Ripperologist 79 May 2007 1

RIPPEROLOGIST MAGAZINE
Issue 79, May 2007
QUOTE FOR MAY:

If Jack the Ripper had been an architect, the Centre Pompidou is what he would have built: for he preferred his entrails out rather than
in. The savage, gory mess that is the Centre Pompidou would have pleased him no end; perhaps he would even have obtained a sexual
thrill from contemplating all the eviscerated intestinal pipes that writhe so uselessly around the inelegant core of the building...

Je Maintiendrai Blog, 1 March 2006.

Features Books
Editorial: Brilliant Branding On the Crimebeat
Don Souden asks if it would still be Jack without Jack. Wilf Gregg reviews the latest additions
Tumblety Talks to the True Crime bookshelf.
R J Palmer on an interview given by Francis Tumblety
We would like to acknowledge the valuable assistance given
to the New York World in January 1889. by the following people in the production of this issue of
Ripperologist: Claudia Aliffe. Jeremy Beadle, Maggie Bird,
A Skeleton Shingle Loretta Lay, Keith Skinner. Thank you!
Joe Chetcuti reveals how Tumblety was compared to a pagan god. The views, conclusions and opinions expressed in signed
articles, essays, letters and other items published in
Foster’s Notations Ripperologist are those of the authors and do not necessarily
reflect the views, conclusions and opinions of Ripperologist
Gavin Bromley examines the accuracy of Frederick Foster’s calculations. or its editors. The views, conclusions and opinions expressed
in unsigned articles, essays, news reports, reviews and other
PC 225H Reports items published in Ripperologist are the responsibility of
Adam Wood and Keith Skinner turn the pages of a real Whitechapel journal. Ripperologist and its editorial team.
We occasionally use material we believe has been placed
A Monstrous Deception in the public domain. It is not always possible to identify
and contact the copyright holder; if you claim ownership of
Dr Jan Bondeson warns us to be wary of contemporary illustrations. something we have published we will be pleased to make a
proper acknowledgement.
Obituary: Des McKenna The contents of Ripperologist No. 79 (May 2007), including
Chris George remembers the popular theorist and contributor. the compilation of all materials and the unsigned articles,
essays, news reports, reviews and other items are copyright
© 2007 Ripperologist. The authors of signed articles,

Regulars essays, letters, news reports, reviews and other items

retain the copyright of their respective contributions.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this publication may be
Press Trawl reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted or
otherwise circulated in any form or by any means, including
Chris Scott with a mammoth report from the Evening News of 6 October 1888. digital, electronic, printed, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or any other, without the prior permission in

News and Views writing of Ripperologist. The unauthorised reproduction or

circulation of this publication or any part thereof, whether
for monetary gain or not, is strictly prohibited and may
I Beg to Report constitute copyright infringement as defined in domestic
laws and international agreements and give rise to civil
From Dracula to Shirley Temple, if it happened, you’ll find it here. liability and criminal prosecution.

I Beg to Report: The Trial of James Maybrick

Fresh from a return to his Liverpool roots, Chris George reports on the vote against
the cotton trader.

I Beg to Report: 2007 Conference

The full lineup for Wolverhampton is revealed.

Ripperologist Magazine
PO Box 735, Maidstone, Kent, UK ME17 1JF. contact@ripperologist.info

Editorial Team Subscriptions Advertising

Editor in Chief Ripperologist is published monthly in electronic Advertising in Ripperologist costs £50.00 for a
Paul Begg format. The cost is £12.00 for six issues. Cheques full page and £25.00 for a half-page. All adverts
can only be accepted in £sterling, made payable are full colour and can include clickable links to
Editors
to Ripperologist and sent to the address above. your website or email.
Christopher T George; Don Souden; Adam Wood
The simplest and easiest way to subscribe is via
Contributing Editors
Jane Coram; Wilf Gregg; Chris Scott
PayPal - send to paypal@ripperologist.info Submissions
We welcome articles on any topic related to
Consultants Back issues Jack the Ripper, the East End of London or
Stewart P Evans; Loretta Lay
Single PDF files of issue 62 onwards are available Victoriana. Please send your submissions to
Donald Rumbelow; Stephen P Ryder
at £2 each. contact@ripperologist.info. Thank you!
 Brilliant Branding
EDITORIAL by DON SOUDEN

An oft-asked question is why the Whitechapel murders in the fall of 1888 continue to fascinate
us nearly 119 years after the fact. The answers are many, starting with the simple fact that the
murders remain unsolved. In much the same way as Fermat’s last theorem engaged mathematical
minds for 357 years before its proof or, more frivolously, the Voynich manuscript continues to lead
cryptologists—amateur and professional alike—on a merry dance to nowhere, the identity of the
hand (or hands, if you will) who killed five or more prostitutes in London’s East End almost 12
decades ago is an evergreen enigma.
Moreover, the late-Victorian period, with its images of gas-lit streets, Hansom cabs and narrow, cobbled streets,
continues to call up a romantically eerie era throughout the Anglosphere. Add to that the fact that the Whitechapel
murderer appeared on the scene at a time when a half-century of technological advances, from trans-oceanic cables
to refrigerated rail cars (a story for another time in itself), enabled the Whitechapel fiend’s reign of terror to be
front-page newspaper fodder around the globe within hours of a victim’s discovery. He was the world’s first “celebrity”
criminal whose depredations were reported in something approaching “real time.”
Yet, I think there is something else that more fully accounts for the enduring enormity of those murders. I will fully
admit, having just signed on to help write a book on corporate branding, that my mind may be unusually open to
certain business analogies. Nonetheless, I would suggest that one of the great strokes of inadvertent branding genius
was the naming of the Whitechapel murder Jack the Ripper! We don’t know who came up with the name: possibly a
journalist, perhaps an anonymous hoaxer with a fertile imagination, maybe even the murder himself, but it took the
murders forever from the realm of the sordid and squalid into that of the eternally sensational.
Would there be the same interest in the events of fall 1888 if they had been, say, committed by the “Whitechapel
Murderer,” the name I used purposely in the first two paragraphs? I would think not. Nor do any number of other,
somewhat similar names for the murderer like “Harry the Hacker,” “Sam the Slasher” or even “Monty the Mutilator”
impart anything close to the sheer bone-chilling terror of Jack the Ripper!
One need look no further than John Simon Ritchie, the late and largely unlamented bass guitarist for the “Sex
Pistols,” to gauge the futility of seeking an image change through a name change. He called himself “Sid Vicious,” a
name that despite his anti-social proclivities inspired nothing but amusement. I’m not sure what it is like in Britain, but
in the United States a name like Sid calls to mind nothing more frightening than a balding, pot-bellied accountant.
Ah, but conjure instead with the name Jack the Ripper. Jack is short, familiar and applicable to anything from
the benignly agile Jack-be-Nimble to the more mischievous Jack Frost (who will nip our nose in winter, but just with
the cold rather than cold steel) to the malignant hangman Jack Ketch. Add to that first name the modifier “Ripper”
and we have the perfectly evil (if undeniably catchy) Jack the Ripper. Within weeks of the name’s coining, women
in New York City who found a thief in their room would race into the street and scream “Jack the Ripper! Jack the
Ripper” and even today, as our I Beg section makes manifest monthly, the same name Jack the Ripper is known and
used worldwide. From its inception, the term has been an example of (if I may borrow from the title of a forthcoming
book) Brilliant Branding.

Got something to say?

Got comments on a feature in this issue?
Or found new information?
Please send your comments to contact@ripperologist.info

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 1

Tumblety Talks
By R J PALMER

On November 24, 1888, Irish-born quack Francis Tumblety boarded the steamship La Bretagne
in Le Havre, France, under the alias ‘Frank Townsend.’ By all appearances, ‘Townsend’ was just
another steerage passenger bound for New York, but there was one difference: In later years,
Chief Inspector John Littlechild of Scotland Yard would reveal that the absconding Irishman was
‘among the suspects’ in the Whitechapel murders. “Tumblety was arrested at the time of the
murders in connection with unnatural offenses,” Littlechild confided to journalist G.R. Sims,
“charged at Marlborough Street, remanded on bail, jumped his bail, and got away to Boulogne.”1
The Chief Inspector did not elaborate, but his admission that a suspect managed to skip the
country suggested a police blunder of colossal proportions.
Tumblety, meanwhile, passed his Atlantic crossing below deck, feigning
seasickness. When La Bretagne docked in New York Harbor on the afternoon of
December 2nd he disembarked in a “hurried and excited” manner, while two
cops from the New York Police Department stood on either side of the gangplank.
Across town, an English detective was already keeping surveillance on Mrs. Mary
McNamara’s 79 East 10th Street residence, a lodging-house Tumblety was known
to frequent. On Wednesday, December 5th, James Rush, a carpenter living across
the street, told an inquiring reporter that a man fitting the Irishman’s description
had bolted in the early morning hours, disappearing in an “uptown car.”2 “Dr.
Tumblety has Flown,” the headlines blared.
Rush’s account, however, remains in doubt. An obscure national tabloid, The
Evening Chronicle, published a short interview with a Mr. Roberts, the proprietor
of the Cornish Arms, a rundown hotel at 11 West Street. Roberts’s account strongly
suggests that Tumblety had, in fact, given everyone the slip the very night he
landed in New York. “A man came to my house Sunday evening [December 2],”
Roberts told the reporter, “and gave the name of Dr. Tomanly. He said he came
on the French Line steamer Bretagne. This morning he came downstairs and said
that he had concluded to go out of town. I did not think anything of his going at
the time until I read the evening papers that such a man was being sought after,
and then the thought struck me that perhaps he was the doctor who has been
suspected of being the Whitechapel fiend.”3
Over the next several weeks Tumblety’s exact whereabouts remained unknown. It is sometimes argued that he sat
cozily and openly in New York City and could have been easily contacted by Scotland Yard. Such was not the case.
Tumblety did not resurface in New York for nearly eight weeks—and only then by the clumsiest of accidents.
The night of January 27th, 1889, was wet and windy, and thus it was with considerable surprise that a lodger at Mrs.
Helen Lamb’s house, 204 Washington Street, Brooklyn, was disturbed by a pounding on the front door and the ringing
of the electric bell. Out on the stoop was a young man who wished to speak to “Dr. Twombly.” The lodger knew no
such man, but a moment later a tall gentleman that everyone knew as ‘Mr. Smith’ walked up the sidewalk. ‘Smith’ had
engaged rooms at Lamb’s ten days earlier and was taking all his meals there.

1 John Littlechild to George R. Sims, 23 September, 1913, reprinted in Stewart P. Evans & Paul Gainey, Jack the Ripper: the First
American Serial Killer (1995) p. 275-276.
2 The New York World, 6 December, 1888
3 The Evening Chronicle (St. Louis) 6 December, 1888.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 2

 On seeing ‘Smith,’ the young man lit up.
“How’y you do, Dr. Twombley!’

Tumblety, aka Twombly, aka Smith, pulled the young man quickly aside and whispered in his ear. The other lodgers
then watched as the doctor gathered his trunks, paid his bill out of a large roll of notes, and fled into the rainy night.
The Brooklyn Eagle published the story the following morning, January 28th.4
Having been “outed,” Tumblety met with a reporter from Joseph Pulitzer’s New York World, and submitted to
an interview in his old rooms in Manhattan. Sometime ago, when I showed this interview to one of the our best-
known historians of the case, he called it “spectacular.” It is an apt description, for beyond a few stray sentences by
the exonerated John Pizer, it is the only known account of a major police suspect giving his version of why he was
investigated for being “Jack the Ripper.’ It is reprinted here for the first time.

HE WORE A BIG SLOUCH HAT

_____________________________
Dr. Francis Tumblety, the celebrated Whitechapel suspect, after two months silence has given his version of
why he was accused of being Jack the Ripper. He says it was owing to the stupidity of the London Police, who
arrested him because he was an American and wore a slouch hat. He is preparing a pamphlet defending himself
and giving a history of his life.
_____________________________
After months of profound silence Dr. Francis Tumblety, whose name in connection with the Whitechapel
crimes has become a house-hold word, has at last consented to be interviewed and give his version of how he
came to figure so prominently in the most remarkable series of tragedies recorded in the long list of crimes.
The doctor landed in New York on the 3rd of last December, and from the moment that he set foot in New
York he was under surveillance. An English detective, whose stupidity was noticeable even among a class not
celebrated for their shrewdness, came over especially to shadow him, and scores of reporters tried in vain to
see him. As soon as he got off the ship Dr. Tumblety went direct to the house of Mrs. McNamara, No. 79 East
Tenth Street, and he has been there ever since. Mrs. McNamara is an old Irishwoman whose fidelity to the
doctor is remarkable, and it was due to her vigilance that all efforts to see him personally failed. She was able
to throw reporters and detectives completely off the scent, and if it were not for the fact that the doctor
voluntarily came forward and made his own statement no one would have known whether he was in New York
or New Zealand.
The police long since ceased to take any interest in the case, as it became evident that the English authorities
had no evidence to hold the doctor. Finding himself no long pursued, the doctor concluded to satisfy the public
by making a complete statement himself. With this object in view he has carefully prepared a pamphlet giving
a history of his life.
It will be a refutation of all the charges that have been made against him.
The pictures that have been published of Dr. Tumbley in London and New York give a very good idea of him.
He is a powerfully built man and stands 6 feet 2 inches in his stockings. His long black mustache has been
trimmed close and reaches down in the shape of a thick growth of beard around his chin, which he keeps smooth
shaven. His face is ruddy and he has blue eyes. If he ever dressed sensationally in the past, he does not do so
now. Yesterday he wore a dark suit which was by no means new, and a little peaked traveling cap. Altogether,
he gave the appearance of a prosperous Western farmer. He wore no jewelry.
Dr. Tumblety talks in a quick, nervous fashion, with a decidedly English accent, and at times, when describing
his treatment by the English police, he would get up from his chair and walk rapidly around the room until he
became calm.
“My arrest came about this way,” said he. “I had been going over to England for a long time—ever since 1869,
indeed—and I used to go about the city a great deal until every part of it became familiar to me.

4 Paul Begg has suggested that the young caller was Tumblety’s protégé Martin McGarry. It is a reasonable surmise.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 3

 I happened to be there when these Whitechapel murders attracted the attention of the whole world, and,
in the company with thousands of other people, I went down to the Whitechapel district. I was not dressed
in a way to attract attention, I thought, though it afterwards turned out that I did. I was interested by the
excitement and the crowds and the queer scenes and sights, and did not know that all the time I was being
followed by English detectives.”
“Why did they follow you?”
“My guilt was very plain to the English mind. Someone had said that Jack the Ripper was an American, and
everybody believed that statement. Then it is the universal belief among the lower classes that all Americans
wear slouch hats; therefore, Jack the Ripper, must wear a slouch hat. Now, I happened to have on a slouch
hat, and this, together with the fact that I was an American, was enough for the police. It established my guilt
beyond any question.”
The doctor produced from an inside pocket two magnificent diamonds, one thirteen carats and the other
nine carats, both of the purest quality, and a superb cluster ring set in diamonds. He said that, in his opinion,
his arrest was due, in a measure, to the police desiring his diamonds and thinking they could force him to give
them up.
“How long were you in prison?”
“Two or three days; but I don’t care to talk about it. When I think of the way I was treated in London, it
makes me lose all control of myself.
It was shameful, horrible.”
“What do you think of the London police?”
“I think their conduct in this Whitechapel affair is enough to show what they are. Why, they stuff themselves
all day with potpies and beef and drink gallons of stale beer, keeping it up until they go to bed late at night,
and then wake up the next morning heavy as lead. Why, all the English police have dyspepsia. They can’t help
it. Their heads are as thick as the London fogs. You can’t drive an idea through their thick skulls with a hammer.
I never saw such a stupid set. Look at their treatment of me. There was absolutely not one single scintilla of
evidence against me. I had simply been guilty of wearing a slouch hat, and for that I was charged with a series
of the most horrible crimes ever recorded.
Why, if Inspector Byrnes was over in London with some of his men they would have had the Whitechapel fiend
long ago. But this is all very unpleasant to me, and I would prefer talking about something else.”
“You are accused of being a woman-hater. What have you to say to that?”
This seemed to amuse the doctor a great deal. He laughed loud and long.
Then he said.
“I don’t care to talk about the ladies, but I will show you one little evidence that I am not regarded with
aversion by the sex. I will first explain how it came to me. I had received a letter of introduction to a lady of
rank, a duchess, who was then at Torquey, which is several hundred miles from London. I presented my letter
and was invited to breakfast with her. When I came I presented her with a bouquet of flowers and she picked
up a quill which was lying on the table near by and dashed off the following stanzas extempore:

To Dr. Francis Tumblety, M.Ed.:

Thanks for the lovely rosebuds sent.
Its beauty may be fleeting,
But not its sentiment.
And its charming beauty
Nor colour cannot last,
It will be a pleasant duty,
In memory of the past,
To guard the faded flower,
When you have gone from me,
In memory of the hour
You came to sweet Torquey (pronounced Tork-kee).
Mary.

“Now that doesn’t look like a woman-hater, does it?” said the doctor, with a look of pride.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 4

 The doctor then exhibited a number of letters from well-known people certifying to his character and
integrity. One general endorsement was signed by A.L. Ashman, proprietor of the Sinclair House; Dr. E.P.
Miller, C.T. Ryan, Dr. Alfred Wynkoop, and J.C. Hughes, of 753 Broadway. He had any number of letters from
merchants, physicians, lawyers, bankers, and business men. Some of the letters he showed were from patients
in England. One was from a gentleman named Bowers, connected with the Midland Railroad, who told him
that his former medicines had done his father a great deal of good, and who urgently requested the doctor to
forward some more. Another letter was from W.H. Eccleston, of Finsbury Park, who wrote him a glowing letter
of thanks for his services, and said that all his friends looked upon the doctor as having saved his life. In talking
about his standing in England, the doctor said:
“If it were necessary I could show you letters from many distinguished people whom I have met abroad. I am
a frequenter of some of the best London clubs, among others the Carleton Club and the Beefsteak Club. I was
the victim of circumstances when this horrible charge was first brought, and since then I have been attacked
on all sides and no one has had a good word to say for me. It is strange, too, because I don’t remember ever
to have done any human being harm, and I know of a great many I have helped.”5
While the precise meaning of this bizarre interview will no doubt be hotly debated in future years, I merely wish to
offer two or three brief observations.
One is struck by the uneasy clash between Tumblety’s strange and ridiculous personality, and the obvious seriousness
with which Scotland Yard viewed him as a suspect. Tumblety’s denials obviously tell us nothing. The innocent and the
guilty defend themselves with equal fervor. Tumblety, however, not only admits to being a suspect in the murders, he
inadvertently reveals having traveled into Whitechapel from a remote location. “With thousands of others,” he argues—
but thousands of others were not named as “very likely” suspects by a Chief Inspector. Tumblety also acknowledges that
detectives followed him in London, and implies their interest continued after his return to America. His most important
admission, perhaps, is having spent “two or three days” in police custody. This cuts to the heart of the matter.
When Evans and Gainey’s 1995 book The Lodger first revealed Tumblety as a contemporary police suspect, researcher
Andy Aliffe discovered a court calendar, in tabular form, that showed Tumblety had been arrested for four counts of
gross indecency and four counts of indecent assault on November 7th—the same charges alluded to by Littlechild.
A further entry showed Tumblety being bailed on November 16th. Critics quickly proclaimed that this exonerated
Tumblety, for had he been in custody the course of those nine days he surely could not have murdered Mary Kelly on
November 9th. Tumblety’s own statement, however, disproves these speculations.
Stewart Evans has argued—correctly—that the court tabulations indicate that Tumblety
was allotted police bail—a procedure that quickly released a suspect from custody,
but required him to return to the station in one week’s time to be formally charged.6
The mechanism of police bail did not allow a man to be held for “two or three days.”
What is often ignored is the fact that a warrant was also issued for Tumblety’s arrest on
November 14th—which certainly wouldn’t have been the case had he already been in
custody! Taken together, this indicates that Tumblety was picked up on November 7th,
held briefly, and released. Failing to appear after the allotted seven days, the warrant
was then issued. We know that two bondsmen came forward to act as sureties for the
£300—the record dates this to November 16th— and a court date for the gross indecency
charges was set at a pretrial hearing on November 20th. All of this would indicate that
the police managed to pick Tumblety up on the warrant sometime between November
14th and November 16th. Thus, he was held for “two or three days” in total—the 7th,
15th, and/or the 16th. The undeniable implication is that Tumblety was not in police
custody at the time of the Kelly murder.
Tumblety’s reference to the corrupt and controversial New York Police Chief Thomas
Police Chief Thomas Byrnes
Byrnes is particular interesting, not merely as a bit of transparent bootlicking of the
local heat, but as an indication that Tumblety had closely followed the Whitechapel
murders while in London. “Why, if Inspector Byrnes was over in London with some of his men they would have had the
Whitechapel fiend long ago,” says Tumblety. This is an allusion to Byrnes’ arrogant comments as published in The Star,
shortly after the murders of Eddowes and Stride. “I would have taken 50 female habitués of Whitechapel and covered
the ground with them. Even if one fell a victim, I should get the murderer,” Byrnes crowed. “But—pshaw! What’s the
good of talking? The murderer would have been caught long ago.”7

5 The New York World, 29 January, 1889

6 See Evans & Gainey, pg. 270-271.
7 The Star (London) 4 October, 1888.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 5

 The British “testimonials” Tumblety produced for the reporter are
evidently genuine, and confirm that he still occasionally practiced
“medicine” in London in the early 1880s. Several men named Bowers
worked for the Midland Railway in England. W.H. Eccleston is William
H. Eccleston, a young railway clerk, who did, in fact, live in Finsbury
Park, Islington. Tumblety could not, however, have been a member of
the Beefsteak Club. Beyond the unlikelihood of such a snooty London
club allowing him in, the Beefsteak was intimately connected to
Henry Irving’s Lyceum Theatre—famous among students of the Ripper
case for its production of Stevenson’s Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. By
1888, one of its more prominent members was Thomas Hall Caine—a
now well-known writer who had been seduced and manipulated by
Tumblety in the mid-1870s. Caine’s correspondence shows that he
had long since washed his hands of the doctor, and his presence in
the Beefsteak Club certainly disallows Tumblety’s.8
What is to be made of these rambling statements of boiled beef and dyspepsia? Tumblety’s comments are bizarre,
to say the least. One must be struck, particularly, by their inappropriateness. Nowhere does he seriously address the
charges laid at this feet, and he even suggests—without the least scintilla of credibility—that Scotland Yard was after
his money. These are surely the comments of a man well experienced in using bombast and eccentricity as a defense
mechanism. Despite Tumblety’s promise to prepare a pamphlet to “defend himself,” his eventual 1889 pamphlet does
nothing of the sort. It is an impossibly incompetent affair, irrelevant of any purpose, filled with tedious and plagiarized
travel monologues, a hodgepodge of testimonials—his cure-all for every criminal offense—and, oddly, near the end a
brief discussion of Bright’s Disease—the same condition from which some believe Kate Eddowes suffered. Tumblety’s
only direct allusion to his London arrest was a grandiose and megalomaniacal comparison between his own tawdry
escape and the ordeals of the Irish Home Rule parliamentarian, Charles Stewart Parnell.9
An odd business.

8 The 1881 UK Census places William H. Eccleston <b. 1864 > at 14 Almington Street, Finsbury Park, London. By 1891 Eccleston is living
at No. 4 Fassett Square, Dalston. For Hall Caine’s connection to the Lyceum Theatre see Hall Caine: Portrait of a Victorian Romancer
by Vivien Allen (1997).
9 Dr. Francis Tumblety--Sketch of the Life of the Gifted, Eccentric and World Famed Physician (Brooklyn, 1889). See p. 87

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 6

A Skeleton Shingle
By JOE CHETCUTI

One night as our adventurer [Dr Francis Tumblety] sat dozing by the bar-room fire, in a country
inn somewhere in Cataraugus county, a most remarkable vision appeared to him. He thought
Aesculapius, the ancient god of medicine, appeared to him in the disguise of an old crone, who
made up herb-medicines in that neighborhood, and after anointing his temples, nostrils, and
palms, with poppy-juice, thus addressed him – ‘My son, I am the divinity that of old presided over
the primitive schools of medicine. Modern science has displaced me from my tripod. My wand
has ceased to charm, and my ring to work wonders. Attend to me, and your fortune is secure...
Commence seven miles at least from this place, and call yourself a doctor... If they ask you what
university you studied in, say Paris, or any other place far enough away. Go on courageously, my
son. Lie and fear not. The world loves to be well humbugged, and it is your own fault if you do
not make them pay well for it.’ With these words, Aesculapius embraced Tumblety, squeezed
both his hands, and left him. Great, as may be expected, was the establishment of our hero.
He yawned, he awoke, he pinched himself to prove that he was really awake. He was disposed
to regard the vision he had seen as some distempered dream, when to his still greater surprise,
and no small delight, he found his fingers on lifting them to the lamp, glittering with rings. This
convinced him that he had really been visited by a god, and to this day he wears as many rings
as his hand can conveniently carry, in evidence of his original call to the practice of medicine.1
In the autumn of 1857, a Montreal political journal called the New Era ridiculed
Francis Tumblety in an oddly satirical manner. The quack was sarcastically linked
with Aesculapius, the Greek and Roman pagan god of medicine and healing. In an
earlier segment of the same article, Mrs Margaret Tumblety was portrayed as having
been haunted by mystic visions shortly before giving birth to Francis. The author of
this derisive article exploited a heathen theme when he mocked Dr Tumblety. Was
the embellishment of such a theme warranted? Did paganism really play a role in
the life of this mysterious Ripper suspect? When searching through my paperwork, I
reviewed a number of instances where Christianity was placed into severe disrepute
by the quack. But as disrespectful as they were, none of those acts jumped out as
having been identifiable proof that idolatry worship was part of Tumblety’s secretive
lifestyle. In addition, the New York Times revealed that Tumblety was a member of
several questionable clubs, yet the nature of those clubs wasn’t disclosed.2 Regardless,
I decided to keep at this because I didn’t think the New Era would childishly fabricate
a pagan theme against the doctor. I felt there must have been a basis to their story.
Did the Montreal author know something about Tumblety’s much-guarded personal
life? Judging by the literary style of the article, the writer probably was the New Era’s
editor Thomas D’Arcy McGee.

