Richard JULIUS 
- Born: 14 Jul 1770
- Christened: 24 Jul 1770, St George Basseterre St Kitts
- Partnership (1): Unknown
- Marriage (2): Sarah Ann CROOKE  on 23 Jul 1797 in St Mary Cayon By Licence.
- Died: 18 May 1806, St Kitts Leward Is Carribean aged 35
Register of St George and St Peter Basseterre 1747-1800 SOG London.
Baptisms: 1770 Jul 24 Richd s. of Julius Caesar & Susanna Julius 10 days old . . . . . private baptism.
Richard was admitted to Lincolns Inn 27 May 1789 - Richard was described as the "only son Julius Caesar Julius of the Island of St Christopher West Indies Esq."
Ref: Lincolns Inn Admission Register 1420 - 1893, Folio 129 Page 531.
Although 21 yrs his junior, Richard was, as was his father, a personal friend of Charles James Fox, 1749-1806, (pictured), Whig statesman and orator, after whom he named his second son. Fox, third son of Lord Holland had a very liberal and unfettered upbringing, mixing a brilliant education in the classics, with much drinking and gambling. His support for the French Revolution saw him denounced in Parliament and marginalised between 1789 & 1800.
That Richard had an illegitimate son William, is part of family lore, see letters by Sarah Ann Julius , but this remains uncorroborated - 2009
The following incident was ascribed to Richard's son Charles, by earlier researchers Florence Stevens, and Sir George Julius. However a recent search (2003) of the London papers by E L Fenn, shows the date and details to fit only with Richard. This is further confirmed by the evidence of Richards admission to Lincolns Inn in 1789
12 July 1791
Domestic Occurrences Page 672
July 12 1791
Report as follows;
An unfortunate recontre took place this morning upon Blackheath between Mr Graham, an eminent special pleader of the Temple, and Mr Julius a pupil in the office of Messrs Grahams, Attorneys of Lincolns, who are brothers of the former.
The parties had dined together at the house of Mr Black, the surveyor, upon Epping Forest on Sunday and after dinner, having drunk freely, the latter expressing some free opinions concerning religion, much abrupt language passed between them. They were reconciled however on that day, and returned to town in the same carriage.
On Monday they met again, after dinner, at the Chambers of Mr Graham the brother of the deceased, when the dispute was unfortunately resumed, though apparently without malignity. No challenge was given that night, but on the ensuing morning the deceased called upon Mr Julius for an apology for some expressions; which being refused they went out together, Mr Graham attended by Mr Ellis and Mr Julius by Mr Maxwell.
A pupil of an eminent surgeon accompanied them to Blackheath, where Mr Graham fell by a shot which had almost passed through the lower part of his belly. He was brought to town in a Post Chaise, and the exertions of the most eminent of the faculty were in vain used for his relief. The ball having laid open the femoral artery and it being impossible to stop the discharge of blood he expired in the afternoon of the next day.
Ref: Greater London Record Office Library - Annual Register 1791 Vol 33 p28.
GENTLEMANS MAGAZINE reports further as follows;
Mr Graham was a gentleman of considerable eminence in his profession and of an esteemed character in private life.
Mr Julius is the son of a very respectable Attorney at St Kitts and is said not to have been the least to blame in this quarrel.
These Gentlemen had for some time been extremely intimate and are not suspected to have had any serious cause of quarrel. Some harsh words they might perhaps have used; and the remembrance of these might have excited a dislike, but certainly not such to make either desire the life of his adversary.
The duel therefore like most others was the consequence of an absurd unwarrantable fear of what might be said and thought if they did not expose their lives to each other.
Ref London Metropolitan Archive (2003)
EUROPEAN MAGAZINE AND LONDON REVIEW: July - December 1791.
Vol 20 p 159.
MONTHLY OBITUARY for July - August 1791.
13. John Graham Esq of Lincolns Inn in consequence of a duel fought the preceding day at Blackheath with Mr Julius a young gentleman from the West Indies, who was in the office of Mr Graham, his adversary's brother.
The quarrel originated on Sunday, in a mixed company on a religious controversy. The subject was hypocrisy and in impropriety of preaching a doctrine contrary to notorious practice in affairs of serious gallantry which was considered as applying too closely to the circumstances of one of the parties; and this produced a violent bustle at the time amongst the company, without producing an amicable adjustment.
The first fire which Mr Graham received lodged a ball in his groin which proved fatal, after the best assistance afforded which could be procured. A mortification took place and he died the succeeding day about noon at his chambers.
Mr Julius, by the advice of Mr Graham after receiving the wound, immediately set of towards Dover as may be supposed for the Continent.
Both parties had previously lived on terms of amity, and the fate of the deceased is much lamented, having been generally esteemed as a very unoffending and respectable character.
WEDNESDAY July 13.
