish prison system.' The report also said: 'Mr O died in prison before his legitimate mental health treatment needs could be met. This only serves to underscore the urgent need to forge new system-wide clinical care pathways, including rapid transfer to local civil psychiatric hospitals, for prisoner-patients such as Mr O.' The report is calling for 'urgent consideration' to be given to 'the systemic changes that are required to facilitate the swift transfer of persons suspected or convicted' of minor offences, 'who have mental disorders, to local psychiatric hospitals'. It added: 'As this is likely to require the development and opening of appropriately secure, intensive care facilities/designated beds in civil psychiatric hospitals, this calls for a multi-agency approach.' Falsification of records Meanwhile, the report also said that it 'is imperative that the falsification of records is treated with the utmost seriousness', after the investigation team found that three entries confirming special observation checks were conducted at Mr O's cell were carried out after the time of Mr O's death. The report outlined the three checks were recorded as being conducted at 7am, 7.15am, and 7.30am on the morning of Mr O's death – after he was found unresponsive at 6.50am. 'The investigation team noted that an (unsuccessful) effort had been made to erase the three entries,' stated the report, adding that it 'clearly suggests' that the entries 'were being pre-filled by staff, entirely negating the value of this recording safeguard'.