1 Discovered by Stephen Ryder. Originally printed in the New Era October – November 1857 issue.
Aesculapius. 2 New York Times, 19 November 1888.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 7

 At the time of that writing, McGee was waging a successful bid to
attain a Canadian Parliamentary seat for himself. A politically influential
supporter of his campaign was the radical Irish attorney Bernard Devlin.
When the Aesculapius tale hit the streets, Devlin and Tumblety were in
a litigation battle against each other which had resulted from a dispute
that ensued shortly after Tumblety was released from his Montreal jail
cell on 1 October 1857. An article was recently published which delved
into the Montreal Superior Court’s ruling on the Devlin vs Tumblety case.3
The New Era’s motive for degrading the doctor in print could have been
attributed to McGee’s desire to stand behind the influential backer who
supported his Parliamentary campaign.
Although this seemed a likely reason why the damaging article was
published, I still was not any closer to confirming that a connection
between the Littlechild suspect and paganism had existed. Pursuing this
premise would prove to be a formidable task chiefly because Tumblety
was very reticent about his personal matters:
Thomas D’Arcy McGee.
I have known (Tumblety) by sight for thirty years...but I never in my
life saw him speak to anyone, I never saw him accompanied by a friend, and I never knew him to inquire for anyone.
– William H Carr, veteran clerk of the 5th Avenue Hotel in New York.4
When a boy he had no associates, and when he returned (to Rochester) he was more exclusive and solitary than
ever. – Captain Streeter.5
I am not in the habit of telling people my private affairs. – Francis Tumblety.6
It seems impossible that a man whose appearance is so striking as to attract universal attention on a crowded street
should be able to throw about his movements an air of such impenetrable mystery. – Pittsburgh Daily Chronicle and
Telegraph.7
No doubt this was going to be a stern challenge. Fortunately, I recalled a specific item of information that would be
of help. It came from The Daily News of Frederick, Maryland:
Dr. Francis Tumblety opened an office in this city where Mr. Charles Kussmaul now has his tobacco and cigar
store, on Court street, about the close of the war for the purpose of curing blood diseases, pimples, etc.,
arising from disorders of the blood. The doctor is a very eccentric man, having for a sign a skeleton head and
whilst out riding always had a greyhound following him.8

The public display of a skeleton head in front of Tumblety’s office was believable. The quack was known for using
strange props when promoting his services as was pointed out by the Chicago Tribune:
(Tumblety) had a herb store at Fulton and Nassau streets, with a glass case in front. Among other things in
this case was a sort of a glass siphon with a red liquid running through a thin glass tube to indicate blood.9

As you can tell, the man wasn’t shy about utilizing eye-catching objects in front of his office. The Maryland article
accurately reported that the doctor’s greyhound would follow its master around town. This has been substantiated by
many other accounts. Researcher Roger Palmer confirmed that a Charles Kassmaul was listed as a Frederick, Maryland
tobacconist in the 1880 federal census. So The Daily News article appeared to have been legitimate. The only noticeable
errors it contained were the slight misspelling of Kassmaul’s name and the probable time-frame inaccuracy of the claim
that Tumblety opened a shop in Frederick near the close of the Civil War.10 But all in all, there wasn’t any reason to
doubt the truthfulness of the statement that Tumblety used a skeleton head as an advertisement sign.

3 Joe Chetcuti, ‘Allies No More,’ The Journal of the Whitechapel Society 1888, April 2007, 10–12.
4 Pittsburgh Daily Chronicle and Telegraph, 27 November 1888.
5 Rochester Democrat and Republican, 3 December 1888.
6 Stewart P Evans and Paul Gainey, Jack the Ripper: The First American Serial Killer. Private letter from Francis Tumblety to Sir Thomas
Henry Hall Caine dated 4 August 1875.
7 Pittsburgh Daily Chronicle and Telegraph, 27 November 1888.
8 The Daily News, Frederick, Maryland, 20 November 1888.
9 Chicago Tribune, 25 November 1888.
10 It was known that Dr Tumblety was open for business in St Louis, Missouri at the close of the Civil War in Spring 1865.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 8

 The most recognizable skeleton head still must be the Jolly Roger. This skull and crossbones image was the flag
symbol on pirate ships. But to find its origin, some say you would need to go back further in time. Back to the days
when a Holy Order of elite fighters stamped a lasting imprint on history. These were enormously wealthy crusaders who
have been credited for having laid the foundation of the modern banking methods which are prevalent today. These
monks allegedly became blasphemous sinners who were persecuted by a Pope and the King of France for their heathen
worship. They were soldiers who were initially founded for the purpose of defending the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem,
yet they were charged at their condemnation trial for having spat and trampled on the Cross. They were accused of
worshiping the head of John the Baptist and the Skull of Sidon. A skull which was said to have been conceived through
an act of necrophilia by one of the monks. After many of them were brutally executed by the Catholic Church in 1314,
their legend still continued to grow. While on the run in Europe, some of the disbanded members of the Order were
rumored to have hid in the numerous shrines which their monk brothers had exquisitely constructed many decades
before. Others were believed to have become brigands on the open seas while sailing under the skull of the Jolly
Roger. Let us now take a look at this secretive army of men, who despite having been charged with idolatry worship
and sodomy, were still envied for their accumulation of vast amounts of wealth and knowledge. These were the Knights
Templar. We’ll hear about their peculiar rituals and their demise at the hands of the savage Dominican Friars of the
Inquisition.
The Knights Templar was a fighting religious order founded in Jerusalem during the year 1118. Their initial duty was
to defend both the Tomb of Christ (The Holy Sepulcher) and the Christian pilgrims who were traveling from Europe to
the Holy Land. They headquartered themselves in the ruins of a sacred structure called the Temple of King Solomon.
What made these expert warriors unique was that they were highly skilled in masonry and well-advanced in monetary
practices. They reaped huge quantities of cash while establishing their exemplary banking network. The Templars
earned the admiration of several European monarchs, especially King John II of Portugal who for a time held the title of
Grand Master of the Order. In due course the Knights would become the bankers for practically every throne in Europe.
It was not long before Royal families enthusiastically sent their sons to be recruited into this honored army of men.
I viewed a documentary which featured Knights Templar historian and author Dr Karen Ralls. She introduced these
crusaders by stating:
It was a ‘new Knighthood’ meaning these would be warrior monks, not merely monks who prayed all day,
but also not only those who fought on the battlefield. So they began as a type of ‘special forces’ for Christ,
you might say.11

The Templars crusaded across Europe and stored up their treasures. As the Order grew more powerful, the Knights
became more secretive. By the 14th century, they were looked upon much differently. Rumors of mysticism and
witchcraft followed them. Their fabulous success was attributed to everything from black magic to their private
knowledge of the writings inside Solomon’s Temple. Endless research and assumptions are possible when exploring into
the history of these monks. There has been plenty of literature printed about them and the opinions of their historians
often vary. Some regarded the Knights as the possessors of the Holy Grail and creators of the Shroud of Turin. Others
considered them devil worshipers who financially supported studies in the Kabbalah, which is Jewish mysticism. Many
scholars felt the Knights were falsely ‘demonized’ by an envious French King who desired their wealth. These monks
were even accused of having been medieval abortionists.12 There was tons of material for me to choose from, but I
decided to concentrate on the persecution of the Knights Templar. It was a persecution fueled by jealousy and greed.
King Philip IV inherited an empty treasury when his reign began. His father’s disastrous military campaigns had left
France in an awful financial state. In 1306, Philip came up with a cruel fund raising idea. He expelled all the Jews from
his realm and confiscated their property. This was a King who was driven by his lust for riches. Author Peter Tompkins
wrote:
Philip in his quest for more and more money, recalled all the coinage (in France) and melted it down for his
usage. He then replaced it all with coins minted of lesser value. This in a round about way, is probably the first
recorded case of devaluing currency. It was when Philip so devalued the French currency that he was forced to
seek refuge from his people in a Templar shelter.13

11 Discovery Channel’s presentation ‘Secret History of the Freemasons.’

12 Rixon Stewart’s America Before Columbus. (The Hidden History of the Promised Land section.) www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.
asp?ID=139
13 Peter Tompkins’ The Magic of the Obelisks. www.templarhistory.com/philip.html

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 9

 The ticked off Paris mob wanted Philip’s head for messing with the coins. Notably, this wasn’t the first time the
Knights Templar had to come to the rescue of an endangered French monarch. Back in 1248, King Louis IX landed his
army in Egypt in an attempt to capture Cairo, but the Egyptians entrapped their invaders. Louis was taken prisoner and
the Egyptians wanted what amounted to £167,000 as ransom for his release. Louis didn’t have much cash back then so
he repeatedly begged the Knights to pay for his ransom. Writer H Meij explained:
The Knights Templar at the time formed, and successfully operated, a sophisticated network across Europe.
This network enabled (them) to move large amounts of funds without having to actually move the cash, much
like a letter of credit as we know it today. Taking a margin on such transactions, (the Templars) could be
regarded as a type of bank...hence Louis IX turned to the Knights Templar for financial assistance.14

So just like his grandfather Louis IX had done, Philip IV called out for the Templars to save him. While Philip was
being sheltered by the Knights Templar, he took a look around their confines and feasted his eyes. The angry crowd had
driven the thieving King right smack into a treasure chest. Peter Tompkins continued:
Here in the Paris temple, Philip became aware, perhaps for the first time of the true wealth of the Knights
Templar. It was here in the protecting arms of the order that he first manifested the idea of stealing their vast
wealth for his political agenda.

There were other religious fighting orders in existence during this time period, but none
of them had the sophistication and prestige of the Templars. At one time plans were drawn
up to unite all the religious fighting orders into one order called the Knights of Jerusalem.
The supreme ruler of this order would be entitled the Rex Bellator. Naturally, Philip IV
desired to be the Rex Bellator. He even made a proposal to Rome stating that all future
French Kings should automatically be given that title and any extra revenue accumulated by
the Knights of Jerusalem was to be deposited to the Rex Bellator! The Grand Master of the
Knights Templar, Jacques de Molay, wanted no part of this, and he subsequently rejected
the entire Knights of Jerusalem concept.
Of all the men who drew Philip’s wrath, Pope Boniface VIII may have headed the list. The
Philip-Boniface rivalry really was a doozy:
* In 1296, Philip started taxing the Catholic Church, but Pope Boniface later issued a
Papal Bull forbidding the clergy to pay.
* In 1302, Boniface issued the Unam Sanctum which proclaimed the superiority of the
Papacy over all secular rulers. When Philip received the decree, he burned it in front
Jacques de Molay. of everybody.
* In retaliation to the Unam Sanctum, Philip held court
against Pope Boniface in absentia charging that the
man was unfit to sit on St. Peter’s throne.15
* As a result, Boniface ex-communicated Philip!
Just a few weeks after his ex-communication, Philip ordered his men to kidnap Pope
Boniface. The King’s orders were carried out, and shortly after this ordeal had ended,
Boniface died. The King sensed that the next Pope, Benedict XI, was not going to be
any friendlier to France, so he arranged for Benedict to be poisoned to death. After
disposing of two Popes in a short period of time, Philip decided to make things easier
for himself. He arranged for his own Papal candidate, the Archbishop of Bordeaux, to
be named Pope Clement V. Philip pressured his new Pope to return to France therefore
the Papacy would eventually be moved from Rome to Avignon. It wasn’t hard to figure
out what was happening here especially after Pope Clement appointed 24 Cardinals
with 23 of them being French. Philip had just created a puppet Papacy for himself
which enabled him to once again levy a tax on the Catholic Church. There would be
no Papal Bull blocking him this time. Pope Clement wasn’t going to bite the hand that
delivered the Holy See to him. More importantly, King Philip was now all set to go after
the Knights Templar in France.

14 H Meij’s A Portrait of King Philip IV (Philip the Fair) www3 tky.3web.ne.jp/~jafarr/A%20Portrai

t%20of%20King%20Philip%20IV%202.html The kidnapping of Pope Boniface VIII.

15 H. Meij, ibid.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 10

 The responsibility of creating a case against the Knights was turned over to the
Royal Chancellor, Guillaume de Nogaret. This guy really was a lovely chap. Not only
had he been ex-communicated along with Philip, but it was his agency that was mainly
suspected for having poisoned Pope Benedict.16 This Chancellor planted twelve of his
own men as spies inside Templar commanderies. These spies paved the way for a list
of offenses against the Knights to be drawn up. Philip issued the command to round up
the Templars at dawn on Friday October 13, 1307 thus giving birth to the Friday the
13th superstition. With the approval of the new Papacy the case was handed over to
the Friars of the Inquisition who charged the monks with these nine accusations:17
I. That during the reception ceremony, new brothers were required to deny
Christ, God, the Virgin, or the Saints on the command of those receiving
them.
II. That the brothers committed various sacrilegious acts either on the Cross or on
an image of Christ.
III. That the receptors practices obscene kisses on new entrants, on the mouth,
navel, and buttocks.
IV. That the priests of the Order did not consecrate the host, and that the brothers
did not believe in the Sacraments.
Pope Clement V.
V. That the brothers practiced idol worship of a cat and a head.
VI. That the brothers encouraged and permitted the practice of sodomy.
VII. That the Grand Master or other officials absolved fellow Templars of their
sins.
VIII. That the Templars held their reception ceremonies and charter meetings in
secret and at night.
IX. That the Templars abused the duties of charity and hospitality and used illegal
means to acquire property and increase their wealth.
Several of the Knights confessed to witchcraft during the proceedings. They
admitted to worshiping a bearded idol, that being a head which they called Baphomet.
The symbol of Baphomet was used by the Templars to represent Satan. Apparently
this symbol was powerful enough to consume men. Not only did the Knights confess
to worshiping this head, but one of Guillaume de Nogaret’s spies ended up doing so
as well. The following is taken from The Encyclopedia of Occultism by Lewis Spence
originally published in 1920:
Guillaume de Nogaret.
Many Templars confessed to having seen the idol, but they described it
differently. We must suppose that it was not in all cases represented under the same form. Some said it was a
frightful head, with long beard and sparkling eyes; others said it was a man’s skull; some described it as having
three faces!; one witness described it as a painting representing the image of a man and said that when it was
shown to him, he was ordered to ‘adore Christ his creator.’

It was contested that these monks also worshiped other skulls, and I’ll give one example. The legend of the Skull
of Sidon states that a particular Knights Templar was a Lord of Sidon. One night he crept into the grave of a lady who
had been buried earlier that same day. Well, this Lord of Sidon dug up her body and violated it. Now it was commonly
known that the order of the Templars were forbidden to have any sexual involvement with women. As the legend has
it, a dark voice from the void instructed this sinful monk to return to the grave in nine months and he would find a
son. The Knight did as he was told and upon returning to the grave at the appointed time he found a male skull on the
lady’s leg bones. There was a belief that the skull and crossbones symbol was born here. (The crossbones on the Jolly
Roger were looked upon by many as leg bones.) The dark voice then bade the Templar ‘guard it well for it would be
the giver of all good things’18 and so the Knight carried the newly born skull away with him.

16 From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XI
17 From www.geocities.com/vampiricstudies/knights.html

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 11

 Consequently he was able to defeat his enemies by merely showing them this magic head. Eventually the skull was
passed to the possession of the Order. This wild fable can be traced back to the twelfth century. So at the time of the
Knights’ famous Inquisition troubles in France (1307–1314) this Sidon tale was already well woven into Templar legend.
In fact, this fable was even called upon during their trials.
Dr Keith Laidler is a respected Knights Templar author. On page 179 of his book, The Head of God; the lost treasures
of the Templars, Dr Laidler tells how the monks were prompted to sever the legs of a dead Templar. The amputated
legs were then crossed on the trunk in what would become a traditional Jolly Roger configuration. Laidler went on to
speak of how the monks’ post mortem rituals were strongly reminiscent of the Skull of Sidon account. Stephen Dafoe
(the owner of templarhistory.com) informed me that Laidler’s writing affirmed what was originally published by another
Knights Templar author named Andrew Sinclair. So these legendary Templar burial customs were not only chilling, but
they were also well known amongst authors and researchers in this field. Additionally, we have this quote from author
Stephen Sora:
The Templars contrary to the beliefs of the church, thought that only the skull and two bones were needed
to be buried for their owners to go to heaven. The skull and crossed bones were a popular motif on the graves
of their fallen.19

A point to be made is that regardless of whether or not these monks truly performed the ‘severing of the legs’
procedure on a Knight’s corpse, this burial preparation was still treated with solemn reverence by the disciples of
Templar lore. It was a morbid legend which was preserved and passed down through the years.
The Doctor used to tell a queer story about himself as if he believed it. He said he was once dead, and
proceeded to explain by stating that when riding near Pittsburgh one day he was thrown from his horse and
carried home for dead. He claimed that he then laid dead for three days, and was only brought to life by the
undertaker, who found him too long for his coffin, attempting to saw off his legs. - New York Herald.20

I’ve stated in the past that Tumblety’s demonic parable mocked the Resurrection. This Ripper suspect declared here
that he rose from death after three days. When his parable spoke of how his legs were to be sawed off as he laid
deceased in a coffin, my initial interpretation concerned the Crucifixion. Christ’s legs were in danger of being broken
by a Roman soldier as he hung dead on the Cross. (John 19:32-33) But ultimately no attempt was made to break Christ’s
legs, and since Tumblety also ended his Pittsburgh story with his lifeless legs having been saved from harm, I surmised
that creating a travesty of the Crucifixion may have been part of the parable’s intent. I still think that Tumblety taunted
Christianity when he claimed to have risen from death after three days, but it’s now clear that the other part of the
parable deserves to be looked at once more.
The description of an undertaker’s attempt to saw off the doctor’s legs while he laid deceased correlates very well
with the legendary burial customs of the Knights Templar. Deciphering this Ripper suspect’s parable is challenging, but
we may have discovered where it was partially derived from. In all my research, this post-mortem amputation ritual by
the Templars is the closest thing I’ve found that can be related to that Pittsburgh parable. We’ve already established
the symbolic importance of the union between a skeleton skull and two dismembered legs. Thus, Tumblety’s ‘severing
of the legs’ parable becomes magnified when it stands beside the news report that he displayed a skeleton head in
front of his office. A prevailing feeling begins to emerge: It was very likely that McGee’s pagan-taunting Montreal article
against Tumblety wasn’t baseless.
When the Templars turned to piracy they flew the Skull and Crossbones and if the ship they wanted didn’t
succumb, they raised the red flag, or the jolie rouge. This flag meant ‘no quarter or mercy will be granted.’ It
was thought that later pirates used the (Jolly Roger) symbol because the ship’s log which listed those who died
on board, had the skull and cross-bones at the heading of the dead list. - Stephen Sora.

Just as in the study of the Whitechapel mysteries, you will find disagreements among Knights Templar historians. For
every person who believes that some Templars turned to piracy, as was stated by Sora, you will find one who thinks
the Knights had nothing to do with piracy, the Jolly Roger, nor the Skull of Sidon. One thing that can be agreed upon
though is that there were plenty of people who faithfully believed all these Templar legends, even if they weren’t
authenticated. While conducting my research, I’ve found that satanists and occultists are convinced that the Knights
were demonic. This is from the Temple of Satan:

18 From www.crystalinks.com/skullsidon.html
19 Stephen Sora, Secret Societies of the American Elite: From Knights Templar to Skull and Bones. Rochester, Vermont: Destiny Books,
2003.
20 New York Herald, 19 November 1888.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 12

 The symbol of the Baphomet was used by the Knights Templar to represent Satan. The Baphomet represents
the powers of darkness combined with the regenerative fertility of the goat.21

And once again from The Encyclopedia of Occultism:

...we can now be pretty certain the Knights Templar were Satanic. We place great credence in the testimony
of fellow occultists, because they are simply reporting the truth, and are not trying to discredit anyone or any
organization.

Drawing a comparison to Dr Tumblety’s mannerisms with that of an occultist of Templar legends produces an
avalanche of questions:
* If a man was captivated by these Knights along with their alleged idolatry and demonic practices, would he seek
to emulate their legendary lifestyles? Would he in turn, like the Knights Templar, continually present himself in
the public eye yet retain for himself a strict aura of privacy which intrigues others for centuries?
* Would he practice abortion like these monks were accused of doing? Would he boast that his presence was shared
in the company of European monarchs?
* Would he take to heart the way the Knights were said to have darkly betrayed their initial duty which was
established for the good of Christianity? Would an emulator of this Order likewise commit himself to a life of
deceit and betrayal?
* Would he constantly travel far and wide like a crusader? Would he make it a point to accumulate and store large
amounts of wealth while laboring on this mission?
* Would he follow the Templar customs by having no sexual relations with women? Would he find ways to be
reproached, like the Templars were, for recruiting and sexually violating young male adults?
* Would he dare announce his presence in the form of a skeleton head and claim his legs were to be severed in a
coffin? Would a prominent Canadian politician derisively print an article that declares him to be in partnership
with a pagan god?
A great number of Knights agreed to the general points of the formula of initiation. It seems possible that
they denied Christ and spat and trod upon the cross. Their alleged words of denial were ‘Je reney Deu’ or ‘Je
reney Jhesu’ repeated thrice. Most of those who confessed having gone through this ceremony declared that
they did it with repugnance and spat beside the cross, not on it. This reception took place in a secret room
with closed doors; the candidate was compelled to take off part or (in rare instances) all of his garments; and
then he was kissed on various parts of the body.22

I suppose it would be difficult for any of us to imagine an undressed monk going through this type of a ritual. Our
mental image of a Templar Knight more likely would have him gallantly adorned in military attire. After reading about
this lewd initiation, an article in the San Francisco Daily Report becomes more notable. The column spoke of how
Tumblety would appear in public ‘half-naked’ and then the next time he was seen he would ‘strut forth decked out
with medals.’23 It just makes you stop and wonder what was really going through this doctor’s mind.
To finish up on the trials in France, the Friars of the Inquisition prosecuted the Knights for their homosexual
practices. It was made known that the recruits were sodomized and ordered to spit on the Cross, then march across
it. ‘According to some scholars, and recently recovered Vatican documents, these acts were intended to simulate the
kind of humiliation and torture that a crusader might be subjected to if captured by the Saracens. According to this
line of reasoning they were taught how to commit apostasy with their mind only and not with their heart.’24 Even if
this truly was their trial defense strategy, their prosecutors didn’t buy into it.
The Knights were burnt at the stake by orders of the Inquisition. They were declared guilty of heresy, rejection of
Christ, and sodomy. All historians agree that the Knights were terribly mistreated during their imprisonment. Many
believed they were tortured or threatened with torture. When studying Tumblety’s reaction to his confinement in the
Old Capitol Prison, we read how he disdainfully likened his incarceration to that of the days of the Bastille and the
Spanish Inquisition.25 He also spoke of his mysterious co-mates who suffered the same type of persecution. The doctor
declared the charges levied against him and his unidentified comrades were unfounded:

21 From www.cephasministry.com/masonic_knights_of_templar_barphomet.html
22 From answers.com/topic/templar
23 San Francisco Daily Report 23 November, 1888.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 13

 Heaven knows that were I alone the sufferer, I would endure and rest content with the vindication of my
name and fame from the odious calumnies which were so heedlessly, and upon no foundation, cast upon me;
but the names of my co-mates are “legion” (emphasis mine), and I feel the public good demands an example
for all future tyrants, who, dressed in the garb of brief authority, may otherwise take advantage of precedent
to play some fantastic tricks at the expense of right, justice, humanity, and liberty.26

Legion is certainly a provocative name to entitle your co-mates especially when considering Luke 8:30’s usage of that
word in terms of satanic identification. I suspect this tormented legion, whom Tumblety made reference to, expanded
well beyond the doctor’s cell mates in the Old Capitol Prison.
While he burned at the stake under the approving eyes of the French monarchy and the Papacy of Avignon, the last
Grand Master of the Order spoke his final words. Jacques de Molay called out to King Philip IV and Pope Clement V:
Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us. God will avenge us.27

Pope Clement passed away the following month and King Philip died
seven months later. France was finally rid of their tyrant King named Philip
IV, and the dead body of Clement V was said to have been completely
charred in a church fire that was supposedly caused by a lightning bolt.
In the Divine Comedy, Dante was shown the place which awaited Clement
in the 8th Circle of Hell.28 Justifiably a good portion of the Templars’
wealth was transferred to another religious fighting order called the
Knights Hospitaller. And in 1903, the corpse of Francis Tumblety traveled
hundreds of miles so it can be buried in a cemetery named after the Holy
Sepulcher.

Acknowledgement and Afterword

I would like to thank Jonathan Menges for providing me with the
contents of Dr Keith Laidler’s book. Since this writing was a key segment
Jacques de Molay burned at the stake.
of my article, I’ll now print an excerpt from page 179 of The Head of God.
The woman in the grave whom the Lord of Sidon violated was simply known as the lady of Maraclea. When Dr Laidler
referred to the ‘stories of the lady of Maraclea’ he was speaking of the Skull of Sidon legend.
...the bodies of certain high-ranking Templars were subject to what most Christians of their day (and of our
day for that matter) would have regarded as the grossest mutilation. A clue to the ‘disfigurement’ enacted
on the Templar corpses is evident in the obvious, but little-noted, size of their tombs; these are quite tiny,
hardly capable of taking a child let alone a grown warrior. The external dimensions of the stone tomb of Sir
William Sinclair, the Scottish Templar, are 100 x 28 centimetres and, as the tomb is carved from solid stone,
the internal measurements are correspondingly even smaller. The grotesque reason for this small coffin size is
that the body was not all in one piece.

The bodies of the Templar dead were partially dismembered and ritually beheaded. From any orthodox
perspective this is a deliberate defilement of the dead, nothing short of butchery. The Templars’ view was
clearly different. It is important to note that the cadavers were only partially dismembered. The arms were
left intact. It was only the lower limbs that were disarticulated and laid cross-wise over the trunk. The severed
head was likewise placed on the trunk, just above the crossed lower limbs. This is, of course, the classic skull
and crossbones, still to be seen on both Templar and masonic gravestones, and it is strongly reminiscent of the
stories of the lady of Maraclea...