Yesterday the Worshipful Company of Apothecaries held there annual herbalizing feast at the Green Man at Blackheath: when about 160 of the Company sat down to a dozen haunches of venison and other delicacies of the season.
Yesterday a duel was fought on Blackheath ; one of the parties was supposed to be dangerously wounded. Had the Seconds been acquainted with so numerous a meeting of the faculty near the place, they might have procured immediate assistance.
THURSDAY July 14.
We are extremely concerned at having it authenticated to us last night that one of the persons who fought the duel at Blackheath mentioned in our paper of yesterday, is dead. His adversary has made his escape. We forbear to mention the names of the parties, lest it might give to sudden an alarm to the relatives of each.
Yesterday John Graham Esq of the Temple at his brothers Chambers in Lincolns Inn.
THE TIMES - Friday 15 July 1791 Pg 2 Col d.
"We are now at liberty to mention the particulars of the unfortunate recontre that took place on Tuesday last at Blackheath, as friends of the deceased have 'ere this been apprifed of the melancoly event.
The Gentlemen were Mr Graham of the Temple and Mr Julius of Lincolns Inn; the latter was in the office of Mr Graham's brother, and both parties were in terms of ftrict acquaintance. The difpute originated on Monday evening, in a company where both were prefent, Mr Graham was fpeaking to a Lady, when Mr Julius faid, he was a hypocrite in affairs of gallentry, and cautioned the Lady on the fubject; at the fame time he gave his reafons for thinking fo.
Mr Graham found himfelf hurt at the imputation, and fome words enfued, but the affair was feemingly made up, through the interpofition of friends, and both parties fhook hands. The circumstance however rankled on Mr Graham's mind, and the next day he called at his brothers Chambers where he knew Mr Julius attended. He told the latter that he confidered thofe Chambers as his own, and infifted on his walking out of them. He folled him down the fair-cafe, when fome further words paffed; on which Mr J. faid, he could not put up with them, and that Mr G. muft go out with him. He faid, it was what he wifed. The parties immediately called on two friends, who attended them in poft-chaifes, and they took one of Mr Hunter's pupils with them, Mr Hunter not being himself at home.
On coming to the ground on Blackheath, both parties fired together and Mr Graham fell. The report of the piftols foon drew together feveral people, who wifhed to stop Mr Julius from going of, by taking hold of the horsfes of the chaife. Mr Julius fwore he would fhoot the firft perfon that attempted fo to do, and at the defire of Mr Graham the people fuffered him to proceed towards Dover. Mr Graham was fhot above the hip and languished until Wednefday morning when he died"
THE TIMES Monday July 18th 1791 Pg. 3 Col c
"Friday the coroners inqueft fat upon the body of Mr Graham of the Temple, who was killed in a duel Tuefday laft. He was shot through the crural artery, and bled to death. After a due inveftigation of this melancholy tranfactin, as well its origin in every fubfequent part, the Jury brought in a verdict of Manflaughter againft Mr Julius, the principle, and acquitted the Seconds. On Saturday evening his corpfe was interred in Lincolns Inn burial-ground"
(It appears dueling was not a specific crime or offence but depending on circumstances persons may be charged with manslaughter, murder, etc. These first two would generally carry a death penalty)
Also Star Thus 14 Jul 1791 as the Times, but adds the meeting took place about 11 o'clock on Tuefday on Blackheath, near the Duke of Buccleugh's wall
Reported in Lloyd's Evening Post Fri 15 Jul 1791 as "Monday morning laft"
Reported in London Chronicle Sat 16 Jul 1791 with addded comment - In the evening the corpfe was interred in Lincolns Inn burial-ground. This funeral prefented an awful example of the fatal confequences of a cuftom which has fo long difgraced the world, and gives us caufe to regret, that no fyftem of laws has yet been contrived of efficacy enough to prevent that abfurd and deteftable practice; that the moft trifling difference may be productive of the moft fatal confequence, and that fociety has no better fecurity than opinion of the lives of its moft valuable members.
Also Morning Post & Daily Advertiser Mon 18 Jul 1791 & General Evening Post Sat 16 Jul 1791
St James Chronicle British Evening Post Tuefday 12 July 1791
Tuefday morning for gentlemen called at George's coffee houfe at the top of the Haymarket, and enquired where Mr Hunter the surgeon lived, and fent for him; Mr H. . . . . not being at home, one of his pupils attended them. In a chaife to Blackheath where the two principals fought a duel with piftols
the parties were John Graham Esq of the Temple, and Mr Julius, a young gentleman from the West Indies, who was then the office of Mr Graham, his adversary's brother.
The quarrel originated the preceding night, in a mixed company on a religious controverfy.