24 From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Knights_Templar
25 Narrative of Dr. Francis Tumblety. (1872), 24.
26 Narrative of Dr. Francis Tumblety. (1872), 48–49.
27 From www.jacquesdemolay.org/
28 From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Clement_V

Additional Sources Consulted

www.bilderberg.org/mason.htm; www.freemasonryinjapan.com/Lecture-Templars.htm; www.dpjs.co.uk/knights_templar.html; ‘The
Skull and Cross-Bones’ by Margaret Odrowaz-Sypnieski BFA. Available at www.angelfire.com/mi3/eric260b/skullandcrossbone.html; www.
casebook.org.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 14

Foster’s
Annotations
By GAVIN BROMLEY

Following the murder of Catherine Eddowes in Mitre Square, a piece of her apron apparently
taken by her killer, was found bloodstained in a doorway in Goulston Street about a third of a mile
away from the murder scene. There was also some writing on the wall above where the apron was
found which may have been written by the killer.
For the inquest into Catherine Eddowes’ death, City surveyor Frederick Foster was requested to produce a plan of
Mitre Square and a map covering the routes the killer likely took to get to Goulston Street from Mitre Square.
On his map of the killer’s likely routes there are some markings and some annotations apparently added later to
explain the location of the doorway to nos. 108/119 Wentworth Model Dwellings where the piece of apron and writing
were found. The additional annotations may not have been made by Foster, but could have been by someone else to
clarify certain aspects of the map.
Of special interest is a lamp marked on the map and noted as such, with an additional explanation that it was 20
feet from the doorway. The location of a lamp near to the doorway is important when considering, for example, how
much light may have been available in the doorway for the killer to leave a message or that after fleeing the murder
scene and getting a reasonably safe distance clear he may have needed light to check how clean his hands were before
discarding the apron, which had now fulfilled its purpose, into the first doorway he then came to1.
The ‘A’ on the map directly opposite the junction with New Goulston Street appears to indicate the location where
the piece of apron and writing was found, since the two routes marked in blue for the killer’s escape also end at that
point. This is actually incorrect as the doorway to nos. 108/119 was located about 25m north of that point. However,
on Foster’s map a small arrow can be seen coming from the end of New Goulton Street (where there is an asterisk on
the map that possibly indicates the location of a lamp post) going obliquely across Goulston Street to a point a little
further north along Goulston Street than the ‘A’, but which is still far short of the actual location where the piece of
apron was found.
In City Beat Part 2 (Ripperologist 75, January 2007) I proposed a reason for Foster’s mistake which may explain an
aspect of the annotations that has proved problematic. However, this was a late addition to the article and consequently
a couple of errors went uncorrected.
One error was not to acknowledge the research done into this subject by Jon Smyth and Rob Clack. Neil Bell, Jake
Luukanen and others have made contributions to this specific area as well. Take a look at the ‘Meaning of the Message’
and ‘Drawings for Eddowes’ Inquest’ threads on Casebook.org forums. Jon Smyth, posting as Jon (naturally enough) and
Wicker Man (just to confuse us), took us through the full development of his thought processes on this.
But, let’s check out the issue first. Below is a close up of the area of Foster’s Map. We can see the ‘A’ noted earlier
and the oblique arrow running from the end of New Goulston Street. There is a mark just north of this arrow and a
leader line from this notes it as a lamp. There is also a larger asterisk on the corner of the junction of New Goulston
Street with Goulston Street roughly from where the arrow appears to start.

1 This idea is explored more fully in City Beat Part 2 (Ripperologist 75, January 2007).

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 15

 The annotations to the side of this
section of the map read:
2 Doors from Wentworth Street
& no 3 on The right 4 blocks
about 30’0 on right hand side
doorway about 20’0 from lamp
found inside entrance to Model
Dwellings from 108 to 119

The first line of text is straight

forward enough. The doorway to nos.
108/119 Wentworth Model Dwellings
was the second one from Wentworth
Street.
The next line, however, raised some
discussion on what was meant by “4
blocks”. It might have meant the
area was four blocks from the murder
site, but the conclusion reached was
that this referred to the 4 blocks of
tenements that made up Wentworth
Model Dwellings. Using the opposite
Figure 1: Close up of Goulston Street and the annotations on Foster’s map
end of the Dwellings as the reference
point, this time the line refers to the third block on the right of four blocks, which again accurately describes the
location of nos. 108/119.
The third line posed a problem that was not satisfactorily answered. It appears to say that the doorway was 30 feet
on the right hand side. The first two lines refer to the doorway (or at least the block where the doorway was) so in
context this line would appear to refer to the doorway as well. But to what did the 30 feet refer?
The next line makes reference to the lamp, stating the doorway was 20 feet away from it. Certainly the scale of
the map and the seeming positions of the lamp and doorway noted on it suggest feet rather than yards as the unit of
measure. The position of the lamp seems to correspond with an ‘H’ symbol on the 1894 OS Map and a circular symbol on
the 1890 Goad Fire Insurance Plan. These markings on the 1894 OS Map and Goad Plan are just outside the doorway to
nos. 120/131, the next doorway south of nos. 108/119. A suggestion that these markings may indicate lamps or at least
that hydrants would be placed near lamps, led me to take this as the position of the lamp to which Foster referred. The
fact that the location of the asterisk on the corner of New Goulston Street with Goulston Street corresponded with an
‘F.A’ symbol on the OS Map seemed to suggest some correlation between these markings and lamps or lampposts. Other
locations where we know a lamp existed (such as the entry to Mitre Square from Mitre Street) also had a corresponding
circular hydrant symbol on the Goad Plan for that area.
‘H’ can be used to denote a number of features on an OS map but, as noted by Jon Smyth and Rob Clack, but in the
context of streets they clearly refer to hydrants, and the fact that the other ‘H’ symbols in the area correspond with
the circular markings on Goad Plans of that time confirms this. As Jon states, the Goad Plans would be more interested
in showing the location of hydrants than lamps. The 1894 OS Map also shows ‘F.P’ symbols. These refer to ‘Fire Plugs’,
seemingly just another name for hydrants and that raised the question of why both fireplugs and hydrants would need
to be noted on the map.
Jon Smyth suggested that the hydrants may have been placed near to lamps so that they could be more easily
found at night in the event of a fire. Some support seemed to be found for this from a member of the Greater London
Industrial Archaeological Society who remembered such placing of hydrants by lampposts in Glasgow or Manchester.
Also, an old photograph showed a lamppost with the word ‘FIRE’ on the lamp was positioned by a grate that would be
the cover over a hydrant pit.
So the questions remained:
• Why was the doorway seemingly located incorrectly on the map, placing it too far south, when the annotations
describe its relative location correctly?
• What was ‘30 feet on the right hand side’ in reference to?
• Where exactly was the lamp? Would it correspond with the location of the hydrant outside nos. 120/131?

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 16

 • As an incidental question, why would the OS map note both fire plugs and hydrants if they were essentially the
same thing?
The problems of the locations on his map were almost certainly a result of Foster basing his map on the 1873
Ordnance Survey Map. However, by 1888 Goulston Street and the surrounding streets had changed a lot.
Between Wentworth Street and New Goulston Street another street intersects Goulston Street that can be seen on
the 1873 OS Map. This is actually two streets – Three Tun Alley (on the western side of Goulston Street) and Goulston
Court (on the eastern side). These roads no longer existed in 1888, but found their way onto Foster’s map. Goulston
Street had also been widened all the way down so there was no longer the slight twist in the road from Three Tun Alley
to Wentworth Street. Wentworth Street was also widened as part of the developments in the area between 1873 and
1888 such that the length of Goulston Street was reduced by about 25 feet at this end as a result.

Figure 2: Overlay of 1873 OS Map (red), 1890 Goad’s Plan (black) and 1894 OS Map (blue) by Jake Luukanen.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 17

 OK, let’s take some measurements of the actual locations. In keeping with the measurements used on Foster’s map
these will be in feet. They were taken from the Ordnance Survey 1:1056 London Sheet 7.67 Edition of 1894-18962
– Godfrey Edition 1985 (reduced to 1:2232). There are some issues regarding the accuracy of lengths taken from an OS
Map (such as distortion caused by plotting locations from essentially a sphere onto a flat 2-dimensional sheet, paper
distortion3 and the difficulty of getting exact measurements using a scale ruler where the measurement falls in between
lines) so there is the possibility of the measurements being a foot or two out.
The distance from Wentworth Street to the doorway to nos. 108/119 is just over 75 feet to the left hand side of
the doorway and about 80 feet to the right hand side4 where the writing and the piece of apron were found. The lamp
appears to be north of the doorway as shown on Foster’s map. A lamp situated 20 feet north of the doorway5 would
therefore be about 55 to 60 feet from Wentworth Street6.
The table below gives some measurements for locations
marked along Wentworth Model Dwellings. Included is
the distance from Wentworth Street as of 1888 to where
Goulston Court (the southern end of its junction with
Goulston Street) had been in 1873. The argument made
in City Beat Part 2 was that Foster may have applied the
correct measurement of the doorway from Wentworth
Street, but from the wrong location on his map; applying
it from Goulston Court rather than Wentworth Street.
This takes the measurement of 75 to 80 feet and adds it
onto the 53 feet that Goulston Court was approximately
from Wentworth Street. Though Wentworth Street is
clearly marked correctly on Foster’s map it could be that
the measurement was said to be ‘from the junction’ and
Goulston Court, being the nearest junction on the map,
was used as the reference point. The resulting position of
the doorway is point ‘G’ in the table and maps below and,
as noted earlier, this erroneous location of the doorway is
referred to as Foster’s doorway. This is demonstrated in
Figure 3. The distance from A to D (blue lines mark the
range of where the doorway was located) is the same as Figure 3: Distance from ‘A’ (junction with Wentworth Street)
to ‘D’ (doorway to nos. 108/119) is the same as from ‘B’
from B to G. The use of these letters will be seen in context (former junction with Goulston Court but still noted on
in Figure 4 where other locations are indicated. Foster’s map) to ‘G’ (location of Foster’s doorway)

Also noted in Figure 4 is the distance to a line taken across from the junction of New Goulston Street and Goulston
Street. The reason for this is that if Foster was only working from the 1873 map he would not have reference to where
the end of Wentworth Model Dwellings would be. His one point of reference in that area would be the junction with
New Goulston Street. This is noted on the map below as point ‘H’.

2 There were no editions of the OS map of London between 1873 and 1894.
3 Ordnance Survey Maps: A concise Guide for Historians by Richard Oliver, 2005, pp. 25 – 28
4 Width of the doorway is about 4 feet 9 inches.
5 From now on I will refer to the doorway of nos. 108/119 simply as ‘the doorway’; where I refer to another doorway, or an erroneous
location of the doorway to nos. 108/119 I will qualify this; Foster’s seeming position of the doorway on his map I will refer to as
‘Foster’s doorway’.
6 This is about 18m from Wentworth Street. In City Beat Part 2 I referred to this distance as 24m, which is actually the approximate
distance of the right side of the doorway from Wentworth Street, as noted elsewhere in that section of the article.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 18

 The points on the map are clarified in table 1:

Letter Location
A Wentworth St. junction with Goulston St. (End of building)
B Southern junction of Goulston Court and Goulston St. as it was in 1873
(single red line denotes this position to distinguish it from ‘C’)
C Location 20 feet north of the doorway (two lines show range from both sides of doorway ‘D’)
D Doorway to nos. 108/119 (both sides of doorway shown)
E Location 20 feet north of Foster’s doorway (position from both sides of Foster’s doorway)
F Fire hydrant outside nos. 120/131
G Foster’s doorway (both sides of position of doorway shown)
H Line from northern junction of New Goulston St (NGS). Single line denotes this position
I End of Wentworth Model Dwellings

Though I tried to arrange locations to get the hydrant to be point

‘H’ on the map below in order to avoid confusion, I didn’t have enough
reference points and ended up with the hydrant (noted as ‘H’ on the
OS Map) being point ‘F’ on my map, while point ‘H’ on my map is the
location opposite the northern side of the junction of New Goulston
Street and Goulston Street. Sorry... I tried! Think of it as ‘F’ire hydrant
if that helps!
Table 2 shows some of the measurements between the various points.

Map Location Approx.

positions Distance
(feet)
A–I Wentworth St. to end of WMD7 176
A – D (left) Wentworth St to left side
of doorway 108/119 75
A – D (right) Wentworth St to right side
of doorway 108/119 80
A–F Wentworth St to hydrant
Figure 4: Locations from Table 1 on map
outside 120/131 118
of Wentworth Model Dwellings
A–B Wentworth St to southern junction
of Goulston Ct and Goulston St 53
A–H Wentworth St to line from northern
junction of New Goulston St (NGS) 163
F–H Hydrant to NGS line 45

7 Wentworth Model Dwellings

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 19

 If we look at some of the distances relative to point ‘G’ this would give us some interesting measurements.

Map Location Approx. Distance

positions (feet)
B – G (left) Goulston Court to left side of Foster’s doorway 75
B – G (right) Goulston Court to right side of Foster’s doorway 80
A – G (left) Wentworth St. to left side of Foster’s doorway 128
A – G (right) Wentworth St. to right side of Foster’s doorway 133
F – G (left) Hydrant to nearest side of Foster’s doorway 10
F – G (right) Hydrant to right side of Foster’s doorway 15
G (right) – H Nearest side of Foster’s doorway to NGS line 30
G (right) – I Nearest side of Foster’s doorway to end of WMD 43

The location of the hydrant from the right hand side of Foster’s doorway (the right hand side of the actual doorway
being where the apron and writing were found) is about 15 feet8. This is not too far away from the ‘about 20 feet’ which
the lamp was stated to be from the doorway, though the left (nearest) side of Foster’s doorway would be only 10 feet
away. Interestingly the distance from Foster’s doorway to the line from New Goulston Street is about 30 feet, which
would make sense of the line in the annotations where it was stated that it was about ‘30 feet on the right hand side’.
While the first two lines of annotations place the doorway relative to the two ends of Wentworth Model Dwellings, this
line of text would appear to place it as a fixed distance from a reference point to give an actual measurement as to
where it was positioned along Goulston Street, even though this was actually incorrect.
As the markings on the 1894 OS Map and the 1890 Goad Plan outside nos. 120/131 actually denote a hydrant and do
not in themselves denote the location of a lamp, then if the doorway was said to be 20 feet from a lamp, this lamp
would be 5 to 10 feet further north of the hydrant (shown as position ‘E’ on the map), assuming the actual location of
the lamp was correctly noted on Foster’s map and then compared to the mistaken location of the doorway.
But is there something in Jon Smyth’s conjecture that hydrants would be placed near to street lamps? Also why are
there separate markings for ‘fire plugs’ on the OS map? Only the ‘H’ markings from the OS map are noted on the Goad
Plans as circular symbols. The fire plugs are not noted.
Early water mains were hollowed-out logs with one end tapered so they could fit into the non-tapered end of the
adjacent log and they were fixed into position with an iron ring.9 The water supply would be accessed by firefighters
by digging down to the main and puncturing it, allowing the water to run into the street or ‘kennels’ (open drains).
It would then be collected into buckets and thrown onto the fire or into the cisterns of early fire engines. When the
firefighters were finished they would seal the hole with a wooden plug, which came to be known as a ‘fire plug’.
Following the Great Fire of London in 1666, an Act of Parliament in 1667 stated that plugs should be put into the water
mains ‘in the most convenient places in every street, whereof all inhabitants may take notice; that breaking of the
pipes in a disorderly manner may be avoided’.
Later fire plugs were short right-angled projections from the main blocked with a wooden plug. To access the water
supply in the event of a fire, one of the firemen would have to release the plug with difficulty by tapping it on the
sides until the water pressure pushed it out and then insert a standpipe against the flow of the water securing it in
place by driving wedges around it. Needless to say, as a result, he would often get very wet, though some standpipes
had a conical shield to help prevent this. Alternatively a canvas dam was placed around the hole to collect the water
and into which the suction hoses would be placed to get the water into the engine from where it would be pumped
onto the fire.
8 In City Beat Part 2 Foster’s implied position of the doorway was obtained by adding the 20 feet to the location of the hydrant and then
seeing how far this was away from Goulston Court. The distance from this implied position to the end of WMD (point I) was stated to
be 35 feet. This was an error as the end of WMD would actually be between about 38 or 39 feet away from this implied position. The
error aside, because of this difference in how the implied position was calculated there is about a five feet difference between this
implied location of Foster’s doorway as stated in City Beat and as stated in this current article.
9 Information relating to the fire service, fire plugs, hydrants and street fire alarms is derived from the following sources: A History of
The British Fire Service by G. V. Blackstone, 1957; London’s Noble Fire Brigades 1833 – 1904 by Sally Holloway, 1973; Private
correspondence with Roger Mardon, Fire Service historian and author, who used as his sources Blackstone, 1957; Fire Protection - A
Complete Manual of the Organization, Machinery, Discipline and General Working of the Fire Brigade of London by Capt. Eyre Massey
Shaw, 1890 edition; A Practical Treatise on Outbreaks of Fire by Sidney Gompertz Gamble, 1926; London’s Fire Brigades by W. Eric
Jackson, 1966.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 20

 The ball hydrant was invented in 1848 and the alternative sluice-type valve was available before the 1870s. These
allowed easier access to the water supply than the fire plug, but London was slower than other cities at installing these
due to the expense involved and because they required constant water pressure. The Waterworks Clauses Act 1847
stipulated that the water supply should be turned on at all times if requested by a sufficient number of ratepayers,
but because pipes and fittings in houses would not withstand constant pressure this was seldom done. Consequently
when the fire brigade required it someone usually had to be found from the relevant water company to turn on the
water supply. This person was known as the turncock and the fire could not be fought until he arrived, unless there
was an open water supply nearby. The Metropolitan Water Act 1871 enabled the water companies in London to install
hydrants in areas where a constant supply of water was provided, at the expense of the Metropolitan Board of Works.
The water company generally determined where the hydrants would be fitted as the Board, although asked, did not
always specify the locations they would prefer.
A Select Committee of 1877 recommended, among other suggestions, that a single authority should be created to
control water supplies and that hydrants should be installed throughout London immediately. Thereafter increasingly
more hydrants were fitted. So the ‘H’ symbols on the 1894 OS map denote where the new hydrants were positioned
and ‘F.P’ shows the locations of the still existing old fire plugs.
Roger Mardon, a Fire Service historian, states:
There is no evidence that the location of hydrants was influenced by street lighting. When they could,
the water companies fitted them between two lengths of main to keep the cost to a minimum. The 1847 Act
referred to convenient distances and, if no distance was prescribed, fire plugs were to be no more than 100
yards apart. If the water pressure was sufficient, firefighting hoses could be connected directly to the hydrant
and the distance from a hydrant to the back or top of a building was reckoned to be often about 350ft. The
19th and early 20th century hose-carts typically carried 500ft of hose and, allowing for bends, all of this could
be used. Therefore it was suggested that hydrants should, on average, be no more than 400ft apart, and less
if buildings were set back from the road or exceptionally tall.

So London was not as forward thinking as other areas, and there is no necessary correlation between the location
of a hydrant and a street lamp. If the locations of lampposts and lamps along Aldgate and Whitechapel High Streets
on the 1873 OS map are superimposed on the 1894 OS map then we can see that these are not necessarily next to the
hydrants noted on the 1894 map. They tended to be not far away but there is no way to infer the exact location of
Foster’s lamp from the position of the hydrant outside nos. 120/131.
What of the F.A symbol on the corner of New Goulston Street which corresponded with the large asterisk on Foster’s
map? As identified by Rob and Jon, this signified a street fire alarm. I can see only two on the 1894 OS Map for that
area: the one on the corner of New Goulston Street, and another on the end of Christian Street near Berner Street. This
latter one incidentally does not correspond with the exact placing of a lamp post from the 1873 OS map.
In 1880 street fire alarms were introduced to London and other cities in Britain. Glasgow had been the first in Britain
to have them installed in 1878. Street fire alarms had already been in use in Germany and the United States for twenty
years. The advantage was that the fire brigade would be more quickly informed of fires rather than someone having
to be sent to the nearest fire station by cab or on foot to raise the alarm. However they initially were few and far
between and were prone to false alarms, both caused maliciously and, as with modern house alarms, by faults with the
equipment. The American Exchange Telegraph system was used at first in London and about 100 of them were installed,
but in 1884 A.C. Brown’s series-circuit system was installed, which would be seen in London for the next 50 years.
Rob Clack refers to some photographs taken of the area about 20 years after 1888. In one, taken circa 1907,
Wentworth Model Dwellings are clearly shown but there is no lamp apparent along the Dwellings (see Figure 5). In
another, taken circa 1919, a tall arc light can be seen at the junction of Goulston Street with Wentworth Street on the
same side as the Dwellings, and there appear to be two lamps on the building south of the Dwellings (see Figure 6).
Another photograph, captioned as being ‘Petticoat Lane, Goulston Street’, estimated to be taken in the early 1900s,
possibly 1910, is identified as New Goulston Street by Rob, showing the street from Middlesex Street (Petticoat Lane)
with Goulston Street in the distance (see Figure 7). If this identification is correct then on the northern corner of New
Goulston Street with Goulston Street is a lamppost, which would correspond with Foster’s large asterisk at the same
location on his map.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 21

 The tall posts used show that these
were in fact electric arc lights. These
cast a very harsh, bright light that at
close range could damage the human
eye. They were not suitable for domestic
use but were used for lighting industrial
yards and later as street lights. but
mounted on very tall posts (typically at
least 20ft or 6m high), taller than the
gas lampposts. Electric street lights were
initially opposed by the government,
arguing that improved lighting would
encourage people to go out and get
drunk in the evenings. Eventually they
relented and in 1882 passed the Electric
Lighting Act. The first experimental arc
lamps were used on Holborn Viaduct in
1878 (which then reverted to gas lamps
on one side and oil on the other), but Figure 5: Photo of Wentworth Model Dwellings (circa 1907.)
Second doorway on left is to nos. 108/119. There is no sign of a lamp. Courtesy Rob Clack.
the first permanent electric street lamps
weren’t used in London until 1891.10
Rob suggests that the lighting would
not have changed much, if at all, in those
20 years with no further development
undertaken in the area. However, Jon
suggests that the placement of lights may
have changed due to electric arc lights
now being installed.
If these lampposts identified by Rob
were the only lamps near the doorway,
then another suggestion is that the “20
feet” and “30 feet” referred to in the
annotations should actually be read as
“20 yards” and “30 yards”. Using this
interpretation, the doorway would be
“about 30 yards on the right hand side”
Figure 6: Photo of Wentworth Model Dwellings (circa 1919) with electric arc light on junction with
and about “20 yards from lamp”. The Wentworth Street highlighted in yellow on far left. Other lamps highlighted on swimming baths south of
doorway is about 96 feet from the end Wentworth Model Dwellings. Courtesy Rob Clack
of Wentworth Model Dwellings and so
about 32 yards, which would correspond
well with “about 30 yards on the right
hand side”. Allowing for the lamppost
seen in the photograph identified by
Rob Clack being a few feet from the end
of Goulston Street at its junction with
Wentworth Street, this would be about
80 feet from the doorway, which is about
27 yards. This is stretching the statement
of “about 20 yards” but it would still be
reasonably near. However the scale of
Foster’s map does not suggest that the
lamp was supposed to be 20 yards from

10 The beginnings of electric street lighting in

the City of London by R. Bourne, in Engineering
Science and Education Journal (April 1996,
Figure 7: Photo possibly of New Goulston Street (circa 1910) with electric arc light on junction with
Volume 5, Issue 2)
Goulston Street highlighted in yellow on far left. Courtesy Rob Clack.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 22

the doorway and elsewhere on Foster’s plans the unit of measure is feet. Also, the lamp (clearly identified and labeled
as such on his map) is shown nowhere near a junction (even the junction with Goulston Court that may have been
mistaken for the junction with Wentworth Street).
If we look at Foster’s map and take the marks to scale, the distance between the lamp and the arrow which may
signify the supposed location of the doorway is about 16 feet. The markings were probably not intended to be exactly
to scale and were just meant to be indications of the rough locations but this measurement is closer to 20 feet than
20 yards. The distance between the lamp and the line from New Goulston Street is about 31 feet. This would place the
lamp roughly where Foster’s implied doorway is in the explanation given above (where it is about 80 feet from Goulston
Court). The marking of the doorway on Foster’s map taken to scale would only be 15 feet from the line across from
New Goulston Street (point ‘H’ in fig. 4), but would be about 28 feet from the end of Wentworth Model Dwellings,
which would be close enough to fit with the statement that it was “about 30 feet on the right hand side”. However
with just reference to the 1873 map the end location of Wentworth Model Dwellings would not be known, and, if it
were known, then it would have to be explained how someone who knew where the Dwellings ended would position
the doorway so far south of its actual position while knowing it was two doors from Wentworth Street and the third
block on the right.
At some point it was realised that the layout of Goulston Street was misleading on Foster’s map and the top end of
Goulston Street (on the side where Wentworth Model Dwellings were) including Goulston Court, is scribbled through.
We can only speculate as to how and when the locations and measurements were obtained, and, depending on the
reference used, it would give us different locations for the lamp. If the asterisk at the corner of New Goulston Street
does denote a lamppost it appears that at some point someone was interested in the locations of the nearest light
sources to the doorway. Given that it appears the doorway was assumed to be further south than was actually the
case, it was the lamps near to the junction of New Goulston Street that were of interest. Given that two lamps were
noted and no others were (for example, the lamppost which was possibly at the Wentworth Street junction) it would
appear the location of the doorway was assumed to be between them as otherwise only the nearer of the two would
be of interest. For example if the doorway was assumed to be north of the lamp along Wentworth Model Dwellings then
there would be little reason to show the lamppost at the corner of New Goulston Street as well, if the lamppost at the
junction of Wentworth Street was not also shown. However if it was at first assumed that the doorway was directly
opposite the junction of New Goulston Street as the ‘A’ on Foster’s map implies, then the lamppost on the corner of
New Goulston Street could have been noted at first, with the other one added later as it was believed the doorway
was a little further north than at first thought, as signified by the arrow (though still incorrectly showing the location
of the actual doorway).
Obviously with the subsequent developments in that area the street lighting as it existed in 1873 is unlikely to help
us out. A lamppost is indicated on the 1873 OS map opposite the junction with New Goulston Street roughly at the
point where the end of Wentworth Model Dwellings would be. However, because of Goulston Street being widened,
this location would have been in the middle of the road by 1888. So this lamppost would have needed to have been
relocated as part of the redevelopment anyway. The other lamp along that stretch of Goulston Street in 1873 was
located on the southern junction of Three Tun Alley with Goulston Street. This location was built on as part of the
redevelopment of the area, but it may have been that a lamp was repositioned at that rough location. This was on
the opposite side of the road to where Wentworth Model Dwellings would be and would be over 45 feet away from the
position of the doorway to 108/119. Taking a line from this location directly across Goulston Street to Wentworth Model
Dwellings would be about 23 feet from the doorway. A possibility could be that the lamp was actually on the opposite
side of the road and its distance was taken roughly from the doorway to a point opposite where the lamp was situated.
This may then have been mistakenly applied to the map on the same side as the doorway, placed relative to Foster’s
doorway rather than its true location.

Location of the lamp

So what are the likely options for the location of the lamp referred to on Foster’s Map? To help with assessing these
locations we’ll also see how many errors would be involved in how the position was applied onto Foster’s map.
1 Someone at the scene had roughly measured the distance of the lamp from the actual doorway at 108/119 and
so the lamp actually was (as stated) 20 feet north of the actual location of the doorway. This location was
applied incorrectly to Foster’s map as the location of the doorway had been placed incorrectly on it. This would
mean it was about 55 to 60 feet from the junction with Wentworth Street where there was possibly a lamp at
the corner of Goulston Street and about 113 – 118 feet from the lamp at the corner of New Goulston Street
(about 103 – 108 feet from the New Goulston Street line – point ‘H’ on fig. 4). This location is noted as position
‘C’ on fig. 4 above and position ‘1’ on fig. 8 below. Such a scenario would only involve one error – incorrectly
locating the position of the doorway and then locating the lamp relative to this incorrect position.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 23

 2 Someone went to the scene to note the location of the nearest lamps to the doorway. They had a rough plan of
Foster’s map as a guide with the incorrect location of the doorway shown. From this guide they assumed the
doorway to nos. 120/131 was the doorway concerned and noted the lamp to be 20 feet north of this doorway.
This would place it about 14 to 19 feet south of the actual doorway, about 94 to 99 feet from the corner of
Goulston Street with Wentworth Street and about 78 – 83 feet from the lamp at the corner of New Goulston
Street (about 64 – 69 feet from the New Goulston Street line). This location is noted as position ‘2’ on fig. 8
below. Again only one error would have been made – incorrectly locating the doorway, though this would have
been compounded by someone at the scene assuming the location on the map referred to the doorway of nos.
120/131, which would have required them to have made no reference to the actual numbers of the residences
of the correct block (i.e. nos. 108/119), or no reference to the numbers was made on their ‘guide’.
3 Someone had noted the distance of the lamp roughly from the New Goulston Street junction. It was calculated
to be about 20 feet north of Foster’s location of the doorway. This would place it about 28 – 33 feet south of
the actual doorway, about 108 – 113 feet from the corner of Goulston Street with Wentworth Street, and about
68 – 73 feet from the lamp at the corner of New Goulston Street (about 50 – 55 feet from the New Goulston
Street line). This location is noted as position ‘E’ on fig. 4 above and position ‘3’ on fig. 8 below. Again only one
error would have been made – incorrectly locating the doorway. But in this scenario the actual location of the
lamp was noted correctly (roughly) on the map, so its relative position to the actual doorway was wrong on the
map.
4 Someone had noted the distance of the lamp roughly from the New Goulston Street junction. This was noted to
scale on Foster’s map. This would place it about 52 feet south of the actual doorway, about 132 feet from the
corner of Goulston Street with Wentworth Street, and about 55 feet from the lamp at the corner of New
Goulston Street (about 31 feet from the New Goulston Street line). This location is noted roughly as position
‘G’ on fig. 4 above and position ‘4’ on fig. 8 below. 52 feet is just over 17 yards, so the lamp may have been
‘about 20 yards’ south of the actual doorway. This is an unlikely scenario as the markings were probably rough
rather than to-scale, and the lamp does appear to be north of the position of Foster’s doorway on the map.
5 Someone noted the location of the lamp on the western side of Goulston Street opposite a position on Wentworth
Model Dwellings which was about 20 feet north of the actual doorway. However this would involve not only
getting the position of the doorway wrong, but also applying the lamp to the wrong side of the street.
6 Someone noted the location of the hydrant on the Goad Plan or other map and had passed on the information
about this, mistaking it for a lamp, to whoever was working on Foster’s map. Further details about the location
of the doorway were not requested as they had already been noted, albeit incorrectly.
Regarding the possibility of the murderer writing the message, if the
lamp was at position 1, north of the doorway, it would probably have
cast enough light on the right hand side of the doorway to enable the
killer to write the message, so long as he was out of the way of the
light himself to avoid casting a shadow where he was writing. Position 5
would probably have been too far away to have cast enough light on the
doorway, while positions 2, 3 and 4, being south of the doorway, would
not have cast any light on the right hand side of the doorway.
Regarding the killer possibly using the lamp to finish cleaning up
and then casting aside the piece of apron in the nearest doorway, both
positions 1 and 5 would suggest he then headed south down Goulston
Street, while positions 2 to 4 would suggest he was heading north towards
Wentworth Street. This scenario would be unlikely if the lamp was at
position 4 as the apron would more likely have been cast aside in the
doorway of nos. 120/131 that being the first doorway the killer would
come to. Similarly if the lamp was at position 3 it would be close enough
to the doorway of nos. 120/131 for the killer to have possibly discarded
the piece of apron there. If he was intending to head towards Wentworth
Street, this would only be a matter of a few feet in the wrong direction
and getting rid of the incriminating cloth would be a priority. However
Figure 8: Map showing various possible locations of the lamp
in Goulston Street referred to in the annotations.
he may have wanted to keep moving in the direction he was headed and
Also shown are the lampposts identified by Rob Clack waited to reach the next doorway (i.e. nos. 108/119), which also would
(orange dots), the hydrant (blue) and the doorway to
have been darker if there was a lamp that close to the doorway of nos.
108/119 (red).
120/131, and therefore would have delayed its discovery.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 24

 Unfortunately we still cannot be sure of the exact location of the lamp referred to on Foster’s map, or even if there
actually was one somewhere along Wentworth Model Dwellings. However thanks to the work of Stewart Evans and Keith
Skinner in first deciphering the annotations, and the work of Jon Smyth, Rob Clack and others who contributed to the
aforementioned threads we have a better chance of understanding the details of the map Foster made and this may
shed some light on the doorway in Goulston Street.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 25

P.C. 225H Reports
A Real Whitechapel Journal
Part I - 1885 to 1888

By ADAM WOOD and KEITH SKINNER

Our knowledge of police activity during the Whitechapel murders has been gained by access to the
official files, by reading contemporary newspaper reports, and the memoirs of senior officers. We
know their movements and suspicions in relation to the Ripper case - but what of the day-to-day
duties of a PC on H Division? Was it all apprehending possible ‘Jacks’, calming frightened women
and recording graffiti? If only we had someone to tell us what it was really like as a copper on
the beat in 1880s Whitechapel.
Charles James Roberts was born in Deal, Kent, in
1864/651, and in his early years earned a living as a
messenger2. He joined the Metropolitan Police on 31
March 18853, aged 20, and on 13 April was posted to
H Division becoming PC 225H, warrant no. 705384.
The 1901 census records Roberts, age 36, as living
at 24 Auteliff Street with wife Annie, age 38, and
children Lily (age 10), Ernest (9) and Edith (6).
Roberts served as a PC for two weeks under 26
years, dying from bronchopneumonia after 11 days
sickness on 15 March 19115. At some point before his
death his divisional number had changed to 172H6.
His widow was awarded an allowance of £79 0s 0d7.
From July 1885 to August 1898 PC Roberts kept a
notebook, recording his duties while out on the beat
from Leman Street station. A copy of the notebook
was donated to the Met Police Archives in 1991, and
was recently re-discovered by Keith Skinner. What
follows, with Part II in the next issue, is a transcript
of PC Roberts’s notes. Spelling, punctuation and
grammar is Roberts’s own. It’s a fascinating insight
into the daily life of not only a policeman, but also
those he came in contact with. As for the ‘Autumn
of Terror’... there’s a break in entries between 17
September and 20 December. Coincidental?

1 1901 census
2 Register of H Division Records
3 List of Preparatory Men for Posting to Divisions, Metropolitan Police
4 Register of H Division Records
5 Return of Deaths during the Year 1911, Metropolitan Police
6 Metropolitan Police Day Book for 15th March 1911
7 Compassionate Allowances to Widows and Children of Police Officers, page 69, Metropolitan Police

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 26

 Felony July 31st 1885. Andrew Immanual age 47. Fishmonger 103 Backchurch Lane given into custody for
stealing a sovereign. Discharged no witnesses appeared against him.

Run over August 23rd 1885. P.C. 225H Roberts reports at 1.30pm a lad named Edward Jacobs of 9 Stanhope
St Hunstan Street, was run over in High St Whitechapel by a pony and trap driven and owned by Henry Hyams
133 Tottenham Court Road, the lad got up and said he was not hurt. Not witnessed by P.C.

Found September 20th 1885. P.C. 225H Reports at 5.30am finding a carmans apron in Chamber St.

Door open September 24th 1885. P.C. 225H Reports at 11.30pm finding a door of an empty warehouse opened
in Mill Yard Leman Street belonging to the London & Tilbury Railway Company. P.C.s 91 & 63H searched the
premises, and found all correct, securing the door up before leaving. P.C. 225H

Assault September 26th 1885. William Howard age 23 of 23 Povern(?) Street Bermondsey Spa Road for
assaulting Edith Riley, 368 Commercial Road, at 12pm in High Street and witnessed by P.C. was brought up at
Arbour Square and sentenced to 21 days

Accident October 10th 1885. P.C. 225H Reports at 2.45pm Henry Froud 101 Church Street Deptford was
driving a pony barrow down the Whitechapel Road laden with skins, and who complained that when trying to
get off the tram metals the off wheel broke. Not witnessed by P.C.

Accident October 13th 1885. P.C. 225H Reports at 1.45pm a pack horse omnibus driven by George Crouchie
2 Caton Court Buckingham Palace Road and owned by Mr. Harris 48 Wilton Road Pimlico, was proceeding down
the Whitechapel Road when the tyre of the behind wheel broke; the driver stated it was caused by the metals.
Not witnessed by P.C.

Run over October 31st 1885. P.C. 225H Reports at 6pm Wm. Lachman 9 Spectacle Alley High St. Whitechapel
complained of being run over in High Street by a horse and cart driven by Henry Beeson 56 Arbour St. Battersea
Park and owned by Peto(?) Brothers. Victoria. Witnessed by Mr Howes 11 Fenchurch Street Buildings EC. Not
witnessed by P.C.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 27

 Assault November 2nd 1885. Informed by Sarah Murray 85 Chancell Road Hammersmith that she had just
lost her purse and she showed me two men who had stolen it. I chased them and caught Joe Garnett. Age 20
of Lynden Buildings Brick Lane who assaulted me and as the complainant could not appear and not being quite
satisfied that he really stole her purse he was only charged with assaulting me and was sentenced to 14 days.
Worship St Police Court

Removing goods. November 14th 1885. PC 225H Reports at 6.30am. Goods being removed from 35 Nottingham
Place, by a horse and cart, belonging to John Hathaway 98 Brady Street Bethnal Green.

Window broken November 16th 1885. PC 225H Reports at 8.45.p.m. finding the cellar window broken at
55 Church Street. Minories. P.C. called the occupier Mr Goldstein, and in company searched the premises and
found all correct.

Gambling November 17th 1885. George Carwell age 13½ of 171 Thomas Street Kennington for Gambling in
Church Street, Minories at 1.p.m. cautioned and discharged. Thames Police Court.

Drunk November 20th 1885. Louisa Roberts age 34 of 35 Spa Road Bermondsey drunk and incapable in Leman
Street was bailed and did not appear

Drunk 5.15pm November 26th 1885. Charles Kelly, for being drunk and disorderly, in Great Alie Street. Fined
a 1/. d

Door broken open December 4th 1885. Stayed at the Pavilion Stores 82 Whitechapel Road from 10.30a.m. to
12.40pm. whilst PC 237H had gone to inform the Commercial Brewery Company, that the place had been broken
into. PC225 left A.C. Macklin of the Commercial Brewery Company there when leaving.

Accident December 15th 1885. Witnessed an accident at the top of Christain Street Commercial Road where
2 men was knocked down by a wagon no 132 loaded with fruit drawn by 3 horses, driven by Joseph Carter 2
Chamber Street. Stepney. and owned by Mr Fairclough 19 Christain Street. one was not hurt but the other H.
Martin 98 Tyson Street Spitalfields had two fingers crushed on left hand and his left leg bruised was conveyed
to the London Hospital by the wagon mentioned, accompanied by PC 148H who witnessed the same, and who
also made out the report. PS The men ran over was drunk at the time the accident occurred.

Drunk December 28th 1885. Ed. Fisher 9 Narrow St. Racliff. Age 29 drunk and disorderly in Commercial Road
at 10.30pm. Fined 2/6 or 3 days

Drunk January 2nd 1886. Patrick Murphy. Age 22. Drunk and disorderly and using obscene language and
assaulting me and 37 H in Christain Street was sentenced to 2 months

Stopping horse January 11th 1886. PC 225 Reports at 1.30pm stopping a runaway horse at the corner of
Osborne Street belonging to Wm. Stein 54 High St Whitechapel which was left unattended outside of his
shop.

Gambling June 13th 1886. Timothy Callagham age 16 of 8 James Street. Gambling in Furness Building
Christain Street. Fined 1/.d

Drunk June 15th 1886. Charles Harris age 23 of 2 Mayfield Buildings Cable Street drunk and disorderly.
Discharged.

Assault June 15th 1886. John Hayes age 42 of 45 Wellclose Square for assaulting William Harrystol 3 Baker
St Commercial Road. Discharged

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 28

 Stealing August 20th 1886. PC 225H Reports at 1.30 P.M. was informed by Henry Marston of 5 Morgan Street
and George Hallson 15 Hinder Street. that two men had taken some boot uppers from off a barrow in the
Commercial Road and had gone up Kings Arm Court. I proceeded up Black Lion Yard round into Chicksand Street
but upon them seeing me they dropped the bag in which they was in and ran away. I chased one of them as far
as Old Montague Street when I lost sight of him. The Description of him was a man about 24 yrs height about
5ft 8ins, Complexion Dark, small dark moustache. Dress Dark brown coat, black trousers, back hard felt hat and
white handkerchief round neck, (2) 5ft 9ins age 25, dark clothes (1) can be identified.

Cutting Wounding September 5th 1886. Called to Mr Morris 14 Fieldgate Street and took into custody John
Helweg, 36 Ann Street Commercial Road, PC404 H taking Julius Regard, 86 Christain Street for cutting and
wounding Morris Topalski, who was taken to the London Hospital by PC 144H, brought up at the Thames Police
Court. 6th, 13th, 20th, 21st Sept. when they was sent for trial at the Middlesex Session 28th and was both
sentenced to 4 months hard labour on Monday October 4th 1886.

Accident September 8th 1886. PC 225H Reports at 2.45 p.m. a collision occurred in Upper East Smithfield,
between a horse and cart driven by John Green, 37 Green Street Paddington N.W. and owned by James Debac,
37 Green Street, and a horse and cart driven and owned by John Gilbert 16 East Street Stratford, breaking the
pole and brace of the last mentioned. Witnessed by Thomas Meadcroft, Swedish Flag Princes Street St Georges.
Not witnessed by P.C.

Fire September 15th 1886. PC 225H Reports at 3.30P.M. the glass of the fire alarm post at the corner of
Christain St. Com. Rd. was broken by a private person for an alarm of fire at 18 Turner Street. PC informed
the Fire Brigade authorities.

Summons September 18th 1886. PC 225H Reports conductor of M.S.C. plate no. 1085, badge no 2921, for not
wearing his badge during his employment, and also for loitering on Tower Hill for 30 minutes. P.C. 90H witness,
was summons to attend Thames Police Court October 1st 1886 before Mr Lushington and was fined 2s/6d and
costs for not wearing his badge and 1s/6d and cost for loitering.

Accident September 25th 1886. P.C. 225 Report att 11.30am. that a pony and trap driven and owned by John
Emmens, 22 Romford Road Stratford, was proceeding down the Whitechapel Road when the spokes of the rear
wheel broke through the bad state of the metals. PC 225H witnessed the same.

Door open October 12th 1886. P.C. 225H Reports that at 2.15am finding the door of 4 Alie Place insecurely
fastened. PC called the occupier, Thomas Litoun who stated that everything was all correct.

Padlock October 15th 1886. PC 225H Reports at 12.15am finding the padlock unfastened of a stable in Tenter
Street South, owner not known PC informed the day-duty.

Dog found November 25th 1886. PC 225H Reports at 7am finding a fox terrier dog “valuable” in Leman Street,
straying and unmuzzled.

Felony November 25th 1886. Too into custody George Wright for stealing a watch value 20s/. from John
Lawson, Scandanavian Home Leman Street, in the Garratt P.H. Leman Street witnessed by John Holmes same
address. when searched at the station I found a discharge paper relating that he was discharged from Parkhouse
Prison on the 19th November 1886 after undergoing 5 years penal servitude. Upon looking into the Convict
List we found it was correct. His office no. being 31821 and that he was discharged in the name of George
Brown alias Whinson(?), Robinson and Edward Bennett. H 1112. Age 29 height 5ft 1½. Complexion sallow hair
dark brown, eyes blue. “Marks” sailor tattooed on left fore arm, tattoo marks on right arm, right little finger
crooked scars on right eyelid and nape of neck. 1 Larceny Central Criminal Court 5 years and that his address he
intended to live was 8 Gravel Lane Hounsditch, made inquiries but he was not known there. Was taken tbefore
M. Saunders at the Thames Police Court 26th Nov and was committed for trial at the Middlesex Sessions on
December 6th 1886. And was sentenced to 5 years penal servitude by Commissioner Kerr. PC 719 City Henry
Costin proveing the former convictions which was that 8 times for rogue and vagabond, sentences from 10 days
to 3 months, once for assault 3 months, stealing a purse. 3 12 months, misdemeanour 14 days and Larceny 5
years Penal servitude.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 29

 Door open December 19th 1886. PC 225H Reports at 12.15am finding the shop door of no 45 Charlotte
Street insecurely fastened. “No one living on the premises”. PC informed the owner Mr Ewan of the Mount
Whitechapel and in company searched the premises and found all correct.

False alarm December 19th 1886. PC 225H Reports at 5.45am passing no 31 Nottingham Place, was called by
Leah Marks, who said that she had heard someone in the house. P.C. searched the house in companny with Mrs.
Marks and found everything all correct.

Charge December 24th 1886. Th. Ma-Carthy 2 Batty’s Court drunk & disorderly in Commercial Road cautioned
and discharged.

Obstruction Thursday January 11th 1887. PC225H Roberts reports at 12.50pm a pack horse van laden with
girders belonging to Edmund Pearson 13 Wharf Road Paddington and driven by George Speller 6 Countess Road
Kentish Town was proceeding down the Commercial Road when the near-hand wheel broke, obstructing the
tram line for 5 hours 25 mins. Viz from 12.50pm to 6.15pm.

Accident January 11th 1887. PC225 H Reports reports at 6.15p.m. that Joseph Gibbs 1A Richardson St. Oxford
St. Mile End was knocked down in the Commercial Road by a horse and cart driven by William Williams 248
Commercial Road, and owned by W Clark & Son Thomas St Burdett Road, Limehouse but stated he was not
hurst. Witnessed by P.C.

Delay January 18th 1887. P.C.225 H Roberts reports at 2.45pm that a pack horse van laden with coal belonging
to Sargeant Longstaff & Co. Regent’s Canal Dock, and driven by James Wright 6 New Gravel Lane Shadwell
was proceeding down the Comial Road, when the near hind wheel sank into the road delaying it for 1⁄2 hour.
Viz from 2.45pm to 3.15pm. PC informed the Vestry Authorities who stated that it would be seen to at once.
Witnessed by P.C reporting.

Charge January 20th 1887. Issacs Frest, 30 Backchurch Lane age 37 a traveller for assaulting Jacob Nyman 2
Battys Court a tailor by striking him over the heard with a stick was bound over in £5 to keep the peace for 2
months.

Found January 22nd 1887. P.C 225H Roberts reports at 10.30P.M. finding in the Commercial Road a boy, said
his name is Joey Isaac. Age 5 Comp. Dark. Dress striped tweed overcoat, blue jersey suit, and cap. Lace boots.
Black and white plaid scarf, found in his possession a bag containing wearing apparel, and a piece of paper with
these words on it. Mr & Mrs Copes has gone to Holland and his mother too. And you must take Joe to Reading
to his grandfather.

Assault. February 4th 1887. Joseph Samuels age 21 of 64 Pearl Street, Spitalfields for assaulting Robert
Utling Old Montague Street and myself witnessed by Fred Haynes 41 Guildford Road Poplar. Sentenced to 1
month.

Drunk February 5th 1887. Charles Scott 82 Grove Street, age 21 for being drunk disorderly and using Ob.
Language. Cautioned and discharged.

Drunk February 7th 1887. Charles. Hennesey 24 Albert St aged 27. for being drunk & Disdly and using Obs.
Language 2/6.

Procession February 20th 1887. PC 225H Roberts reports at 12.45pm seeing a procession of about 150
socialists accompanied by a brass band and 5 banners start from out of Berner’s St. Schools marching toward
the Commercial Road. PC called 402H off Settles St Point to accompany them and I then came ot the station
and met Insp. Thresher outside and informed him of it.

Summons February 25th 1887. Summonsed by PC 212H and 225H for racing in the Commercial Road on Sunday
Feb 6th at 12.15am drivers of M.S.C. Plate no 2056 Badges no 17382 and driver of M.S.C. Plate no 1078 Badge
20564 (1) fined 10/. And 2/. Cost (2) discharged.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 30

 Door open March 24th 1887. PC 225 H Reports at 12.45AM. finding the door of 56 Royal Mint Street insecurely
fastened. P.C. called. the occupier Thomas Adams and in company searched the premises and found all
apparently correct own neglect.

Charge May 5th 1887. Mark McCarthy 9 Masons Buildings High Street Boroough age 23 for being drunk and
disorderly and assaulting me on Tower Hill. 1 month H Labour.

Charge May 5th 1887. Norah O’neal Charles Court Old Montague Street age 19 drunk & incapable in George
Street Tower Hill. No appearance.

Window open May 15th 1887. PC225H Reports at 10.30PM finding a window opened on the premises of M.
Davis & Co 44 Upper East Smithfield. PC marked the same and kept observation and reported the same to 232H
who relieved me at 2a.m no one living on premises.

Street lamp broken June 11th 1887. PC225H Reports at 9a.m. finding a street lamp no 49 broken in
Nightingale Lane Parish of St John’s Wapping. PC failed to find out how and when it was done. Board of Works
and Gas Comp.y informed.

Accident June 20th 1887. PC 225H Reports at 11.15a.m. as a brewers dray loaded with beer drawn by 3
horses, driven by Frank Robinson 33 Great Hermitage Street Wapping. owned by C. Hoare Lower East Smithfield
was coming up Nightingale Lane. William Griggs Star Loding House Dock Street fell off cutting his head. I
offered to take him to the Hospital but he refused my services.

Charge June 27th 1887. Mortimer J. Costello. 4 Calvert Street Wapping age 21½, concerned with another man
stealing part of a chain Value 30/1. the property of Butler Norris Wilkerson in Upper East Smithfield at 1.15pm
went before Mr Lushington same day. Remanded to the day following and discharged.

Run over July 12th 1887. P.C. 225H Reports at 12.20PM an accident occurred in Hopper Street a lad 16 name
Robert Law 37 Dora St. Rhodeswell Road Limehouse was ran over by a cart loaded with empty cases belonging
to George Blackman Gowers Walk Commercial Road, the lad was taken away to the London Hospital by John Ellis
122 Jubilee St. PC followed. was attended to by Mr Thomas House Surgeon who stated that he had a contused
chest and was detained. PC informed friends. Witnessed by Wm Chapman 10 Dora St. Limehoue. Wm Gordon 8
New Lyson Street. Bethnal Gree. Joseph Luggett 35 Heneage St. Spitalfields and Joseph Allen 6 Sparrow Corner
Minories. Not witnessed by PC reporting.

Deserter July 11th 1887. William Southcombe gave himself up to me for deserting from H.M.C Amethyst in
May 1885 whilst in Monte Video was remanded to the 19th, but on the 18th was taken down by me to the Duke
of Welington lying at Portsmouth Harbour, and handed over to the Admirality.

Assault July 13th 1887. William Matthews 2 Rays Court

Ellen Street a stevedore was given into my custody for
violently assaulting Samuel Levy 1 Ellen Street, before
Mr Lushington on the 14th but was remanded to the
21st, Witnessed by David Jacobs 17 Ellen Street, but was
discharged. Prosecutor not appearing at court.

Fighting August 16th 1887. Arthur Richardson age 21

of 14 St George’s Street, a carman for disorderly conduct
and fighting in St Georges Street was bound over in the
sum of £5 to keep the peace for 3 months.

Injured on duty August 29th 1887. I beg to rpeort

that at 1am 29th inst. being on duty at the fire at St
Katherine’s Wharf and whilst helping the firemen to pull
the fire engine on to St Katherin’s Bridge, my left thumb
came in contact with the wheel and skid of the engine,
injuring it. I attended the Divisional Surgeon this morning
who placed me on the sick list.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 31

 Assault November 12th 1887. Henry Sutton age 23 of 50 Spicer Street Commercial Road Easy, a labourer, given
into custody for assaulting Jas Scott no 9 Brunswick Buildings, Goulston Street, further charged with assaulting
me. Fined 5/. Or 5 days. Prosecutor not attending. “Thames” on 14th.

Infirmary December 6th 1887. PC 225 Roberts reports that at 10pm the 6th my attention was called at
the corner of St Mary’s Street Whitechapel Road, where I found a woman (name unknown) in an unconscious
condition. PC called the assistance of PC427H and a Hackney Carriage Plate no 8973 and conveyed her to the
Whitechapel Infirmary and was seen by the house surgeon Mr Larder who stated she was in a very bad fit. and
she was detained. Description Comp fair, eyes blue, hght 5ft 3ins Dress black jacket, brown dress, speckle straw
hat, S.S. boots, carried with her an umbrella.

Found December 16th 1887. PC225H Roberts reports that at 1am the 16th inst. was informed by William
Brocter 63 Nelson Street New Road that a horse and cart no 143 belonging to L. M. Fairclough had strayed into
the Nag’s Head Yard Whitechapel Road (where he was watchman). PC took the same to the station and informed
the owner who sent one of his men to fetch it away. all correct.

Charge 12.30AM January 27th 1888. William Spears age 45 of the Old Manor House Leman Street for being
found on enclosed premises for the purpose of committing a felony. Discharged Thames P.Ct. M. Saunders,

Charge February 6th 1888. Edward Lloyd 46 Castle Street Southwark age 36 for being Drunk & Disorderly and
also assaulting me and 446H in Upper East Smithfields at 7pm 5th. 7 days H.L. M. Saunders

Charge February 9th 1888. John Readon 9 Mill Yard Leman Street age 31, labourer for assaulting Dock
Constavle 99 in the St Kathn Docks at 7pm 8th inst. 20/. Or 7 days Hard labour. F. Lushington.

Collision February 14th 1888. PC225H Reports at 3.30PM that a collision occurred in Upper East Smithfield
between a pack horse van no 483 driven by George Webb 5D Block Peabody Building Glasshouse Street,
Whitechapel owned by Thomas Allen Lower East Smithfield, breaking the former pole. not witnessed by PC.