The firft fire which Mr Graham received launched a ball in his groin, which has proved fatal, the beft affistance being afforded which could be procured. A mortification took place, and he died yefterday about noon at his brother's Chambers
Mr Julius, by the advice of Mr Graham after receiving the wound, immediately fet off towards Dover, as may be fuppofed for the continent.
Both parties had previoufly lived on terms of amity; and the fate of the deceafed is much lamented, having been generally efteemed as a very unoffending and refpectable character.
General Evening Post Tuesday, July 12, 1791
One of the unfortunate rencontres took place on Tuefday morning upon Blackheath between Mr Graham and eminent fpecial pleader of the Temple and Mr Julius a pupil in the office of Meff Graham, Attorneys, of Lincolns Inn who are brothers of the former The parties had dined together, at the houfe of Mr Black, the surveyor, upon Epping Foreft on Sunday; and, after dinner, the latter exprefsing fome free opinions concerning religion, much abrupt language paffed between them. They were reconciled, however, on that day, and returned to town in the fame carriage.
On Monday they met again, after dinner, at the Chambers of Mr Graham, Lincoln's Inn, the brother of the deceafed, where the difpute was unfortunately renewed, though apparently without malignity. No challenge was given that night; but in the enfuing morning the deceafed called upon Mr Julius for apology for fome expreffions; which being refuted, they went out together, Mr Graham attended by Mr Ellis, and Mr Julius by Mr Maxwell.
A pupil of an eminent furgeon accompanied them to Blackheath, where Mr Graham fell by a fhot, which paffed almoft through the lower part of the belly. He was brought to town in a poft-chaife, and the exertions of the moft eminent of the faculty were in vain ufed for his relief. He expired yefterday afternoon.
Mr Graham was a gentleman of considerable eminence in his profeffion, and of an efteemed character in private life.
Mr Julius is the fon of a very refpectable attorney at St Kitts, and is faid not to have been the leaft to blame in this quarrel.
Thefe gentlemen had been for fome time extremely intimate, and are not fufpected to have had any ferious caufe of quarrel. Some harfh words they might, perhaps, have usfd; and the remembrance of thefe might have excited a diflike, but certainly not fuch as to make either defire the life of his adverfary. The duel, therefore, like moft others, was the confequence of fear - the fear of what might be faid and thought, if they did not expofe their lives to each other.
Evening Mail Wed 13 Jul 1791
The following are the particulars of the unfortunate recontre that took place on Tuefday laft at Blackheath.
The gentlemen were Mr Graham of the Temple, and Mr Julius of Lincoln's Inn; the latter was in the office of Mr Graham's brother, and both parties were on terms of ftrict acquaintance. The difpute originated on Monday evening, in a company where both were prefent -- Mr Graham was fpeaking to a lady, when Mr Julius faid he was a hypocrite in affairs of gallantry, and cautioned the lady on the fubject; at the fame time he gave his reafons for thinking fo.
Mr Graham found himfelf hurt at the imputation, and some words enfued, but the affair was feemingly made up, through the interpolition are taken of friends, and both the parties fhook hands. The circumftance, however, rankled on Mr Graham's mind, and the next day he called at his brother's Chambers, where he knew of Mr Julius attended. He told the latter that he confidered thofe chambers as his own, and infifted on his walking out of them. He followed him down the ftair-cafe when fome further words paft; on which, Mr J faid he could not put up with them, and that Mr G. muft go out with him. He faid, it was what he wifhed. The party is immediately called on to friends, who attended them in poft chaifes, and they took one of Mr Hunter's pupils with them, Mr H. not being himfelf at home.
On coming to the ground on Blackheath, both parties fired together, and Mr Graham fell. The report of the piftols foon drew together several people, who wifhed to ftop Mr Julius from going off, by taking hold of the horfes of the chaife. Mr Julius's swore he would fhoot the firft perfon that attempted fo to do, and at the defire of Mr Graham the people fuffered him to proceed towards Dover. Mr Graham was fhot above the hip, and languished until Wednesday morning when he died.
General Evening Post Thurs Jul 14 1791
The late duel gives us caufe for regret, that no fyftem of laws has yet been contrived of efficacy enough to prevent their abfurd and this deteftable practice; that the moft trifling difference may be productive of the moft fatal confequence, and that fociety has no better fecurity than opinion for the lives of its moft valuable members.
Further particulars of the late duel between Meff Graham and Julius:-when the former unfortunately fell, Mr Julius came up to him, fhook him by the hand, and after exchanging forgivenefs with him, he and his friend took to the poft chaife and were fetting off for a Dover; a crowd, however, furrounded the carriage, and would not let it proceed until Mr Graham's carriage came up to the fide of it. Mr G. then, with what remaining ftrength he had, put his head out of the carriage window, and requefted they would let him pafs, " as whatever may be the confequences, the gentleman has behaved like a man of honour" this inftantly fatified the crowd, and the chaife paffed on.