Collision February 14th 1888. PC225H Reports at 4pm a collision occurred in Upper East Smithfield between
a van driven by William Reeder 13 Broadway London Fields owned by father John Reeder etc and a van driven
by Robert Fielder 40 Victoria Chambers owned by H&G Dutfield, Upper East Smithfield, smashing the front of
the former carriage not witnessed by PC reporting.

Alarm February 27th 1888. PC 225H Robert reports that at 10PM being informed by Miss Paget Sister in charge
of St Katherines Restaurant 42A Dock Street that she thought that someone had attempted to break in at the
back, as the window in the back door had been broken during their absence. Viz from 8pm to 10pm.

Accident March 1st 1888. PC 225H Roberts reports that at 2pm an accident occurred in Upper East Smithfield
to William Jones age 28 of 3 London Cottages London Street Bethnal Green, who was driving a pairhorse van no.
4 belonging to John Miller Leman Street Whitechapel caused by a pack horse van no 57 driven by Edward Britten
54 David Street Stratford, New Town, belonging to the London General Omnibus Company Limited, colliding
with the first named van, causing the driver to fall off his seat. PC conveyed him to the London Hospital in
the said van where he was seen by the House Surgeon “Dr Galloway” who stated that he was bruised on left
side and cut on head but was enable to proceed home. Witnessed by Stephen Tucker 27 St Georges Street and
John Willey 42 Pannepton Street Cambridge Heath Road Bethnal Green and London Dock Constable no 45, and
by P.C. reporting.

Charge March 5th 1888. Peter Sweeney 50 Wellclose Square age 13 & John Driscoll 3 Mayfields Building Cable
Street unlawful possession of lamp fittings. Discharged prosecutor Davis & Co 44 Upper East Smithfield not
appearing.

HC unfit March 28th 1888. I beg to report H.C. no 12933 plying for hire on Great Tower Hill to be unfit for
public service through having the plate on back disfigured. Driver Badge 15829 owner Willian Preston, Upper
Gloucester Place Marylebone Road,

Charge March 31st 1888. Antonia Lutto Saffron Hill Hatton Garden, for assaulting Thomas Watkins.
discharged

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 32

 Alarm April 16th 1888. I beg to report that at 2AM hearing the smashing of glass at the rear of Mr Lee’s shop
95 New Road. PC called Mr Simmons who resides there and in company with him and PC134H examined the
premises and found apparently all correct.

Door open April 24th 1888. I beg to report at 10.20P.M. finding the door open at the back premises in Romford
Street of Mr Gundlach, New Road. PC called him who stated that all was correct own neglect.

Barrow found May 5th 1888. I beg to report that at 10.30PM finding a barrow in Romford Street belonging
to William Wedge & Son 43 Spelman Street Hanbury St. Mile End New Town, informed owner who stated that
he would come and fetch it.

Fire May 8th 1888. I beg to report that at 7pm I saw the chimney on fire at no 2 Queen’s Court Charlotte
Street, occupied by Samuel Abrahams, some person unknown gave alarm at the fire station, and two firemen
attended and put it out with pails of water nos 530 & 375 engaged from 7.10pm to 7.45pm. Damage chimney
pot broken, cause unknown.

Charge May 14th 1888. William Blackman 21 Morgan Street age 16, for gambling with cards & bronze money
in Bowyers Buildings. Fined 10/. or 7 days.

Found May 16th 1888. I beg to report receiving a pawn

ticket of a silver watch from Jacob Greece 11 Mulbery
Street Whitechapel who stated that he had found it in
the Whitechapel Road about 9.45am.

Charge May 28th 1888. Dennis O’Keefe age 31, labourer,

18 Glasshouse Buildings Drunk, Disorderley, Obscene
Language in Dock Street at 5pm 26th. Discharged.

Door open June 2nd 1888. PC 225H Reports at

6.15am finding the door open at 21 Whitechapel Road
“unoccupied” Pc informed Bingemann & Bros 4 Catherines
Court Seething Lane (“Leasholders”) who sent the clerk
Mr Caton and searched the premises and found apparently
all correct, stating that he knew the ketch on the door
was weak and that he send a man to make it secure.

Charge June 24th 1888. Emma Clements age 36 & Margaret Donaghue age 29 of 4 Betts Place St Georges for
being drunk disy and using obscene language (1) 5/ or 5 days (2nd) 2/6 or 3 days.

Inquest July 10th 1888. Attended an inquest held at the Gun Tavern on the body of a man (name unknown)
who was found drowned at the foot of the Globe Stairs Wapping. Verdict found drowned no evidenceto provide
how he came in the water. Death supposed by suffocation from drowning.

Charge July 16th 1888. Kate Collins age 22 of 42 Anchor and Hope Alley Wapping for being Dk. Dis. Obs
language 7 days. H Labour.

Charge August 1st 1888. Cornelius Toomey age 23 of 5 Bird Street Wapping for being Dk. Dis. O.L. & assaulting
me. 7 days H Labour.

Charge August 15th 1888. Kate Morrison age 40 no home Drunk & Disly. Prostitute. 2/6 or 3 days.

Door open August 24th 1888. I beg to report that at 10.30PM finding the door of 69 Lambert Street (a tea
warehouse) insecurely fastened. PC marked the premises and kept observations till 6am. Informed day duty.

Light burning August 30th 1888. I beg to report that at 11.30pm finding one of the gas burners alight on the
ground floor of the wool warehouse opposite the Crown P.H. Rupert St number or owners not known. PC kept
observation on the premises and informed day duty at 6am.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 33

 Charge August 31st 1888. John Oragan age 32 of 9
Wellclose Square Dk. Disly. Obs Language 2/6d or 3
days.

Nuisance September 7th 1888. I beg to report at

7.30PM Henry Fletcher 90 Cable Street complained of
the urinal at the bottom of Leman Street being in a
choke and unfit state. PC examined it and found it was
so, and informed the Whitechapel Vestry Authorities
who said that they would send some one to attend to it
as soon as possible.

Charge September 10th 1888. John Goodchild age

20 of 5 Old Nicholl Street Shoreditch for assaulting me
when off duty. 20/d or 14 days.

Charge September 17th 1888. James Wilson, age 25

of 52 Flower & Dean Street, Spitalfields, a labourer.
Drunk & fighting useing obscene language & assaulting
me in High Street Whitechapel. = 2 months H.L.

Charge December 20th 1888. Ellen Caldon age 27 of

56 Samuel Street St Georges, for assaulting her husband
by throwing a parrafin lamp at him. Discharged, her
husband refused to appear against her.

Hospital December 20th 1888. PC225H Begs to report

that 2.15am being on duty in Cannon Street Road. I
heard screams of murder and police, I ran round into
Samuel St. and saw a man named James Caldon 56
Samuel Street age 28, bleeding very free cuts in the
face, and in a very exhausted condition, with only his
shirt on. With assistance of P.C. 233C. who had come
up in the meantime we got him to his home and put on
his clothes and conveyed him “on a barrow belonging
to John Cook 42 Verulane St Grays Inn Road Holborn”
to the London Hospital he was suffering from severe
cuts in the face and in a very exhausted condition and
he was detained.

To conclude Part I, is there a reason why Pc Roberts had nothing to report during 17 Septebmer and 10 December
1888? Was he on vacation, or sick leave? Nothing to confirm this is recorded in the H Division recods held at the
Metropolitan Archives.
It seems unlikely, but perhaps police on duty during the Whitechapel Murders were expressly forbidden to note their
daily activities for fear of alerting the culprit.
Regardless of the entries recorded in late 1888, this notebook gives us an exclusive look into the activities of a copper
on the beat in the late Victorian East End of London.
PC Roberts faced a seemingly daily battle against abusive drunks and the victims of accidents involving waggon
wheels caught in tram tracks (itself an eye-opener as one usually thinks of the streets of Whitechapel paved with
cobblestones).
But intriguingly, does the report of 10 September 1888, logging a charge against one John Goodchild, represent the
first recorded evidence of the existence of the Old Nichol Gang?
More - much more - to follow in Part II in the next issue of Ripperologist.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 34

 A Monstrous
Deception
by JAN BONDESON

Between 1788 and 1790, a mystery attacker stalked and assaulted more than fifty women
in London. The Monster, as he soon became known, sneaked up to his victim and whispered
obscenities in her ear, before cutting her in the buttocks with a sharp knife, or a spike fastened
to his knee. At other times, he would invite an unsuspected lady to smell a nosegay and stab her
in the face with a sharp instrument hidden within the flowers.
On the evening of the Queen’s birthday, on January 18, 1790, the Monster staged a ‘quintuple event’ on the London
streets, slashing at five different victims in the area around St James’s Street. One of them was the 19-year-old Miss
Anne Porter, daughter of a hotel owner, who received a deep wound from the Monster’s rapier. As always, the maniac
stood gloating at the terror of his blood-soaked victim, before calmly taking off into the night.
By April 1790, London was in a state of Monster-mania. The wealthy merchant John Julius Angerstein posted a £100
reward for the capture of the Monster, but the only result was that a number of innocent men were beaten up and
arrested. Since it was known that the London Monster had a predilection for attacking only beautiful young women,
there were several fake victims who scratched themselves with some sharp instrument to show that they had been
worthy of the Monster’s attentions. Other women purchased cork-rumps or copper-enforced petticoats to protect
themselves against the Monster’s rapier.

The three genuine portraits of Rhynwick Williams.

Ripperologist 78 April 2007 35

 On June 13, 1790, when
previous Monster victim
Miss Anne Porter was taking
a walk in Green Park, she
pointed out a man walking
nearby as her assailant. After
a long and ludicrous chase by
Miss Porter’s boyfriend, the
cowardly fishmonger John
Coleman, he was identified
as the Welsh artificial flower
maker Rhynwick Williams,
and put on trial at the Old
Bailey. The capture of the
Monster was an overnight
sensation. Pamphlets
about the trial of Rhynwick
Williams sold like hot cakes,
particularly if they were
illustrated with a print the
celebrity of the day. Five
books and pamphlets about
the Monster were published,
illustrated with at least four
different prints depicting
Rhynwick Williams. When Monstrous! Princess Charlotte the Princess Royal as herself and as Miss Anne Porter.
I researched my book The
London Monster, which was featured in Ripperologist in October 2000, it was something of a mystery to me why one
of these prints was so very unlike the others.
This mystery has now been solved in an unexpected manner. In the Notes and Queries for 1880, Mr William Rayner,
of Notting Hill, wrote that he had three prints of ‘The Monster’ in his collections. While two of them were genuine, the
third one was just a relabelled portrait of Sir Joshua Reynolds as a young man, issued ten years earlier. Similarly, a print
labelled ‘Miss Anne Porter, Who was so Barbarously treated by the Monster’ was really a portrait of the Princess Royal
at the age of thirteen, originally published in the London Magazine of 1779. Both these spurious portraits originated
as plates in the New Lady’s Magazine. Clearly, the editor of this publication wanted to edify his female readers with a
plate depicting the monstrous celebrity of the day along with his swooning victim, without any expenditure on having
their true likenesses taken.
Exactly what Sir Joshua Reynolds and the Princess Royal, who
were both alive in 1790, thought of having themselves depicted as
the London Monster and Miss Porter is not known. They may well
have consoled themselves with the fact that the prints of their
time offer many other ludicrous instances of substituted portraits,
as detailed by other correspondents to the Notes and Queries. In
1760, the publisher of the Naval Chronicle, being at a loss for a
genuine portrait of Commodore Howe, instead used a print of the
notorious Captain William Henry Cranstoun, who had persuaded
Mary Blandy to poison her father. The portrait of Sir Aston
Cockayne, prefixed to his poems, was used as the portrait of Ovid
in an edition of Plutarch’s Lives. A certain Mrs Hodges was first
transformed into Mrs Fitzherbert and later into Princess Caroline
of Brunswick, without any alteration to the rest of the print. In
the 1830s, there was excitement among English antiquaries upon
the discovery of an engraved portrait of the poet John Skelton,
in a copy of his Dyvers Ballads, but then it was discovered that
the very same engraving had been used to depict the author of
Dr Boorde’s Boke of Knowledge. Not long after, another engraving The inoffensive-looking Sir Joshua Reynolds
masquerading as the Monster.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 36

 of Skelton was unearthed by a
diligent antiquary, but it was
soon revealed that it had also
done service as the author of
a French edition of the Danse
Macabre, and originated as the
knave of clubs in an early German
pack of cards.
A writer in Chambers’s Journal
of September 27, 1856, asked
himself how many engravings in
old books were really of the
person they assumed to represent.
He also pointed out that
substituted portraits were very
common among the publishers
of prints of celebrated criminals.
He knew that an artful forger
The Monster in action on a bawdy contemporary cartoon. had erased the words ‘Richard
Cobden’ from an old engraved
plate and substituted ‘William Palmer’, printed off a large number of copies and sold them all as genuine portraits of
the celebrated poisoner. Two engraved plates of Cartouche, the French Jack Sheppard, originated as portraits of the
designer Aubert and the author Le Gallois, respectively. A print of Lamotte, the French spy, was later sold as depicting
Mr Hackman, the assassin of Miss Ray. An alleged early photograph of Müller, the murderer of Mr Briggs, originated from
an old negative of a popular preacher of the day. In The Hanging Tree, Professor V.A.C. Gattrell exposed a print of Eliza
Fenning, executed for attempted murder in 1815, as one used previously to depict Mary Ann Clarke, the mistress of the
Duke of York. The Kaleidoscope magazine of Deptember 1827 adds that a publisher who wanted to issue a print of the
murderer John Lomas used an old woodblock representing the Duke of Wellington, with a few minor touches from the
engraver. It is recorded that the murderer’s head was in much greater demand than that of the Duke.
These examples show that certain unscrupulous printsellers of Georgian and Victorian times were up to every
kind of rascality, using images
of sometimes quite well-known
people to impersonate the
celebrities of the day. For two
reasons, criminal celebrities
were a key target group for these
forgers. Firstly, the criminals
had been obscure individuals
before hitting the limelight
upon being arrested for their
various misdeeds, and no one
could find out what Rhynwick
Williams, Mr Hackman or Müller
the railway murderer really
looked like once they had been
locked away in prison. Secondly,
prints of celebrated criminals
had a roaring sale at the time,
particularly when sold at the
execution. I would be surprised
if the examples listed in this
brief article are the only existing
substituted portraits on prints of
Another contemporary print that gives a fair idea of the prejudice against Rhynwick Williams.
criminals from this period. Was he guilty or not? The full story is in my book The London Monster, now out in cheap paperback
in both Britain and the United States.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 37

 Obituary:
Des McKenna
Ripper theorist; 1933-2007
Ripperologist was sad to hear of the death of Liverpool-
born Jack the Ripper author Des McKenna on 21 April in
Manchester, England.
We understand from his widow Anita that Des had been diagnosed
as being rundown and depressed last year, although as Anita indicated
to this writer (Chris George), anybody who knew Des would know he
was not a depressed type – quite the opposite. The ever ebbulient
Des eventually succumbed to a bout of pneumonia and then was
diagnosed with cancer. After being initially hospitalised in Wigan,
where he and Anita lived, he was then transferred to a hospital in
Manchester. In December, he was informed he had six months to live.
The cancer that was first diagnosed in his right lung spread to his
liver and bones. He was on morphine patches and, unfortunately, according to Anita ‘nothing could ease the pain.’ We
understand that his funeral on 30 April was carried out in a style that the colourful Des would have approved: with
an old-fashioned horse-drawn hearse drawn by black horses with heads decorated with black plumes, the coffin in a
glass hearse. In style it thus recalled the funerals of the Victorian era that Des wrote about, including the style of the
funeral of Liverpool MP William Huskisson, the first man killed by a steam locomotive at the opening of the Liverpool
– Manchester railway in 1830.
By profession, before his retirement, Des was a heavy goods vehicles driving instructor. Not only did Des have a
lifelong interest in the Whitechapel murders but some who have only read his writings, may be surprised and intrigued
to learn that he was an expert gurner, the peculiarly English art of twisting one’s face into odd and amusing looks. He
took part in the gurning championships held annually at Egremont in the Lake District as part of the Egremont Crab
Fair.
Des will be remembered for his contributions to the major Ripper magazines. He wrote a series of articles called
‘Hunt the Ripper’ in which he ‘looked at suspects old and new,’ commencing in the October 2001 issue of Ripperologist.
In the opening salvo of the series, McKenna looked at both Druitt and D’Onston. He mentioned that during a visit to
Wimborne Minster, Dorset, where Druitt is buried, a tour guide told him that the suspect in fact was murdered and
did not commit suicide as generally thought. Des wondered if the unproven murder idea had arisen because Druitt had
someone help him drown himself in the Thames to escape the insanity said to run in his family. In fact, one of his sisters
committed suicide, another attempted it, and his mother was incarcerated in a lunatic asylum in Chiswick, not far
from where Druitt’s body was found floating in the Thames off Thorneycroft’s Torpedo Factory on 31 December 1888.
McKenna then went on to question on what basis Roslyn D’Onston aka Robert D. Stephenson was named as a suspect,
due to his somewhat murky biography, which McKenna pronounced sounded ‘suspiciously like a romantic fable.’
In Ripper Notes in July 2001 in ‘The Two Faces of Roslyn D’Onston’ Des McKenna once more questioned the D’Onston
story and wondered if Robert D’Onston Stephenson and Roslyn D’Onston, author of The Patristic Gospels, could have in
fact been two different men. This article provoked a strong response from the late Melvyn Harris, who had promoted
Stephenson aka D’Onston as a Ripper suspect in The True Face of Jack the Ripper (Michael O’Mara Books, 1994). In the
July 2002 issue of Ripper Notes appeared Harris’s article, ‘Roslyn D’Onston: Two Lives or One?’ critical of the Wigan
man’s article, followed by Des’s somewhat tongue-in-cheek response, ‘Wee Jack the Ripper – or Winkie D’Onston in
His Nightgown?’ questioning Harris’s contention that the suspect could so easily exit his hospital ward in the London
Hospital, Whitechapel, for nightly bouts of murder and mayhem. Truthfully, Des McKenna was not the type of man to
be cowed even by the formidable Mr Harris.

Continued on next page

 Des and Anita McKenna at the 2000 Ripper conference in Bournemouth

In one of his last articles, in The Journal of the Whitechapel Society 1888, in October 2006 Des wrote about taking
part in one of the newly instituted Maybrick tours of Liverpool organised by the local tourist board. In this article, Des,
though not a believer in Maybrick-as-Jack, wondered if James Maybrick may have seen the ‘notorious Liverpool Museum
of Anatomy’ begun by Joseph Thornton Woodhead in the Paradise Street ‘Sailortown’ section of the city and whether
if Maybrick, if Jack, had seen the ghastly exhibits they might have had an effect on his psyche. Just as a century
later, the self-same exhibits, subsequently moved by Louis Tussaud to Blackpool, and thence by George Nicholson to
Morecambe, where they were viewed by the Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe, could possibly have had an influence on
that later ‘Ripper.’
As an author, if Des McKenna had a weakness it might be that he all too readily lept to colourful and sometimes
unsubstantiated conclusions. Des’s personal suspect for Jack appears to have been not fellow Liverpudlian James
Maybrick but Birkenhead-born Frederick Bailey Deeming, the con man and multiple murderer known for slaughtering
his wife and four children at Dinham Villa, east of Liverpool, and burying them under the hearth of his house, then
fleeing to Australia with a local woman and similarly killing her outside of Melbourne and burying her in his Australian
house, a crime for which he was executed in Australia in May 1892. Writing in last month’s Journal of the Whitechapel
Society, Des pondered the bloody Mr Deeming in ‘Frederick Deeming – Was he Jack the Ripper?’ Although admitting that
Deeming is ignored as a suspect, even given the ‘heave-ho’ by researchers, Des asked, ‘should he be so easily dismissed?
He was perhaps the most inhuman ogre ever to stalk the corridor of nightmare.’ Des stated that Deeming’s confession,
held to be rambling and obscene, was supposedly destroyed, although Des wondered whether the confession was kept
by a jailer and whether it did verify that Deeming was indeed the Ripper. However, despite Des’s ideas of Deeming as
the murderer, there is a strong view among Ripper scholars that the murderous conman was in fact in South Africa at
the time of the Whitechapel murders.
Des and Anita attended the first United States Jack the Ripper convention in Park Ridge, New Jersey, in April 2000,
for which I was an organiser. In introducing himself to me by letter dated 24 April 1999, Des wrote: ‘In presenting
myself to you may I say I’m a man who for the last 50 years has been interested in Jack the Ripper. I’m now retired,
having been employed all my life as a humble artisan and am by no means wealthy. It’s going to cost me a lot to get
myself and my wife over to see you and I would not think of coming over if I didn’t feel I had something to contribute.
I think I’m a good speaker and I’m expressive and can use words strongly.’ Anyone who has read Des McKenna’s lively
and provocative articles or heard him speak can verify that all he claimed was true. Rest in peace, Des, and our best
wishes to your widow, Anita.
We understand that before his death, Des had written a novel about Jack the Ripper and that his son by his first
marriage, Peter McKenna, was trying to get it published.
CHRIS SCOTT’s

Press Trawl
The Evening News
6 October 1888
DOWN WHITECHAPEL WAY
A clever though somewhat superficial Frenchman, writing about our Sunday observances, opined that the English,
who were the most sensible people on the face of the earth for six days of the week, took leave of their senses on the
seventh. The East end Christian, watching his Jewish brother, is almost bound to come to the conclusion that the latter,
while by no means a fool from Sunday morning till Friday night, is more sensible still on his Sabbath day. The lower
class Jew, of whom I am speaking here, not only abstains more strictly from work on his day of rest than his equally
humble Christian neighbour does on his, but spends it differently. As a rule the Jew is not addicted to drunkenness,
though his mode of living, less exclusive now than formerly, has made a considerable alteration in that respect. This
does not mean that he gets “blind roaring drunk” but he is not a teetotaler by a long way. But even when he exceeds
the bounds of moderation at ordinary times he will leave off swilling on Friday at sunset. His Christian brother keeps
up the game till midnight on Saturday, and as a matter of course, sleeps off his bout on Sunday morning; consequently
the ushering in the day of rest - not from a religious, but merely from a family point of view - does not exist for this
Christian brother, except perhaps on Christmas Eve. The Jew, on the other hand, unless he is actually destitute, has a
very comfortable time of it on Friday night. Whatever good or bad luck the previous six days may have brought, there
has been actual or attempted provision for the seventh. The housewife has been to market on Friday morning according
to her means, the homely board is spread at dusk that same evening, and whatever else may be lacking the the way
of table appointments that board is sure to be graced by a clean white cloth. If the head of the family be not exactly
orthodox, but simply observant of his religion, there will be the blessing of the wine and of the bread, albeit that the
former commodity owes nothing to the vineyards of France or elsewhere, and is only a decoction of grocers’ raisins
and water. After which the whole of the household sit down to their meal - not a very sumptuous one, but carefully
cooked. The chances are ten to one - remember I am speaking of the poorer classes - that the repast merely consists of
fried fish, bread and butter and tea, but it is good of its kind, for the Jewish housewife is essentially a clever cook. The
girls and boys have “cleaned themselves” and, after supper, their young friends of both sexes will come in and spend
the evening with them and their parents. If it will run to it, there will be during the evening such homely delicacies as
roasted chestnuts or baked apples in the winter, in the summer cheap raw fruit. In former days Jewish lads and lasses
scarcely ever left their parents’ homes, unless it were to go to a near neighbour. Things have changed somewhat, still
even now they rarely go on that night to the play or music hall, which outing is reserved for Saturday night. The Jew is
essentially find of music, and above of florid Italian music. When cheap opera in English used to flourish at the Standard
Theatre, half of the audience was composed of Hebrews. It is no unfrequent thing, therefore, for the belated wayfarer
through the dark alleys in the purlieus of Petticoat lane and Goulston street to be attracted by operatic choruses, nay
even solos, sing very decently indeed. Should his curiosity lead him to have a peep through the chinks of the shutters
he will be gratified by a family picture such as that described by George Eliot in “Daniel Deronda,” a little more lowly,
perhaps, in texture, but essentially the same in outline.
As with his Friday night so with his Saturday morning and throughout that day. The poorer Jew must be poor indeed
to have no Sabbath suit of clothes. The poorer Jew must be poor indeed not to have superior food on his day of rest.
The Christian brother in his immediate proximity has observed all this, and asked himself how the Jew manages on
earnings probably not superior to his own. His wife (the Christian’s) is probably engaged in the same workshop with the
Jew’s daughter, for umbrella making, waistcoat and trouser making is not confined to the Jewess down Whitechapel
way. The Christian goes out with the “glass basket,” the Jew goes out with his old clothes bag. By the glass basket

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 40

I mean the men who go from house to house bartering cheap Bohemian glass ornaments, artificial waxen flowers on
stands, sets of jugs, &c., &c., for left off clothing. The Jew, instead of giving the latter, gives hard cash. The Christian,
therefore, knows that he has as much chance of a windfall as the other. How, then, does the Jew manage to do more
with his money than the Christian? That is what the Christian asks himself, and if he be not altogether a ginsodden
brute, he is not very long in arriving at a solution. “The Jew,” he says, “tries to buy and sell, in however small a way,
instead of doing manual work. So for the old men; the women work with their needle, as do my wife and daughter.
The sons do not take to carpentering, smith’s, or upholsterer’s work. If they toil with their hands at all. they take to
cigar making, boot rivetting, and tailoring - trades, in which, if they are steady at all, they can start on their own
account with a very small capital indeed. Why should I not do the same?” And he does the same. If authentic statistics
could be arrived at, it would be found that in the area mentioned by me in my former article, there are fewer artisans
in proportion to the population than elsewhere, except tailors, boot rivetters, &c., &c. If all the proprietors of the
attractive fruit shops in the various populous quarters of London were to be canvassed, and if they were prepared to
tell the truth, it would be found that their first start at shopkeeping was due to emulation of the Jew. The fried fish
and potato shops, the fumes of whose pans greet our nostrils in the transpontine and other regions, are due to the
initiative of the Jew. The sale of sewing machines, perambulators, mangles, &c., by weekly payments - not an unmixed
blessing, perhaps - was inaugurated by a Jew.
In Whitechapel, and in the adjacent roads, the Jew’s influence on his Christian brethren is plainly visible for good
and evil. The good I have endeavoured to point out, I now come to the evil. Such businesses as the Jew engages in at
starting require, first and foremost, not only assiduous application, but hardheadedness and in the beginning careful
husbanding of the first gains. Whether the Jew excels in all these qualities, it would be difficult to say off hand; certain
it is that those with whom he deals give him, as a rule, credit for such, chiefly because he has a reputation for sobriety.
The Christian is reputed not to be so sober. But if he be as temperate as the Jew, he is not so daring, especially if he
have spring from the humbler orders. With the Jew’s example so very close to him, he, however, catches some of it,
and it would be easy enough to point out scores and scores of prosperous shops in Whitechapel whose proprietors,
Christians, launched into business with a mere nothing.
But to return to my theme. The Jew, as I have already hinted, is fond of finery, but frugal and hard working though
he be when needs must, he is also very indolent the moment the first pressure is removed. He then begins to work
with his head, while he lets the others do the laborious physical toil. There are down Whitechapel half a dozen coffee
shops - not public houses - from which he directs his operations, whatever they may be. In one case he may have a
score of men out for him buying job lots in the City. The humbler ones buy the leather cuttings of the boot and shoe
manufacturers, others buy waste paper, and so forth. But one and all, while not pretending to work, work. The Christian
who is not in the secret begins by imitating the Jew in not working. By some process of his own he thinks that what the
Jew can do at his leisure he can do. And the Christian goes to the wall, and ends in a lodging house in Flower and Dean
street, while the Jew migrates to Maida Vale or Canonbury, or Westbourne Park in the end. This is the evil part.
I have left the most delicate matter to the last, and I am very reluctant to tackle it now, lest I be suspected of
wishing to prove too much. The police will tell any careful inquirer that there is “not a single Jewess among the class
of unfortunates who have lately become the victims of the murderer’s knife.” Let not the reader infer from this that
there are no Jewesses leading immoral lives. At the risk of being contradictory, I can answer that there are. But they
are all more or less prosperous. Like their brethren in trade, they began with the intention of throwing the burden on
others, and so well have they succeeded that they are the mistresses of establishments, the threshold of which the
fiend that stalks abroad would not dare to approach. In short, the Jew is the Yankee of Europe - acute, scrupulous
- because afraid of the law. Those who come in daily contact with him at his headquarters do equally well, provided
they penetrate the secret of his success; but if they only guess part they are submerged. That is why the lower classes
in Whitechapel are less poor, less degraded, less unclean, at least outwardly, than elsewhere in the metropolis, unless
they are poorer, more degraded, and more unspeakably filthy than any of the lower classes anywhere in the world. The
latter are, however, the exception.
A.D.V.
The Metropolitan Police force, under the Home Office or directed by a popularly elected body, will always be severely
criticised and often attacked. It is too much to suppose that out of the 5,476,447 people whose lives and property it
protects, there will not be some who are dissatisfied with the methods of protection and detection. Because the police
are neither omnipresent nor omnipotent, there seems a disposition in certain quarters to oust them ignominiously from
their position. To this foolish tendency we have never lent support. We have recognised the painful duties which even
the most humble constable has to perform, and we have admitted the general efficiency with which each member of
the force goes about his task. The inability to capture the Whitechapel murderer has naturally intensified the chronic
dissatisfaction, but when a return is called for showing the work the police have recently performed in the East end,

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 41

it is probable the police will more than justify themselves. In this connection it is fitting to examine carefully the
report of Sir Charles Warren, just issued. Sir Charles points out that the total force under his command is 14,081, and
that its number is not by any means commensurate with the demands upon it. making deductions for illness, absences,
and special work, the men available for street duty are only 8,773. the augmentation of the number of men has not
kept pace with the continually increasing work. In 1849 there were 5,288 men available for street duty, and then the
population to be protected was 2,473,758, while now the population is, as we have said, near five and a half millions.
Since 1849, also, 1,833 miles of new streets have been added, so the area is far beyond the powers of the force to
afford efficient watching. London is in fact far behind the other great cities of the world in the comparative strength
of its police, and a good case is certainly made out for a largely increased force. The police rate is in the nature of an
insurance premium on life and property, and Londoners generally will surely not object to pay a little more in order to
make the war against crime and anarchy more successful. The rateable value of the Metropolitan district is over thirty
four million pounds, and the real value of the property in it almost incalculable. For the protection of this property the
cost of the police, £1,096,277 is quite a small sum.
Taken in connection with recent revelations of the awful conditions of vice and immorality under which life is lived
in the East end of London, it is curious to note that the Baptist Union held a large missionary meeting at Huddersfield,
last night, when urgent appeals were made for funds to extend the foreign missions of the society. Would it not be
more in keeping with the real spirit of Christianity if the various religious bodies were to pay more attention to their
fellow subjects in our great towns and cities, and leave the inoffensive heathen to settle among themselves - without
prejudice, as the lawyers say - the relative merits of sprinkling and immersion as a passport to Paradise?

THE EDITOR’S DRAWER.

THE WHITECHAPEL ATROCITIES.
TO THE EDITOR OF “THE EVENING NEWS.”
Sir - As a constant reader of your valuable paper, I beg to bring forward one or two suggestions which may be worth
notice on this most important occasion. In the first place, supposing that the above be the work of one individual, it
does not seem at all unnatural to suppose that the monster knew the extent of the constable’s beat in each and every
case, and how long it would take for him to appear at the same spot. There ought, I maintain, to be extra constables
placed in between the time for a man going the full extent of his beat, occupying in most cases from ten to fifteen
minutes. For argument’s sake, we will suppose it to be the work of a gang. I ask, what earthly chance would that poor
constable stand, considering that the only weapon he has to protect himself is a truncheon? It stands to reason that his
regulation stamp would allow the scoundrels every opportunity to prepare themselves to meet him. The only weapon
that should be carried by them in that district should surely be a loaded revolver ready at hand. I would in conclusion
suggest that all constables employed on night duty should wear silent shoes, as no doubt many have defeated the ends
of justice by the regulation stamp.
I am, &c.,
J. MORRIS.
October 4.

TO THE EDITOR OF “THE EVENING NEWS.”

Sir - I beg to point out to you certain characteristics (if not already noticed by you) in the handwriting of the letter
and postcard - said to be facsimiles of those received, signed “Jack the Ripper,” and which I would suggest be made
public, as the writing casually noticed might not be recognised. I would first draw attention to the S. The letter in every
instance where commencing a word is quite isolated from the other letters forming the word, the point of the finger
cutting it off. The letter R, ending in Ripper and doctor, as elsewhere, are particular or rather peculiar in formation.
The C’s, somewhat meagre. The T’s you will also see are crossed in a definite manner clean to the left. You will from
the foregoing, when comparing the postcard and letter referred to, identify both as one writing.
I am, &c.,
F.S.C.

TO THE EDITOR OF “THE EVENING NEWS.”

Sir - Surely the impotence of the means at our command to deal with cleverly concocted crime which is demonstrated
beyond a doubt by the dreadful state of things which has paralysed the East end of London should set us to work to find
out machinery which is better able to serve the purpose. Our detective force must be reformed. It is no use to trust any
longer the safety of our women and all unarmed persons to the vigilance of the belled cat who announces his approach
in the very uniformity of his walk which he has acquired whilst a police constable. We must have a force with which

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 42

the criminal cannot make himself familiar. We must have a body of men who are unknown and are able to make their
way unsuspected, and, in fact, trusted by the very criminals themselves. It is worthwhile to remind your readers of
what has occurred several times in France, where perhaps the secret police is the most efficient in the world. It has not
unfrequently happened that members of the secret police there, even women, have become trusted members, of bands
of ruffians, and have taken a leading part in the planning and preparation of a crime. At the right moment they have, of
course, arranged for the capture of the whole gang, and stood side by side in the dock with the criminals unsuspected,
and believed to be virtually of their class, and have received at the hands of the judges sentences, as if they had
actually participated in the crime. They have subsequently, of course, been removed to a place of safety and rewarded,
as their splendid services deserved. Some such system as this ought without a day’s delay to be adopted here. The
blood of the victims of the enormous mass of undiscovered crime in England calls aloud for some such innovation. The
public safety demands it, and common prudence renders it absolutely necessary. Then again, who do we have for the
directors and chiefs of our detective departments men who may be excellent as soldiers, perfect as disciplinarians, but
who understand, perhaps, no more the detection of crime and the spying out of criminals than a simple child? Why have
we not men whose lives have been devoted to the study of such things, men whose experience, perhaps, can find a
parallel for every crime, criminal lawyers of long standing like Mr. Montagu Williams, Mr. Poland, and others, who must
be quite familiar with the methods of the criminal class? Why can we not recruit into our detective ranks such person
as the clerks of solicitors, who have been engaged in criminal practice, and who must have a knowledge of the ins and
outs of such things second only, if second, to that of the gentlemen whom I have named? Why must we also keep to
the beaten track which leads only to impotence, and consequently universal terror, when prudent remedies, and the
careful selection of the persons to deal with such things might render the chances of criminals to escape infinitesimal
indeed, instead of, as it at present seems, almost as probable as otherwise?
Hoping, Sir, that you will insert this letter, if only to wake up a discussion upon the subject of a reform in this
respect,
I am, &c.,
A.W.
October 3.
TO THE EDITOR OF “THE EVENING NEWS.”
Sir - I have no wish to trespass on your already replete space, but permit me to point out that the Whitechapel
murderer cannot, or is not likely to be, an inhabitant of Whitechapel at all. It would be quite easy for a person to come
into that neighbourhood from a remote one by the Underground Railway to Aldgate, without much observation, and
return by another way. It is my impression that he is a person of education, and has the means to adapt his apparel as
a disguise, and to remove traces of blood from it. These reversible mackintoshes with a sponge would form at once a
disguise and protection. It is difficult to connect in one’s mind the idea of a respectably dressed person carrying a black
bag with such atrocious crimes, but it may be so, and he may reside with quiet people, quite the other side of the City,
who have not the remotest idea what their lodger really is. It behoves all people, therefore, to be on guard, and to
report to the police “obscure doings of suspicious persons.” Just now the air is full of theories; but it seems to me that
the true scent has been lost, because a maniac or outcast is being sought for. It is quite feasible for other theories to
hold water, and yet the true criminal may be outwardly a respectable person who attends to his work during the day,
but who is sometimes late in coming home at night.
I am, &c.,
W.D.H.
THE MURDERS.
LETTERS FROM “JACK THE RIPPER” TO THE POLICE.
The Press Association said the following postal telegram was received by metropolitan police at 11.55 last night. It
was handed in at an office in the Eastern District at 8 p.m.
“Charles Warren, head of the Police, New Central Office.
Dear Boss - If you are willing enough to catch me, I am now in City road lodging, but number you will have to find
out, and I mean to do another murder tonight in Whitechapel.
Yours, Jack the Ripper.”
A letter was also received at the Commercial street police station, by the first post, this morning. It was addressed
to the “Commercial street Police Station” in blacklead pencil, and the contents was also written in pencil, and couched
in ridiculous language. The police believe it to be the work of a lunatic. It was signed “Jack the Ripper,” and said he
was “going to work” in Whitechapel last night. He added that he was going to commit another murder in the Goswell

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 43

road, tonight, and spoke of having “several bottles of blood under ground in Epping Forest,” and frequently referred
to “Jack the Ripper under the ground.”
Detective Inspector Aberline (sic) has been informed of the correspondence, and the police of the G division have
been communicated with.

SIR CHARLES WARREN WILL USE BLOODHOUNDS.

The Central News is authorised to state that Sir Charles Warren has been making inquiries as to the practicability
of employing trained bloodhounds in the streets of London; and, having ascertained that dogs, which have been
accustomed to work in a town, can be procured, he is making immediate arrangements for their use in London.

THE MURDERER IS SAID TO HAVE BEEN SEEN YESTERDAY.

Yesterday afternoon, shortly after three o’clock, information was given at the police station in Moor lane, as to a
man who had been seen in Liverpool street at twenty minutes past one o’clock, and who has been followed to a public
house in Chiswell street. His conduct was stated to have been suspicious, and he was said to resemble the description
given of the East end murderer.

ANOTHER SUSPICIOUS OCCURRENCE AT THE EAST END.

The Central News says: A woman was found lying insensible in Brick lane shortly before midnight. A crowd quickly
collected, and great excitement prevailed. It seems that about half past 11 o’clock three men noticed a hansom cab
containing two men and a woman turn down Air street. having reached a dark railway arch the men in the cab got out
and deposited upon the ground the woman, who was apparently insensible. The three men who were watching, having
their suspicions aroused, raised an alarm. The other two men jumped into the cab, and the cabman drove hurriedly
off. One of the men, however, returned to the spot where the woman had been deposited, and was pointed out to a
constable, who took him to the Commercial road Police station. He gave the name of Johnson, but as he unable to
dispel the suspicions of the police he was detained.

FACTS VERSUS THEORIES.

TO THE EDITOR OF “THE EVENING NEWS.”
Sir - I have read the various scientific theories of the Whitechapel murders published in your columns during the
last few days, also your able article, on September 10, after the murder of Annie Chapman, and I ask you to allow me
to supplement those theories by quoting the facts of a case which came under my own observation some years ago.
I had a young friend who had just returned home from college, and whose parents resided in the country. He was a
fine, handsome young fellow, and, being an only son, his parents were very proud of him. After he had been home a
few weeks, he received an invitation to visit some friends in London. His father readily consented, and he came here,
and stayed two months. While on that visit he was allowed to do very much as he liked, and being young, and easily
beguiled, he contracted a disease from which he never recovered, and which ultimately caused his death. When he
returned home he confided his secret to me, and I entreated him to see a medical man at once, but he would not do
so, preferring to treat with a “quack” in London, who advertised in the country papers.
Things went on in this way for nearly a year, and, of course, instead of getting better, he gradually got worse, until
he ultimately became a perfect wreck, and I was reluctantly compelled to tell his father the true facts of the case, and
that gentleman at once procured the best advice in his power, but the disease had thoroughly penetrated his system,
and the physician could do him very little good.
At last dangerous symptoms began to develop themselves, for about every three weeks he would become morose, and
his whole thoughts were concentrated on murder. He had informed me that the woman from whom he had contracted
the disease was about 22 years of age, and it is a singular thing that, although his whole animosity was confined to
womenkind, he never attempted to injure an elderly or middle aged lady, but if his sisters (aged respectively 20 and
22) came near him, he would fly at them like a tiger, and curse them, swearing that they had been his ruin. It was
just the same if he saw young ladies of that age passing along the street he would snatch up a knife, or any weapon
he could get hold of, and swear he would murder them. He had a delusion that they were all prostitutes, and that he
had a mission to exterminate them wholesale; and yet, when he recovered from this mania, he was quite unconscious
of his acts, and would be as affectionate and gentle to his sisters and their young lady friends as if nothing unusual had
happened; but while the mania was strong upon him he showed astounding cunning, and had to be watched day and
night, or there is no doubt that he would have executed his supposed mission by wholesale slaughter. Al last he became
worse, and one day he attacked his favourite sister, and injured her so seriously that his friends were compelled to
place him in a lunatic asylum, where he died a raving maniac.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 44

 Now, Sir, I am not a medical man, therefore I am not in a position to say whether this was a case of monomania,
homicidal mania, or epilepsy; but with your kind permission I would like to point out a similarity between his case
and that of the monster now committing the atrocious crimes in our midst. I have said that the woman who ruined my
friend was about 22, and that when the mania was upon him he considered all girls of that age prostitutes, and that his
revenge would only be complete by exterminating them wholesale. Is it not singular that the whole of the unfortunate
women butchered in Whitechapel are about the same age? - viz., from 35 to 45? Can it be possible that this fiend has
suffered in the same way as my friend, and has sworn a deadly revenge against all unfortunates of that age? Of course,
I am presuming that he is a monomaniac, and doing his horrible work single handed.
Again, my friend always endeavoured to obtain a knife for his contemplated butchery, and constantly swore that the
first victim he met he would disembowel. The knife has been the weapon chosen for the Whitechapel tragedies, only,
unfortunately, it has successfully accomplished its diabolical work. You will notice that the attacks of my friend were
periodical, (every three weeks), and almost the same thing occurs in the present murders. I have mentioned these
facts to show you that, although my friend was prevented from carrying out his designs, there is not the least doubt
but that he would have done so had he been a free agent in the matter; therefore, I think that in many particulars his
case is analogous to the series of hideous murders lately committed. I see that the police are making vigorous search
in the lodging houses of Whitechapel. I wonder if they have ever thought it possible that the assassin may have taken
refuge in one of the vaults of the churches in that neighbourhood? One thing is certain, they need not look for him in
lodging houses.
I noticed a letter headed “East End Atrocities” in your issue of October 3, signed A.F.H., M.D., and although I agree
with a portion of what he says, I certainly cannot see why the details given at the coroner’s inquest should be kept
secret, for, allowing that the publication of every detail does put the criminal on his guard, it at the same time puts
the whole facts before the public, and brings many things to light which may ultimately lead to the arrest of the said
criminal. Germany may like secrecy, but, as a rule, John Bull likes to know what is going on around him. As regards
every penny a liner, butcher boy, &c., having his theory on these murders, I suppose, as I cannot write M.D. after my
name, I must consider myself classed as one of these; however, as the greater part of this letter deals with facts I am
quite content to let “poor, rational medical men” lay aside hypotheses and supply theories to the above facts, which
I do not profess to understand.
I am, &c.,
Carlisle street, N.W., October 5.

TO THE EDITOR OF “THE EVENING NEWS.”

Sir - You publish in your special edition of the 4th a facsimile of the letter and postcard supposed to have been
written by the murderer. Now, having been in America and mixed with American people, I am quite certain that the
above have been written either by an American or one who has been in America for some time. The whole of the letter
is full of American words and phrases: for instance, boss, fix, right track, real fits, down on, ripping, buckled, give it
out straight, and right away are very common expressions used in America. Hoping some hint of this sort might lead
to a clue.
I am, &c.,
WHITECHAPEL.
London, E., October 4.

A FRENCH CHAPTER OF WHITECHAPEL HORRORS.

The following appears in The Times this morning:
Sir - The terror which has naturally been so widespread among the masses in the districts where the recent shocking
murders were committed was intense enough without its being aggravated by the gratuitous theory of the coroner, that
these horrible outrages were not the act of a maniac, but had been coolly committed by a sane person, who wished
to earn a few pounds by gratifying the whims of an eccentric American anatomist. It will, no doubt, be found that the
idea that Yankee enterprise gave a stimulus to these terrible atrocities is utterly baseless.
For weeks I have been expecting that some one would draw attention to the fact that precisely the same crimes were
many years ago committed in Paris, and were ultimately found to have been the acts of a monomaniac.
Last summer, while travelling in France, I picked up and glanced over a French work resembling “Hine’s Every day
Book,” which gave an account of a remarkable criminal who must have strongly resembled the fiend who has created
such consternation in the East end of London. For months women of the lowest class of “unfortunates” were found
murdered and mutilated in a shocking manner. In the poorest districts of the city a “reign of terror” prevailed. The

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 45

police seemed powerless to afford any help or protection, and in spite of all their watchfulness fresh cases were from
time to time reported, all the victims belonging to the same class, and all having been mutilated in the same fiendish
way.
At last a girl one night was accosted in the street by a workman, who asked her to take a walk with him. When, by
the light of a lamp, she saw his face, it inspired her with a strange feeling of fear and aversion; and it instantly flashed
upon her that he must be the murderer. She therefore gave him in charge of the police, who, on inquiry, found that
her woman’s instinct had accomplished what had baffled the skill and the exertions of all their detectives. The long
sought criminal had been found at last.
It subsequently came to light that he had been impelled to commit these crimes by a brutal form of homicidal
mania. He had sense enough to known that from this class of women being out late at night, and being friendless and
unprotected, he could indulge his horrible craze upon them with comparative safety and impunity, and he therefore
avoided selecting his victims from a more respectable class.
He was convicted and executed, to the great relief of the public; and if any persons were afterwards tempted to
imitate him, his prompt punishment effectually deterred them.
This notorious case must be well known to the Parisian police and to thousands of persons in France, and if inquiry
is made its history can be easily procured.
No doubt a ruffian like him has turned up in East London, and will also be detected. When he is, we must trust that
he will meet with the same stern justice that was meted out to his French prototype.
Michael Mack.
A TEMPERANCE MAN IS CHARGED WITH THREATENING TO SHOOT.
At the Hammersmith Police court, yesterday, Brice Williams Stillman, manager of a City Temperance restaurant,
residing in Iffley road, Hammersmith, was brought before Mr. Paget, charged with unlawfully presenting a loaded
pistol at Henry Grant, an omnibus conductor, and George Henry Martin, while in the Swan Hotel, Broadway. Mr. Ross
appeared for the prisoner. Henry Grant said he was in the employ of the London General Omnibus Company, and lived
in Overstone road, Hammersmith. At twenty minutes past twelve that morning he has in the private compartment of
the bar with two or three of his friends. The prisoner, who was with other persons, proposed a “gamble” for drinks all
round. He was so long about that witness said he would treat his friends. He got talking a lot and wrangling. He was
drunk. Witness took no notice until he pulled out a pistol, and said, “This is a bit you ought to have,” holding it towards
his face. Mr. Ross: He did not shoot it at you? - Witness: No, I should have been dead if he had. The second complainant
said the prisoner first showed him the pistol.

A CHILD’S TOY.
He said it was a child’s toy, and put it back in his pocket. He confirmed Grant’s statement with respect to the
prisoner taking out the pistol, and pointing it at him. He said Grant caught hold of the prisoner’s wrist and held up his
hand. Witness caught hold of the other hand. It was a drunken lark. Police constable 407T, who took the prisoner into
custody, said he had his hand and the pistol in his pocket. The pistol was loaded in both chambers. William Black, a ‘bus
driver, said there were six or seven in the bar, and they were all drunk. He thought the pistol was a “bird shooter.” The
prisoner drew it out and said, “There’s a child’s toy.” There was a row all round the bar, and the prisoner was treated
more like a dog than a man.

THE “TEMPERANCE” MAN HAD BEEN DRINKING.

He could not say the prisoner was drunk; he had been drinking. The prosecutor and the other man were too drunk
to know what they were doing. Witness remained in the house - he was too drunk to move. (Laughter.) William Jasper,
a plasterer, said he was in the bar. The prisoner would not toss for drink. Mr. Paget: Who proposed it? - The witness
pointed out Black. He said the prisoner pulled out the pistol, and showed it. He put it back in his pocket instantly. He
did not point it at anybody. William Griffin, a cabdriver, said some person hit the prisoner on the hat, which was the
instigation of the row. He did not see the pistol pointed. He saw him pull out something, which he said was a child’s
toy. Before he had time to put it back into his pocket he was thrown out of the bar, and given into custody. They said,
“This man is Jack the Ripper; he has got a pistol.” Witness took the prisoner’s hat to the station. When he got there he
was pushed out. Mr. Paget said the witnesses had introduced a new feature in the case, showing that the prisoner had
been ill treated, which might account for him drawing the pistol. It was a question for the jury. The prisoner was then
committed for trial for attempting to shoot, and for a common assault. Bail was allowed.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 46

All the news that’s fit to print...

I Beg to Report
IPSWICH DEFENDANT DENIES MURDER CHARGES. Steve Wright, 49, of Ipswich, Suffolk, has appeared before Ipswich
Crown Court to deny responsibility for the murder of five women last year. Mr Wright, a former forklift truck driver, is
accused of killing Gemma Adams, 25, Tania Nicol, 19, Anneli Alderton, 24, Paula Clennell, 24, and Annette Nicholls, 29,
all of whom were found dead near Ipswich during a 10-day period in December. Mr Justice Calvert-Smith said the trial
would take place in Ipswich and prosecutors said that it was likely to last between six and eight weeks.
The Suffolk Police inquiry into the Ipswich murders was one of the biggest the country had ever seen and involved
more than 500 officers from 30 forces. It began when Tania Nicol was reported missing after she was last seen on 30
October. On 15 November, police issued an appeal for information about Gemma Adams, also missing. Her body was
found in early December, followed soon afterwards by the discovery of Miss Nicol’s body. On 10 December, the body of
Anneli Alderton was found at Nacton, near Ipswich. Two days later, the bodies of the other two women, Paula Clennell
and Annette Nicholls, were found.
Man denies Suffolk murder charges, BBC News, London, UK, 1 May 2007.

MEMENTO MORI. During the month of May artist Kathi Rick exhibited her work,
consisting of mummified human remains and the tin reliquaries where they
were kept, at the North Bank Gallery at 1005 Main Street, Vancouver, British
Columbia, Canada. Ms Rick called the exhibition Mementomori and described
it as her memorial to murdered women and a commentary on what she called
a ‘worldwide soul-rotting culture of misogyny.’ The exhibition paid tribute to
the thousands of women raped and murdered every year round the world,
including the ‘ghost brides’ of China, the ‘dowry deaths’ in India, the ongoing
genocide in Sudan and the victims of ‘honour’ killings in Pakistan, Lebanon,
Egypt, Iraq and Iran. Ms Rick also remembered in her work the murders of
students at the École Polytechnique in Montreal, Quebec, the prostitutes
from Vancouver, B.C., the Amish schoolgirls killed in Pennsylvania in 2006,
Sharvettia Brown, who was recently beaten to death in Portland, and the 17-
year-old Kurdish girl, Du’a Khalil Aswad, who was publicly stoned to death by Kathi Rick
family members and acquaintances in Iraq in April because of her relationship
with a Sunni Muslim boy. Ms Rick painted the names of dozens of these women on the walls of the gallery to complement
the remains hung on the walls. ‘What so often happens,’ she said, ‘is that we remember who kills them but not who
they are. I want to give them back their names, their skin, their faces, their voices, give them their lives back.’
Ms Rick began considering her artwork in the late 1970s, when she found a book about the Jack the Ripper murders.
When she flipped to the photograph of Mary Kelly, her knees buckled and she fell onto a stool. She said that the Ripper
has been romanticized as a gentleman in a top hat and cape, but that didn’t reflect the reality of what he did to his
victims. Since detectives at the time thought that projecting light through a dead person’s eyeballs could reveal the
last thing that the person saw, Mary Kelly’s eyes were removed, further adding to the desecration of her body. Ms Rick
put an eyeball inside one of the reliquaries as a way to give Mary Kelly that body part back.
Ms Rick found her inspiration for the exhibit in the catacombs at Rome and Palermo, Sicily, where mummified bodies
are kept. ‘Seeing the relics, and those bits of saints, was very creepy,’ she said. ‘But it made an impression. You can’t
ignore a body. There’s something about them being the same size as you, occupying the same space, that you can’t
ignore.’ She added that the point of the exhibit was to engage patrons and have them participate in the meaning of
each show. Some visitors to Mementomori cried, wrote notes about the experience and discussed with Ms Rick other
kinds of traumatic and horrific events that happened to them or their family. ‘People want to talk about things that
upset them,’ she said. ‘I like to start the dialogue and see what other people bring to it.’
Brett Oppegaard, Mementomori, The Columbian, Clark County, Washington, USA, 18 May 2007.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 47

TREVOR MARRIOTT NAMES THE RIPPER. The author of Jack The Ripper-The 21st Century Investigation has finally
put a name to the elusive Whitechapel murderer. His previous investigations had not allowed him to finger any one
individual, but new information gleaned trawling microfiche archives in Bremen to find crew lists of German merchant
ships, checking the City of London archives to study the movement of merchant vessels into the UK and liaising with
legal authorities in the USA has enabled him to settle for German merchant seaman Carl Feigenbaum as his prime
suspect. Mr Marriott said: ‘The last investigation took me two years, and I got to the point where I had investigated
the murders, the victims and the main suspects who had been put forward over the years. Having negated the usual
suspects, it looked very much like it might be a merchant seaman. If you look at the time that passed between the
murders it suggests that they were committed by a traveller. I then discovered one particular German merchant vessel
which travelled between Bremen and Whitechapel at the time of the murders. There was one murder where the boat
was not logged as coming to Whitechapel - but then I found that it had been in London, only to suffer a collision in
the Thames. So it was never logged as coming to Whitechapel but it did come to that area at the correct time. It put
a definite link between one of the sailors and the dates of the murders.’
Mr Marriott found that murders similar to those of Jack the Ripper had taken place in Germany between 1889 and
1891 and in the USA between 1891 and 1894. The last of those deaths resulted in a German national being arrested
for the murder of a woman. Although this man went by several names, he was convicted as Carl Feigenbaum. The
court transcript of his trial in America has never been used before in research on the Ripper case. Mr Marriott said:
“Subsequent inquires linked one of his aliases to the merchant navy. And that linked him to being on the transatlantic
route between Germany and the USA between 1890 and 1891.
He added: “The thing about this case is that there will always be people who will not accept any explanation. They
want definitive proof and of course you cannot get definitive evidence after this much time. But all of this is based
on true facts. People get convicted of murder today on circumstantial evidence. What we have here is the strongest
evidence there has been to date of who Jack the Ripper really was.”
See Wilf Gregg’s Crimebeat in this issue for a review of the book.
Jack the Ripper was a German merchant seaman, Biggleswade Chronicle, Biggleswade, Bedfordshire, UK, 15 May 2007.