Without meaning to allude to either of the above parties, this unfortunate circumftance short hold out in example to all people who differ, either in politics or religion, to do so with temper and moderation: as for the want of this conduft, we find that the fubject of all others which recommends peace and forgivenefs of injuries has unfortunately produced the death of a very valuable member of fociety.
Morning Herald Tue 19 Jul 1791
When Mr Graham fell in the late unfortunate duel on Blackheath, there were not lefs than 20 fpectators prefent, who were about to take Mr Julius into cuftody until Mr G. with almoft his laft breath, requefted that no perfon would interrupt his departure.
Also reported in
Lloyds Evening Post Wed 13 Jul 1791 Similar to European Magazine Obituary above
London Chronicle Thurs 14 Jul 1791 Similar to Times
Star Thus 14 Jul 1791 similar to Times but adds the meeting took place about 11 o'clock on Tuefday on Blackheath, near the Duke of Buccleugh's wall
Public Advertiser Fri 15 Jul 1791 as General Evening Post
London Recorded or Sunday Gazette Sun 17 Jul 1791, adds nothing further to the matter
Diary or Woodfall's Register Mon 18 Jul 1791 ditto
Public Advertiser Mon 18 Jul 1791 ditto
FLORENCE STEVENS in "Genealogy The West Indies" and repeated in "A Power in the Land" says; " A younger brother of Mr Graham's was also articled there, an insolent, overbearing youth very quarrelsome. He called young Julius a "Nigger-Driver" and one day after abusing him he spat in his face, an insult which Mr Julius could only follow up by a "meeting" though he never would have quarreled.
Mr Julius fled to his relations at the Old Palace Richmond, where he was hidden in a garret until he could be shipped of to St Kitts. This must have been about the year 1815. He could not claim his inheritance in St Kitts for fear of identification and it passed to the Crown".
Ref: Family lore.
Julius Richard (Lawyer) died 18 May 1806
Ref Cayon Diary St Kitts Caribbeana Vol 3 Pg 111
From: Frances Bellis
Sent: Thursday, 23 July 2009 10:59 p.m.
Cc: Guy Holborn
Subject: RE: Richard Julius admitted Lincolns Inn 27 May 1789
Dear Mr Fenn
Thank you for your enquiry to Miss Hutchings, on whose behalf I am replying. The Mr Graham who died as a result of the duel was one John Graham who was admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 3 May 1781 "the 3rd son of Thomas Graham of Edmond Castle, Cumberland" but he was not called to the bar. Instead as your extract states he became a special pleader which was a type of quasi-barrister, members of the Inns of Court who specialised in drafting, the then particularily arcane, written proceedings in actions in the common law courts. They were permitted to do this without being called to the bar and so were said to practise under the bar. In an early legal directory for 1790 he is listed as having chambers at 7 Fig Tree Court, Inner Temple which matches your extract saying he was "of the Temple". He was indeed buried in the undercroft of the Chapel, our records showing that he was buried on 16 July 1791, having died on the 13 July and that his executors paid L.1 for the privilege.
His two elder brothers were Thomas and James Graham who were attorneys with chambers in New Square (then called Serle's Court) first at no 10 then at no. 6. They were both members of the Inn as it was a prerequisite for having chambers within the Inn. It was not until later that attorneys were banned from being members. Thomas was admitted on 13 November 1777 the eldest son of Thomas and James on 25 February 1780, Thomas' 2nd son. The family appear in Burke's Landed Gentry and so I have attached the relevant page from the 1900 edition for your information.
As regards to your relative, Richard Julius, you are correct in your date for his admission to the Inn. The Admissions Register states that he was the only son of Julius Caesar Julius of the island of St Christopher. He was not called to the bar and since he was working for attorneys I presume that he too was going into that branch of the legal profession.
I hope that this information is useful and I wish you well in your continuing research. If you have any further queries do not hesitate to contact me again.
Mrs F Bellis
Lincoln's Inn Records: SOG London.
1781 3 May John Graham gen 3rd sn of Thomas Graham of Edmond Castle Cumberland Esq.
1791 John Graham Esq a member of this honourable Society died 13 July and was buried
16 July 1791.
The Black Books of Lincoln's Inn.
Council held on July 27, 1791.
Twelve Benchers present.
"Order'd that no corpse from henceforth be buried under the Chapel or in the grounds of the society except of such as have been Masters of the Bench"
Accounts of John Ord Esq, the treasurer for the year 1791:
Receipts: . . . . . L.1 each from the executors of . . . . . and John Graham respectively, for burial ground under the Chapel.
Richard had a relationship with someone unknown.
Richard next married Sarah Ann CROOKE  [MRIN: 244], daughter of Milward CROOKE  and Nancy CLARKE , on 23 Jul 1797 in St Mary Cayon By Licence. (Sarah Ann CROOKE  died on 9 Jun 1807.)