SOUTHERN COMFORT. ‘A Southern mother might be tempted to marry off her daughter to Jack the Ripper (who
reportedly was a member of the royal family - so there) if it meant she could get out all her tea napkins.’
Gayden Metcalfe and Charlotte Hays, Somebody Is Going To Die If Lilly Beth Doesn’t Catch That Bouquet (Hyperion, 2007),
a whimsical guide to Southern weddings.

A TOUCH OF CLASS. ‘The 5.0-liter V-10 is untouched except for a reprogrammed ECU and a lighter exhaust with reduced
back pressure. It sounds two octaves more Jack the Ripper-esque than the base Gallardo, but the gain in grunt is more
acoustic than it is tangible.’ Jack the Ripper’s name has been taken in many contexts, more often than not in vain,
but as far as we know this is the first time it’s been used in a car review. Mind you, this is no ordinary car. The total
production of the 2007 Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera isn’t expected to exceed 350 units, all of them reportedly
already spoken for, despite a price tag of £150,000. Just the thing for the Ripperati to drive down to their local for a
couple of pints.
Georg Kacher, Car Reviews, 2007 Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera, Automobile Magazine, USA, May 2007.

YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING. ‘It has a nasty habit of getting to you, the little devil called stress.
Detectives are firm on their findings - this “Jack the Ripper” has spared no one. Research junkies
add that it’s the next “serial killer”.’
Jaskiran Kaur, Stress, out! Chandigarh Newsline, Chandigarh, India, 30 April 2007.

LOVE TO EAT TURKEY ’CAUSE IT’S GOOD. ‘Not all of these men used handguns and assault weapons,
most did. Some carved them up Thanksgiving-style, like Jack the Ripper.’
Dusty Nathan on American mass murderers, Bang, Bang ... You’re Dead! OpEdNews, Newtown, PA, USA,
20 April 2007.

HERE COMES DE JUDGE. ‘Suppose the policeman comes along, and he sees three people in a car and
there is Jack the Ripper driving.’ United States Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer asked this
question in a recent case out of California. A former Harvard Law School professor, Breyer reportedly
likes hypothetical scenarios. ‘When they work, hypothetical questions can reveal a contradiction or

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 48

expose a fundamental legal principle. Of course, they don’t always work,’ remarked Michael Doyle in an article about
the Justices’ personalities.
Justices’ questions reveal the people behind the law, Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune, Minneapolis, MN, 19 May 2007.

LEAVE IT TO BEAVER. Canadian history magazine The Beaver is running a survey

seeking the worst Canadian in history, in emulation of similar surveys conducted in
2005 which identified Jack the Ripper as the worst Briton and a group of Scots as the
nastiest of their countrymen. ‘Our international reputation has us as this very nice,
quiet, friendly place,’ said Deborah Morrison, president of Canada’s National History
Society, which publishes The Beaver. ‘We thought it would be fun to show people
our seamier side and take a look at some of our more villainous characters, and how
they’ve helped to shape our country,’ she added. Voters can visit the magazine’s
website to nominate villains or vote for the blackguards of their choice. Among the
nominees are pop singers Celine Dion, Avril Lavigne and Shania Twain, murderers
Clifford Olson, Paul Bernardo and Allan Legere, prime ministers John A Macdonald,
Brian Mulroney, Jean Chretien and Pierre Trudeau, and fictional characters Black
Jacques Shellac, Snidely Whiplash, and Natasha Nogoodnik and Boris Badanoff. An
early leader in the vote was ‘somebody only Canadians could know and hate’: the
Harold Ballard
late Harold Ballard, former owner of the Toronto Maple Leafs hockey team. ‘We take
our hockey very seriously,’ said Ms Morrison. Ballard, a self-described misanthropic
‘miserable old bastard’ was loathed by fans and served time in jail for fraud and tax evasion. As we close this edition
of I Beg to Report, well over 13,000 votes have been logged. The Beaver will tally the results received by 1 June 2007
and present them in its August/September issue, along with Top 10 Canadian miscreants chosen by historians.
Canadians can’t all be nice guys, eh?, MSNBC, USA, 2 May 2007.
Who would you pick as the worst Canadian? The Beaver, Canada’s History Magazine, April/May 2007.

SQUATTING WITH THE RIPPER. ‘Easily the scariest night in my life. I couldn’t lock the front door. In the parlour were
bullet holes and other classic murder signs. Jack the Ripper - I didn’t usually think about him, but he was on my mind
that night. It was the kind of place Jack the Ripper would come to unwind after a night of murdering.’ Barry Smith on
squatting at an old, out-of-business hotel. Smith has been appearing in Aspen, Colorado, in his one-man show, American
Squatter, a multimedia examination of the year he spent living on the cheap in London in 1988.
Stewart Oksenhorn, Aspen humorist debuts his new one-man show, Aspen Times, Aspen, CO, USA, 4 May 2007.

JACK THE RIPPER ON TRIAL. A group of freshmen in Belvidere High School’s Buc Pride Academy in Illinois, USA, took
Jack the Ripper to trial on 1st May as part of national Law Day. The trial followed six weeks of classes that incorporated
multiple subjects into case study. In science class, students did everything from blood-typing to hair analysis in order to
narrow down the suspects to one. They came up with Joseph Barnett, Mary Kelly’s companion. The students benefited
from the advice of Associate Judge John Young and several local attorneys. ‘They get the chance to see how it really
works, rather than just on TV,’ said Judge Young. ‘Maybe some of them will go off and decide to be lawyers and judges.’
‘Before, the only thing I knew was “order in the court,” said Alec Wells, one of two student judges presiding over the
trial. ‘I knew fact witnesses and opinion witnesses, but only because I’d watched My Cousin Vinny.’ By the end of the
day, Wells and his co-judge were calling out rules on objections and witnesses off the top of their heads. The trial ended
with a hung jury and Barnett walked. ‘I thought he was guilty,’ juror Chris Reid said. ‘A lot of the evidence pointed to
him.’ Barnett was not so lucky last year, when the class found him guilty.
Kevin Haas, High-school jury trial for Ripper, Rockford Register Star, Rockford, Ill, USA, 2 May 2007.

I SHAGGED THE SHERIFF. ‘If you sneeze in San Mateo County, the authorities want to send
you to state prison; now these guys get caught like this and act like it’s no big thing. If
Casper the Friendly Ghost came into a Redwood City courtroom, the DA would try to make
him seem like Jack the Ripper and demand a long term in San Quentin to “protect the
public”.’ A reader of the San Francisco Examiner made this remark concerning a news
item from Redwood City, California, to the effect that taxpayers would have to shell out
more than $14,000 for an off-duty 120-mile relay race across the desert involving county
law enforcement officers which ended with the sheriff and undersheriff being swept up
in a brothel bust. Sheriff Greg Munks and Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos were detained and

Sheriff Greg Munks

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 49
questioned on 21 March by Las Vegas police in Operation Dollhouse, a raid on a handful of brothels near the Las Vegas
strip targeting brothel operators and managers, as well as prostitutes, some of whom were foreigners believed to be
working against their will. Bolanos said Sheriff Munks, who participated in the relay race, was looking for a massage
because he was sore from running and unknowingly ended up at the brothel.
The San Francisco Examiner, San Francisco, CA, USA, 8 May 2007.

JACK THE RIPPER, METER MAN. ‘“Blair has already been found guilty of war crimes by a tribunal in Japan.” This is like
being given a parking ticket by Jack the Ripper!’ Given the present political climate, it was perhaps inevitable that Jack
the Ripper’s name would somehow come up in connection with Prime Minister Tony Blair. Commentator Androsthenes
made the above remark in respect of a previous observation by Verite concerning an article on Blair’s announcement
of his departure in a speech to his Sedgefield constituency.
Evening News, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 10 May 2007.

INFORMATION HIGHWAYMEN. ‘Copyright is another area that has generated major headaches for Google. To listen to
Hollywood talk, the company has as much respect for the law as Jack the Ripper, given the profusion of pirated video
clips on YouTube.’
Verne Kopytoff, Who’s Afraid of Google? San Francisco Chronicle, San Francisco, CA, USA, 11 May 2007.

ACROSS THE FIRTH OF CLYDE. Canice Donnelly is starring as Jack the Ripper in the Arran Music and Drama Club
production of the eponymous play on the Brodick Hall stage for a week run starting on 28 May. Mr Donnelly is reportedly
looking forward to playing his most macabre character yet, having been in a diversity of roles from Madam Lucy in
Irene to the tailor Motel in Fiddler on the Roof. Tickets are on sale in the Book and Card Shop, Brodick Hall, Brodick,
Isle of Arran.
The Arran Banner, Isle of Arran, Ayrshire, Scotland, UK, 11 May 2007.

DRAC AND JACK - TOGETHER AT LAST. Film and Television director and cinematographer
Ernest Dickerson is set to helm The Un-Dead, a sequel to Bram Stoker’s Dracula which has
been endorsed by the author’s family. The film will be based on a novel written by Stoker’s
great-grandnephew, Dacre Stoker, and Ian Holt, who has also adapted the book for the
screen. Production will begin in Eastern Europe later this year. The plot is partially based
on materials excised from the original version of Dracula, which was trimmed down before
publication. New characters include Jack the Ripper and Countess Erszebeth Bathory.
Un-Dead To Rise On Film, Sci Fi Wire, 14 May 2007.

BAD GUYS CAN JUMP. ‘And now, introducing the unexciting, drab, three-piece-suit San
Antonio Spurs as... villains? Talk about suddenly playing out of character. They’ve been the
most vanilla menu item this side of Baskin-Robbins, no matter how many championships
they won. The plain brown wrappers of the NBA. The stealth dynasty. And now they’re the
bad guys? So it would seem. Bruce Bowen as Jack the Ripper. Robert Horry is no longer Big
Shot Bob but Attila the Hun. Manu Ginobili and Tim Duncan today could pass for the James
brothers. Eva Longoria can be Bonnie so Tony Parker can be Clyde.’ Sportswriter Mike
Lopresti, Gannett News Service, on the image of the USA National Basketball Association
San Antonio Spurs following their controversial victories over the Phoenix Suns.
Ernest Dickerson
Spurs’ image takes hit against Suns, USA Today, 17 May 2007.

ALL HELPFUL URGES SHOULD BE CIRCUMVENTED. ‘So I fall off the wagon a few days in. A couple of glasses of red wine
and a (whole) bar of dark chocolate that accidentally somehow crept into my basket while standing in that dastardly
queue at M&S doesn’t exactly put me up there with Jack the Ripper on the list of sinners though, methinks.’ Jenna
Walker on her detoxing efforts in preparation for a California trip.
Detox confusion rains on the sun-kissed beaches, The Evening Telegraph, Peterborough, England, UK, 18 May 2007.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 50

SING ALONG WITH JACK. A Jack the Ripper musical! How come nobody thought of it before? But seriously, folks, a new
musical about the Ripper will have its world premiere in Witney, Oxfordshire this summer. The authors are two local
men: David Staines, who lives in Witney, wrote the libretto, and Robin Martin-Oliver, of Milton-under-Wychwood, the
music and songs. They hope their musical will go on to be a hit on the West End stage, but for the nonce they are
content with four performances on the stage of the little theatre at Cokethorpe School, just outside Witney. Mr Martin-
Oliver said of their musical: ‘It’s got everything, an unsolved series of murders that shocked the nation and created a
climate of fear.’ He added: ‘It was David’s idea to turn it into a musical, using the diaries of a gentleman who was a drug
addict and could have been the Ripper.’ James Maybrick comes to mind, doesn’t he? Mr Martin-Oliver also remarked:
‘It’s a complicated story and over the years there have been loads of people throwing in their three-penny bit about
who he really was. I suppose we’re throwing ours in as well, but we’re leaving it open to the audience.’ He concluded:
‘The main aim is to showcase this new musical. It will be professionally filmed at Cokethorpe and then marketed to
London directors and theatres. We have young professionals eager for a new challenge, professional musical director
Andy Collis and a small orchestra, all from Sheffield.’ Mr Martin-Oliver has been a professional director for 15 years,
working for major companies like Glyndebourne, Covent Garden and the Welsh National Opera. His work includes a
musical, House of Dolls, and a one-act opera, Purgatory. The author of the libretto, Mr Staines, will play the role of
Inspector Warren [sic], the policeman in charge of the investigation into the Whitechapel murders. Performances of
Jack will take place on 2, 3, 4 and 5 August. Because the cast and orchestra have to stay in the area, the authors are
appealing for help in providing B&B accommodation for some of them. They are offering £60 a week, plus three free
tickets. Anyone who can help, including local businesses, should call Mr Martin-Oliver on 01993 832629.
David Horne, School debuts Ripper musical, Oxford Mail, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK, 22 May 2007.

BLUEPRINT JACK. ‘Is this a business plan or just one wild stab after another? Rename it the Jack the Ripper report.’
Patrick Smith on the business plan drawn up by Racing Victoria, a body charged with reviewing the thoroughbred
industry in Victoria, Australia.
Racing Victoria blueprint is a wild stab in dark, The Australian, Sidney, New South Wales, Australia, 21 May 2007.

CORNWELL GOES TO COURT. Best-selling author and self-appointed Ripper expert Patricia Cornwell was in court recently
pressing her libel suit against a ‘cyberstalker’ who according to her had persecuted her on the internet, causing her
emotional distress and damaging her reputation. The alleged stalker is Leslie Sachs, the little-known author of How to
Buy Your New Car for a Rock-Bottom Price and even less famous co-author of Cheap Wheels: The Complete Guide to
Buying, Selling and Enjoying Used Cars. Mr Sachs claimed on his website that Ms Cornwell was a ‘Jew hater’ and ‘neo
Nazi’. Ms Cornwell told the court: ‘I said, you know, you can accuse me of a lot of things but hating a group of people
or being a felon is beyond the pale.’ She added that she feared for her safety following the postings by Mr Sachs and
had ‘massively increased’ her security, hiring two full-time bodyguards. Mr Sachs was not present in court and was
not represented. He said on his website that he now was a ‘political refugee’, having fled to Belgium to escape the
lawsuit.
The dispute springs from the publication of Ms Cornwell’s novel, The Last Precinct, in 2000. Mr Sachs claimed that
the novel plagiarised one of his books, The Virginia Ghost Murders. He attacked Ms Cornwell on his website and after
she won an injunction against him attached a sticker to the cover of his book reading ‘The book that famous Patricia
Cornwell threatened to destroy.’ Mr Sachs, who described himself as Ms Cornwell’s biographer, also wrote on his
website: ‘Patricia Cornwell is a woman of many hatreds, a woman who boasted in Vanity Fair magazine that she can
get away with murdering people. Here is the real story of Patricia Cornwell - the criminal sleaze, the scandals, the
truth, fully backed by documents that you can see for yourself.’
Ms Cornwell told the court that Mr Sachs’s postings had been a ‘huge distraction from the creative process’ and that she
no longer met her readers at book signings. At the hearing she asked the court to enforce a broader injunction against
Mr Sachs, claiming that his writings were libellous and had caused her emotional distress and hurt her reputation. She
also sought unspecified damages. After the hearing she said there should be more restrictions on internet postings.
‘There are so many people who can be damaged, it’s really quite frightening,’ she said. ‘Someone should not be able
to run away from the consequences of their despicable behaviour.’
Dan Glaister, The plot thickens as crime writer Patricia Cornwell takes ‘cyberstalker’ to court, The Guardian, 24 May 2007.

CUTTY SARK ABLAZE. The famous 19th-Century clipper Cutty Sark has been ravaged by a fire which may have been
started deliberately. The ship left London on her maiden voyage on 16 February 1870, sailing around the Cape of Good
Hope to Shanghai in three-and-a-half months. She made eight journeys to China as part of the tea trade until steam
ships replaced sail on the high seas. The ship was later used for training naval cadets during World War II, and in 1951
was moored in London for the Festival of Britain.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 51

 The ship is kept in a dry dock at Greenwich in south-east London. Much
of it, including half the planking and the masts, had been removed as
part of a £2.5m restoration project made necessary by the action of sea
salt, which had accelerated the corrosion of the ship’s iron framework.
Chris Livett, chairman of Cutty Sark Enterprises which was repairing
the clipper, said at the scene: ‘From where I stand there is not a huge
amount of damage to the planking that was left on. There are pockets of
charred planking and some have gone, but it doesn’t look as bad as first
envisaged.’ The chief executive of the Cutty Sark Trust, Richard Doughty,
said: ‘What is special about Cutty Sark is the timbers, the iron frames that
went to the South China Seas, and to think that that is threatened in any
way is unbelievable, it’s an unimaginable shock.’ Following an inspection
of the site on Monday afternoon, he added: ‘Buckling of the hull remains a
big fear but until we do the measurements we are not going to know. With
my naked eye, as far as I have been able to see, the structure of the ship
seems to be intact.’
Police were looking into the possibility that the fire was started deliberately.
They were analysing CCTV images which were thought to show people in
the area shortly before the fire started. A number of witnesses had already
come forward and the police were urging anyone else who may have been
in the area to contact them.
Blaze ravages historic Cutty Sark, BBC News, London, UK, 21 May 2007.

THE MATTER OF REWARDS. The BBC Magazine has asked itself: ‘How
effective are rewards?’ And answered: ‘More effective in keeping cases
in the headlines than resulting in convictions, but this can lead to vital
information being uncovered.’ The question was put forward in the context
of the reward totalling over £2.6m offered for information leading to the
safe return of 4-year old Madeleine McCann, who disappeared in Portugal
Cutty Sark. Photo 2006 Adam Wood on 3 May 2007. The answer is not only of interest given the present plight
of the McCann family, but will also remind Ripperologist readers of the
controversy over the proposed reward for information leading to the capture of Jack the Ripper.
The Magazine noted that the lure of money is used in all sorts of situations as an
incentive to get people to come forward, but, in the UK, payouts appear to be the
exception rather than the rule. Any individual can offer a reward through police forces
in England and often the largest are made in high-profile abduction cases. According to
the independent charity Crimestoppers, the theory behind rewards is getting people’s
attention and keeping big police investigations in the public eye. In many cases offers
of rewards are made through the charity, which has set up an international number
in relation to Madeleine’s disappearance. Since the announcement of the reward
it has received 350 calls. ‘It’s hard to quantify how successful rewards are,’ said
Crimestoppers Dave Cording. ‘Rewards do work, but in the UK they are not the driving
force behind people coming forward with information,’ he added. ‘In contrast, the
Americans are huge on claiming rewards. I think it’s a cultural thing and people in the
UK just don’t like it when they feel an injustice has been committed.’
Criminology professor Betsy Stanko said the psychology behind rewards was largely
based on breaking the silence of people who knew they were at risk if they went to
the police with information. ‘Often this is a family member, a friend or a business
associate, someone who is close to the person who has committed the crime,’ she said.
‘This closeness often means a person fears they will be harmed if they speak to police.
Rewards are about trying to get the information out of them.’ Madeline McCann

In some cases rewards have hampered investigations, with police time being diverted to taking evidence from those
more interested in the bounty than the truth. The use of rewards came under particular scrutiny during the first trial
over the death of Damilola Taylor. The court case centred on the testimony of a 12-year-old witness, who was discredited
after videotapes were shown of her bragging about a £50,000 reward she stood to pocket. The case collapsed when she
admitted in court to changing her story.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 52

Of the 350 calls Crimestoppers has received so far about the McCann case, only 64 have been passed on to police. ‘The
flip side of the system is that a reward can encourage crank calls,’ says Mr Cording. ‘But in our experience the golden
nugget that can help to solve a crime is often mixed up in them.’
How effective are rewards?, BBC News, Magazine, London, UK, 14 May 2007.

A TOUR OF THE CITY OF LONDON CEMETERY. As London becomes increasingly expensive

and the pound continues to rise against the US dollar and other lesser currencies,
visitors and hapless residents are actively on the look out for less costly outings. How
about a visit to the City of London Cemetery and Crematorium? It is Europe’s largest
graveyard and the last resting place of Jack the Ripper victims Mary Ann Nichols and
Catherine Eddowes.
The Cemetery’s 200-acre site near Epping Forest was purchased by the City of London
in 1854 and opened in 1856 as a response to the increasing demand on churchyards
in the centre of London. Many of its memorials date from Victorian times. Examples
of all the Victorian symbols of death can be found here: veiled urns, broken columns,
clasped hands, open testaments, anchors and chains, ivy, torches and many more.
Beside the monuments, the Cemetery offers magnificent gardens. It is landscaped with
shrubberies, flowers and avenues of chestnuts, oaks, limes, planes, copper beeches and
cedars. The Cemetery’s entrance is located on Aldersbrook Road (A116), Manor Park, at
the South-east corner of Wanstead Flats. Manor Park railway station is within walking
distance. Bus service 101 from Wanstead Underground Station passes the entrance.
Start the visit entering through the Cemetery’s original ornamental iron
gates flanked by porter’s lodge and superintendent’s house. You will see
three roads; take the middle one, Chapel Avenue. The first monument
on the left is dedicated to William Haywood, who died in 1894. In
1849, Haywood, who was Surveyor and Engineer to the City of London
Commissioners of Sewers, reported to the Commissioners that there were
88 churchyards within the square mile of the City of London, and many
were in a terrible, overcrowded condition: as many as ten coffins might be
resting one on top of another, graves were barely covered with earth and
body snatching was rife. Haywood’s layout for the new cemetery included
the extensive network of curving paths and avenues which now comprises
7 miles of roads, two Gothic chapels and Catacomb Valley, formed by
draining the lake, a former fishpond, with the catacombs built into the
lakeside banks.
At the first roundabout turn
left on Central Avenue. On
the right you will see the
memorial to John Vigiland, a seaman who died and was buried in Africa.
His father had his body brought home and reburied in a monument
fashioned out of Sicilian marble. Also on the right is the grave of George
Binks, the foreman rope-maker of the Woolwich Dockyard, who invented
the wire rope in the mid 1830s. Continue to the Church roundabout and
take Belfry Road, the fourth turning on the left. After a few metres on the
right you’ll see a white cross marking the grave of Elizabeth Ann Everest,
Winston Churchill’s nanny.
Proceed along Belfry Road until the second turning on the right, Anchor
Road. On either side you’ll see the only above-ground vaults in the
cemetery. Go clockwise round the Chapel and take St Andrews Road.
You’ll see a semi-circular row of arches ahead. The outer wings are the
Columbarium, where cremated remains are kept in niches. Next to it are
the last catacombs built in London housing stone coffins. Continue along St
Andrews Road and turn left into Cheethams Road until the Traditional Crematorium. Turn left again into Limes Avenue
and then right into Gardens Way. Beyond is the grave of football legend Bobby Moore under a magnolia tree.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 53

Follow Gardens Way until you reach the Memorial Garden. On the left, in front of the circular rose garden, there is a
plaque commemorating Private John Joseph Sims, 34th Regiment, one of the two holders of the Victoria Cross buried
in the Cemetery. Sims won his Victoria Cross during the Crimean War in 1855 for rescuing wounded soldiers under
heavy fire. Queen Victoria pinned the Cross on his breast at the first investiture of the award of the VC in Hyde Park
on 26 June 1857. Sims died on 6 December 1881, aged 46, at the Union Workhouse, Thavies Inn, City of London, from
tuberculosis. He was buried in Common Ground in the City of London Cemetery, without a headstone, but a plaque was
placed on the location of his burial as part of the Cemetery’s Heritage Trail in 2003. The other VC holder buried in the
Cemetery is Lieutenant George Drewry VC, Royal Navy, who won his Victoria Cross at Gallipoli in 1915. Further on along
Gardens Way you’ll come across similar plaques on the right and left of the road commemorating Mary Ann Nichols and
Catherine Eddowes. Their graves are also part of the Heritage Trail.
Next take the first turning right, Willow Road, and then the first turning left, Woodland Avenue. On the right hand
side there is a patch of woodland specially designated for natural burials, where graves are marked with wooden posts
which are eventually removed as the cardboard coffins and their owners return to the earth. At the end of this road
turn right and continue along South Boundary Road, which runs parallel to the railway, because it was originally planned
that coffins would be delivered by rail from central London.
Turn right into South Gate Road. On the right are the twin pink marble graves of Sergeant Bentley and Constable Tucker,
two unarmed policemen who were killed on 16 December 1910 in an encounter with Latvian radicals which led to the
Siege of Sidney Street. Go clockwise round Stacey’s Circle, named after the first Cemetery superintendent, and take
the second exit along St Dionis Road. On the left are a war memorial and military graves.
Take the first turning, Central Avenue, left. In this section there are several church memorials marking the places
where the remains disinterred from London churchyards were reburied. On the left there is a memorial indicating that
the remains of eighteen generations of parishioners of St Helens, Bishopsgate, are buried on that spot. Among them
is Robert Hooke (1635-1703), a distinguished scientist and architect. Further along on the left is the St Andrew’s and
St Sepulchre’s monument, which is surrounded by railings. Originally 12,000 people were buried there, later joined by
3,000 more whose remains were discovered in the church’s vaults. Just before reaching the final junction, on the left,
is a memorial to Lord Shiva. Continue to the Great Circle, from which you can see all the major buildings. To return to
the entrance, go left. The walk covers some 2.5 miles and can be completed on 2 hours.
The City of London Corporation has published two books: The Cemetery in a Garden and The Heritage Brochure, which
was written by David McCarthy, the Cemetery Superintendent. Mr McCarthy also conducts regular Sunday tours. They
are free, but you have to book by telephone at 020 8530 2151
Len Banister, Walks: City of London Cemetery & Crematorium – 2.5 miles,
Wanstead and Woodford Guardian, East London and West Essex Guardian Series, UK, 30 April 2007.
Catharine Arnold, Necropolis: London and its dead, Simon and Schuster UK, London, 2006.

AND FINALLY, A TEST OF YOUR RIPPER KNOWLEDGE.

The question last month was: The husband of which major
American film star likened John Wayne to Jack the Ripper?
The answer: Shirley Temple. John Agar, to whom she was
married from 1945 to 1950, was featured in Sands of Iwo
Jima (Allan Dwan, Republic, 1949), which starred John
Wayne as USMC Sgt John M Stryker. The following lines of
dialogue are from this film: Cpl Robert Dunne (Arthur Franz):
‘Stryker knows his business.’ Pfc Peter Conway (John Agar):
‘So did Jack the Ripper.’
This month’s question: Which British comedy star played a
uniformed Frenchman who didn’t know who (or what) was
Jack the Ripper? The answer will appear in next month’s
edition of I Beg to Report.

The wedding of Shirley Temple and John Agar

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 54

 I Beg to Report

The Trial of
James Maybrick
Liverpool 19-20 May by CHRISTOPHER T GEORGE

It was a pleasure for me to return to my home city of Liverpool to attend the ‘Trial’ of James
Maybrick for being Jack the Ripper, as proponents of the controversial Maybrick Diary would
contend. Although not myself a believer in the Maybrick-as-Jack theory, I am nonetheless
fascinated by the conundrum of who devised the Diary and whether it is a new hoax or an old
hoax. That is, whether the document was devised, as many of us think relatively recently, i.e.,
around the time of the Centennial of the Whitechapel murders in 1988 and before 13 April 1992,
when former Liverpool scrap metal dealer Michael Barrett took it to London literary agent Doreen
Montgomery, or else some time in the decades following Florence Maybrick’s September 1889
conviction for the arsenic poisoning of her cotton merchant husband.
One thing that Maybrick proponents and anti-Diarists cannot get around is that the Diary is not in James Maybrick’s
known handwriting. In her presentation, Shirley Harrison, author of the original 1993 The Diary of Jack the Ripper
(Smith Gryphon), which first published the Diary in facsimile and transcript form and provided a commentary on the
Diary, stated, as she did in her original book, that an explanation for the difference in the handwriting could be that
Maybrick suffered from multiple personality disorder. Though, hmmmm, how would that explain that the writing is
fairly consistent throughout the 63-page narrative, written as it is, in a period photograph album or scrapbook with its
opening 48 pages hacked out?
The well-run weekend, ably emceed by Jeremy Beadle, was organised by
Chris Jones in celebration of the Bicentennial of the Liverpool Cricket Club,
and held in a marquee by the side of the historic club house, within a block of
the cream Maybrick mansion, Battlecrease House on tree-lined Riversdale Road.
The event did not answer any of the questions about the Diary. Nonetheless, it
provided a full and frank discussion by leading authorities on the ‘problem’ of
the Diary with one or two surprises and revelations along the way.
A total of 180 people attended the event over the two days, including
Ripperologists such as book dealer Loretta Lay; Caroline Morris, a co-author of
Ripper Diary: The Inside Story (Sutton Publishing, 2003); Alan Sharp, author of
Jack the Ripper and the Irish Press and an associate editor with Ripper Notes; The Trial was held in a large tent beside
the clubhouse of the Liverpool Cricket Club.
Whitechapel Journal editor Adrian Morris; Albert Johnson, owner of the Maybrick (Photograph by Chris George.)
watch; and a large contingent of other
interested Liverpudlians with varied knowledge of the Maybrick and Ripper cases.
I had flown over trom Baltimore, Maryland, USA, to attend the event, and another
transatlantic visitor was New Jersey’s Otto Gross, who had provided information for
Shirley Harrison’s latest Maybrick book, Jack the Ripper: The American Connection,
as she related in ‘Dear Diary’ published in our pages and available at Casebook:
Jack the Ripper. Mr Gross told me that while he is not totally ‘sold’ on the idea that
James Maybrick committed a series of American murders, such as killings in Austin,
Texas (the ‘Servant Girl Murders’ of 1884), New Orleans, and Kansas City, he is at
least certain that there was a serial killer involved even if it was not the Liverpool
businessman – and he continues to research the American crimes on that basis.
The weekend began in entertaining fashion as Liverpool crime historian Vincent
Burke, complete with amiable, ruddy face, mutton chop whiskers and red socks,
Crime expert Vincent Burke who colourfully tells
the story of the Maybrick Case.
told the story of the Maybrick Case in which Alabama-born Florence Maybrick was
(Photograph courtesy of Tony May.) found guilty of the arsenic poisoning of her husband. As Burke stated, the evidence

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 55

 introduced in the August–September 1889 trial at Liverpool’s St George’s Hall was largely circumstantial and hinged
less on the contradictory medical evidence than on Florence’s proven infidelity with Liverpool cotton merchant Alfred
Brierley. The adulterous relationship swayed the presiding judge, Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, to direct the jury to
convict her. The mob outside the court jeered the judge as he left the court – though, perversely days earlier, they had
jeered Florie on her first arrival. Thus was the fickleness of public opinion well demonstrated.
And talking of fickle Michael Barrett, the scheduled second speaker, who had promised to tell the truth to the
attendees at the Trial about the origins of the Diary, proved a non-show, not surprisingly given his previous known
erratic episodes. The topic of Barrett’s behaviour and personality cropped up several times during the weekend,
particularly in the talks by Shirley Harrison and Keith Skinner, who made the point that Barrett was a highly unlikely
figure to pick to be a principal player in a forgery scheme.
The time slot that had been made available to Barrett was ably filled by
Lindsay Siviter, who read out from the description of a visit to Mrs Maybrick
in gaol by an unnamed woman journalist published in the American magazine
Shirley Illustrated in 1902. The heartbreaking and solemn account proved
a perfect follow-up to Burke’s narrative of the Maybrick Case, even if the
audience was denied the chance to hear from the mercurial and frustrating Mr
Barrett. According to organiser Chris Jones, Barrett had told him by telephone
when he proposed attending the Trial that the original story that he had told,
about obtaining the Diary in 1991 wrapped in a brown paper parcel from former
Liverpool Echo compositor Tony Devereux (who shortly thereafter died) was the
true one. Of course, Mike’s former wife, who now calls herself Anne Graham,
maintains that the Diary had been in her family for years and that her father
Billy Graham had received it from his stepmother Edith who got it from his
Shirley Harrison expresses her continued belief
that Maybrick was the Ripper as master of ceremonies step grandmother, Elizabeth Formby, who was friendly with Alice Yapp, a senior
Jeremy Beadle looks on. (Photograph by Chris George.) servant and nurse in the Maybrick household, who may have stolen the Diary
from Battlecrease House. This same Alice Yapp was likened by Vincent Burke to the manipulative housekeeper Mrs
Danvers in Daphne Du Maurier’s Rebecca. Anne Graham claimed that she gave the Diary to Devereux to give to Mike to
give him a writing project, Mike being a part-time journalist.
Shirley Harrison reiterated her belief that James Maybrick was Jack the Ripper and said that research into Maybrick
continues. She and audience member Robert Smith, whose publishing firm in 1993 brought out Ms Harrison’s The Diary
of Jack the Ripper, fielded questions from those in attendance about the money given to the Barretts. Mr Smith stated
that he paid Mike Barrett a nominal fee of a pound in order to ‘protect’ it and ensure that the publishing project could
proceed. Out of the royalties the Barretts received, £5,000 was paid out by Mike in five £1,000 payments to an unknown
recipient. Does that imply a forgery scheme and some ‘Mr Big’ behind the operation? In answer to a question from
Adrian Morris who said he had received communications from Ripperologist Martin Fido in which Mr Fido said that the
ink in the Diary was blue when he first examined the Diary, but has changed to black during the last fifteen years, Mr
Smith stated the colour of the ink has not changed: ‘The ink in the Diary is and always has been black, although with a
dipped pen the intensity of the colour varies,’ he replied. ‘When the pen has been freshly dipped, the colour is black
tinged with blue but when the pen has less ink it is grey in tone.’
The question and answer session was followed by lunch in the Liverpool
Cricket Club. Curry and chips for me plus a beer at the bar with Paul Begg.
Meanwhile the Maybrick watch was being shown by owner Albert Johnson
to interested parties. I had seen the gold watch at the Bournemouth Ripper
convention in 2001 and didn’t need to see it again. The story of the watch
with its light scratches on an inside cover – ‘I am Jack’ and ‘James Maybrick’
plus the supposed initials of the Ripper victims – and that of the Diary, and
the contradictory scientific findings on both – that seem to show that the
ink in the Diary and the scratches are at least decades old – remain muddy
and confusing. Much like the turbulent Merseyside weather on the Saturday:
bright sunshine alternating with rain showers that thudded on the roof of the
marquee!
The afternoon session opened with Jeremy Beadle introducing Dr David Canter,
Dr David Canter tells the audience that Liverpool University Professor of Investigative Psychology, as Merseyside’s
the diarist’s selection of Middlesex Street for his
lodgings fits his theory of geographic profiling.
‘Cracker’ – referring to the acclaimed TV series with Robbie Coltrane as
(Photograph by Chris George.) a criminal psychologist. Would Dr Canter be able to crack the case of the

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 56

Maybrick Diary, we all wondered. Well, no. Consistent with what he wrote in his book Mapping Murder on geographic
profiling, he stated that he found the diarist’s chosen lodgings in Middlesex Street, within the locus of the murders, to
be consistent with the type of location criminals choose as a base. He also read from a period medical text a description
of the symptoms of arsenic poisoning which appeared to mirror the symptoms noted by the diarist: ‘The surface of
the body is pale, cold, clammy, and sweating, and the aspect is cadaveric.’ When pressed by an audience member on
whether he really believed the Diary to be authentic, Dr Canter was noncommital. The impression was left that while
he was fascinated by the authentic-sounding narrative in the Diary, he might not believe it is the real deal.
Another half-hour break preceded the last presentation of the first day by the Rip’s own Editor in Chief, Paul Begg.
Paul began his presentation with the statement that ‘The stories about the origins of the Diary don’t seem credible.’
The 48 pages removed from the front of the photograph album or scrapbook that was used to write the Diary, in itself
an ‘inappropriate’ type of vehicle for the story, are, he said, ‘very indicative of a forgery.’ He said that the arsenic
Maybrick supposedly took as an aphrodisiac was more likely to produce suicidal tendencies than homicidal urges. He
declared, ‘There is nothing to suggest that James Maybrick was a homicidal maniac. Nobody would butcher a woman
like the Ripper did with Mary Jane Kelly in revenge for a philandering wife.’ And since three handwriting experts have
decreed that the writing in the Diary was not in Maybrick’s handwriting, it seems ‘highly improbable’ that the writer
of the Diary was James Maybrick. Because the Diary lacks provenance and cannot be linked to Maybrick either by chain
of possession or handwriting, it cannot be taken seriously as a historical document. The question is whether it is an
old or a new forgery.
I drove away from the Cricket Club to join my wife Donna for dinner in downtown Liverpool at the Crowne Plaza
Hotel by the Pier Head. In keeping with the showery weather of the day, hail thudded against the windscreen of my
hired silver VW Passat as I headed north on Aigburth Road. I thus missed the marathon quiz hosted by Jeremy Beadle
which Loretta Lay told me went on till after 11:00pm!
Sunday proved sunny and bright, a much more serene and settled day than
rainstormy Saturday. The lead-off presentation of the morning was by Bill
Rubinstein, Professor of History at the University of Wales at Aberystwyth.
He began with a history of the Whitechapel murders which was probably
appreciated by the locals in attendance who knew less about the murders
than that a local man had been implicated as Jack the Ripper on the basis
of the Diary. The rest of Prof Rubinstein’s presentation, frankly, could have
been scripted by the late Paul Feldman since much of what he said was the
‘evidence’ for the candidacy of Maybrick in Feldman’s 1996 Jack the Ripper:
The Final Chapter. Included thus was the Liverpool ‘Ripper’ letter of October
1888 mysteriously signed ‘Diego Laurenz’ in which the writer said he was
on the landing stage ready to take ship to America. Transatlantic trips of
course being common for Mr Maybrick – in 1880, he had met Florence during
a passage on board the SS Baltic; the Maybricks spent part of their time in
Prof Bill Rubinstein reiterates his belief that Norfolk, Virginia, before settling in Battlecrease; and Galveston, New Orleans,
James Maybrick was likely the Ripper.
Charleston, and other US cotton ports would have been regular places that
(Photograph by Chris George.)
the cotton merchant would have visited. Prof Rubinstein pointed out, as did
Feldman, that ‘Diego’ is Spanish for James and that ‘Laurenz’ rhymes with Florence. The lack of murders in October
could be explained by Maybrick taking a trip to America. The Professor said that even without the Diary, he felt there
was a ‘sixty-forty’ chance that Maybrick was the Ripper, but that if it could be proven that the merchant was at some
function in Liverpool at the time of a Ripper murder he obviously could not have been the killer. If Maybrick was the
Whitechapel murderer, the fact that he changed doctors on 19 November 1888 and his new physician, Dr Drysdale,
worked to wean him off arsenic with homeopathic remedies, could explain why the killing spree ended after the 9
November murder of Mary Jane Kelly.
The second presenter of the day, Donald Rumbelow, author of The Complete Jack the Ripper, laid out the reasons
why he thought the Diary was a hoax. He pointed out that the clever thing about the Diary is that there are no dates
in it apart from the last page, signed ‘Jack the Ripper’ and dated ‘this third day of May 1889.’ Because of the lack of
dates, the reader has to apply knowledge of the Maybrick and Ripper cases to make sense of the document and thus
the reader does the diarist’s work for them. Despite the 48 missing pages at the beginning of the book, the writer
announces his or her intentions in ‘a real piece of scene setting’ – the choice would be London and that whores would
have a reason to pay. The emergence of the Maybrick watch on the heels of the Diary was further proof to Rumbelow
that a hoax was involved. The watch has been shown to be a lady’s watch that would not have fitted with the large
watch chain in the published photograph of Maybrick. The scientific assessment that the scratches may date back tens
of years would not take them back to the time of the Ripper crimes. Rumbelow also asserted that professional watch

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 57

 repairer Timothy Dundas did not remember seeing the scratches and only
recalled repairer’s marks – the implication being that the marks were put in
the watch later by someone who learnt that Maybrick was being named as
the Ripper in the Liverpool press. Don singled out the wording ‘tin matchbox
empty’ as another indication that the Diary is phony since the police list of
Catherine Eddowes’ belongings was first made public when it was published in
Martin Fido’s book of 1987. Don, a former City of London police constable, also
found it ‘nonsensical’ that Maybrick would have had time to search through
Eddowes’ pockets. He said, ‘There would have been insufficient time between
the beats of P.C. Harvey and P.C. Watkins into Mitre Square.’ Finally, Don found
it deplorable that ‘the name of Maybrick has been besmirched’ by whomever
Don Rumbelow enumerates the reasons why he
contrived the Diary and also that ‘Maybrick’s grave has been vandalized as has
firmly believes the Diary to be a fake. Sir William Gull’s’ after both men were named as Ripper suspects.
(Photograph by Chris George.)
From the audience, Albert Johnson denied that Dundas had done a complete
examination of the watch before he brought it forward. In his opinion, the watch was not a lady’s watch but a man’s
watch. Another person heard from in the audience was Tony Devereux’s daughter. She cast doubt on Michael Barrett’s
claim to have regularly visited her father when Mr Devereux was ill. To her mind, Barrett was not a close friend of her
father’s as Barrett claimed. She had no knowledge of the bottles of sherry that Barrett allegedly brought her father
– he was a whisky drinker not a sherry drinker.
For lunch, I had a couple of ham and tomato sandwiches and a pint of Guinness,
then, as invited, I trekked over to Battlecrease House in the bright sun to see once
again the site of those grim occurrences of that May of 118 years ago when James
Maybrick took his final breath and his widow was accused of his murder. I had been
inside the house in August 2003 when I was in Liverpool for the UK convention at
the Britannia Adelphi. Now at the invitation of owner Paul Dodd, attendees at the
Trial were able to wander the grounds, somewhat circumscribed from the heyday
of Jim and Florie, but still beautiful with flowers such as mauve rhododendrons
and yellow laburnum. Children in period dress collected donations for Mr Dodd’s
favourite charity, Kidswheels (proceeds from a Friday night coach tour of Maybrick
sites and from the event also went to the same charity). In the company of Lindsay
Siviter and Robert Smith, I explored the staircase of the mansion, the doors to the
various flats that now make up the house being locked. The wooden staircase was
from the period of the Maybricks as was the leadlight stained glass window. Lindsay
had a copy of the plan of the house that had been used at Florie’s trial. The visit
gave food for thought and sat there in my stomach with the sandwiches and Guinness
that I had consumed.
In introducing Keith Skinner, the last speaker on Sunday afternoon, Jeremy Beadle
announced that Keith would be working with Patricia Cornwell on a new edition of
her Portrait of a Killer. Jack the Ripper: Case Closed, and that the new edition would
attempt to correct errors that she had made in the earlier edition of her book, for
example, that her suspect, Walter Sickert, had no descendants.
Keith attempted to put some perspective on The ‘Jury’ visits Battlecrease House
the problem of the Maybrick Diary in terms of (Photograph courtesy of Tony May.)
following the documentary history regarding the
Diary. ‘What should be on trial,’ he said, ‘is not James Maybrick but the Diary.’ He
showed an excerpt from Paul Feldman’s film The Diary of Jack the Ripper and made
the point that the three questions raised by Paul Begg at the beginning of the Diary
investigation 14 years ago remained unanswered: ‘Who wrote the Diary? When was
it written? Why was it written?’
Keith held up a copy of a small red Victorian diary of 1892 that Michael Barrett
had bought in March 1992 after he contacted Doreen Montgomery and had claimed,
under the pseudonym of Williams, that he already had the Diary of Jack the Ripper
in his possession. The small red diary was purchased after Mike had placed an ad
The little red Victorian diary held in the hand
of emcee Jeremy Beadle. in a trade magazine seeking a used or partly used Diary dated 1880 to 1890 with
(Photograph courtesy of Tony May.) ‘twenty empty pages.’ What did this imply? Well it occurs to me – although I did

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 58

not have a chance to air the idea during the Trial, that Barrett realized the
very thing that Paul Begg pointed out, that the Diary looked ‘odd’ written in a
scrapbook with the opening pages cut out and that he intended to rewrite the
narrative into a more appropriate looking book. However, he found the little
red diary not only too small but of an impossible year, 1892, since Maybrick
had been dead three years by that time. Skinner reached no conclusion, just
let the odd episode speak for itself of Mike trying to buy a period diary after
he had contacted the literary agent but before he took the Diary that we all
know and love to London.
Keith said that research on the Diary continues and that there would be new
revelations that he was at that point not at liberty to disclose. In reply to a
question from me, he replied that the research was separate to a reported
book he was working on with Bruce Robinson, writer and director of the cult Keith Skinner reading out the advert that
film Withnail and I and script writer for The Killing Fields. Keith, an actor Mike Barrett placed for the Victorian Diary
(Photograph courtesy of Tony May.)
before he became a full-time researcher, has known Mr Robinson for some
decades, going back to when they were fellow actors. He said that Bruce does not believe Maybrick was the Ripper but
that the book will be, in Robinson’s opinion, ‘an atom bomb.’ I also sought clarification of a remark that I thought I had
heard Keith make in his presentation that his new research would show the Diary had come ‘out of Battlecrease House.’
He clarified, ‘I said that [presented with the new information] a court would say the Diary came out of Battlecrease
House. I have made no suggestion that Maybrick was the Ripper.’
In an ending panel
discussion, each speaker –
barring Dr Canter, who did not
appear on the second day –
made some final remarks. Paul
Begg reiterated his belief that
the Diary ‘is not allowable as
history.’ For her part, Shirley
Harrison said that she was ‘most
interested in the psychological
side of the Diary’ and that
psychologists who have read
the Diary have told her that
it reads persuasively like a
true narrative. The audience
was then invited to vote on
whether James Maybrick was
In the ending panel discussion, Paul Begg tells the audience the Diary ‘is not allowable as history.’
(Photograph by Chris George.) innocent or guilty. The ballots
went 63 to 57 in favour of
Maybrick’s guilt – quite possibly because the large number of Liverpudlians in the audience wanted a local man to be
the Ripper! Of course, as Alan Sharp remarked on Casebook: Jack the Ripper, those in attendance were not given the
option of voting for any other candidate.
Thus concluded what had been an informative and
interesting weekend studded with authorities. I thought
the event matched up to any Ripper conference that I have
attended, and I have been to six so far, both in the UK and
in the US. Organiser Chris Jones, emcee Jeremy Beadle,
and the speakers and audience deserve credit for a most
successful event.

Counting the votes..it’s a close one!

(Photograph courtesy of Tony May.)

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 59

 I Beg to Report

2007 Conference
The organisers of this year’s conference in Wolverhampton have announced the final two speakers
at the event, and the complete line-up has been released.
The Rip’s own Don Souden will be revealing the Myths of Jack the Ripper - those canards reported in the contemporary
literature which have remained intertwined with the facts to leave us guessing what’s true and what’s not.
Don will be followed by Robert Eighteen-Bisang, who will attempt to discover the truth behind another possible myth;
that Bram Stoker based his Dracula on the Ripper murders.
The weekend’s itinerary is as follows:

Friday 12 October
Jack, a one-man entertainment
by MICHAEL HUIE

Saturday 13 October
The Wolverhampton Kate Eddowes Would Have Known
by DAVE MORRIS
The Life of Catherine Eddowes
by ANDY ALIFFE
Mitre Square
by NEIL BELL
Jewish Witnesses and IdentificatIon at the Seaside Home
Michael Huie by STEWART EVANS
Banquet followed by entertainment

Sunday 14 October
The Myths of Jack the Ripper
by DON SOUDEN
Dracula and the Ripper
by ROBERT EIGHTEEN-BISANG
An Audience with
NEAL STUBBINGS
OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT AWARD
presented to Neal Stubbings

Robert Eighteen-Bisang See the website for full details - www.ripperconference.co.uk

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 60

 On the
Crimebeat
WILF GREGG looks at the new
additions to the True Crime bookshelf

A GRIM ALMANAC OF SUSSEX

W.H, Johnson
S/B, 192 pp., Illus., Sutton Publishing, £14.99

Regular readers of this column will know I am a great fan of this series. As with its predecssors, this a large-
sized softback volume, profusely illustrated throughout, with dateline entries ranging from the major cases to
bizarre entries on items covering matters at times both sad and horrific, but nonetheless interesting. The major
cases featured include the Brighton Trunk Murders and the town’s police conspiracy case, plus Patrick Mahon,
Norman Thorne, and John George Haigh amongst others. Two old murder cases featured
which I found interesting were Ann Cruttenden (1776), convicted of the murder of her
husband (to which Mr Johnson adds a quote that Peter Potter, a carpenter, submitted a
bill for “putting up a post for the woman to be burnt on”), and Anne Whale and Sarah
Pledge, convicted in 1752 of the murder of the former’s husband. Anne Whale was burnt
at the stake as she was adjudged guilty of petit treason whereas Sarah Pledge was ‘only’
hanged and dissected.
A couple of other snippets: William Treble who, awaiting execution for forgery in
1810, hanged himself in prison as he could not bear dying in front of a gaping mob; and a
Brighton man who in 1799 sold his wife for five shillings and eight pots of beer. The author
drily observes that divorce was not available to the lower classes at the time.
Mr Johnson is a prolific author on Home Counties crime and this book reflects this.
Open it anywhere and the bizarre, sad, horrific and even on occasions the comic can be
found. Strongly recommended.
John George Haigh

JACK THE RIPPER – THE 21ST CENTURY INVESTIGATION

Trevor Marriott
P/B, 356 pp., Illus., John Blake Publishing, £7.99

Ripper books are normally outside my remit but I felt justified in including this
new edition of Mr Marriott’s book as it has an additional chapter from the first
printing dealing with Carl Feigenbaum, who was executed in the electric chair in
Sing Sing in 1896 for the murder of a woman in New York. Feigenbaum is not of
course a new Ripper suspect, as he is featured in Jack the Ripper: Hunting the
Suspects by C.J. Morley (2004), and there is a brief reference in David Allen Hearn’s
excellent Legal Executions in New York State 1639-1963 (1997).
While this edition has the bold statement on the cover that “A TOP MURDER SQUAD
DETECTIVE REVEALS THE RIPPER’S IDENTITY AT LAST!”, which may be typical publisher’s
hyperbole, it is fair to say that Mr Marriott has put much meat on the bones of what I
knew about Feigenbaum.
In addition, Mr Marriott includes several cases of Ripper-like unsolved murders of
women in the USA, Germany and Switzerland, suggesting therefore that as an inveterate
traveller Feigenbaum could not only have been the Ripper but a global serial killer to
Trevor Marriott
boot! I leave the verdict on this to Ripperologists.

Ripperologist 79 May 2007 61

 This stunning aerial photo of ‘Ripper Country’ makes abundantly clear just how far
Jack had to travel from Mitre Square to Goulston Street before discarding Kate Eddowes’s
bloody apron piece. That subject has been dealt with by Gavin Bromley in recent issues
of Ripperologist and he continues his examination of the topic this month.

1
7

8
2
9

10
4
11

12
6

1 Leman Street 7 Minories

2 Commercial Street 8 Mitre Square
3 Goulston Street 9 Mitre Street
4 Wentworth Street 10 Bevis Marks
5 White’s Row 11 Houndsditch
6 Middlesex Street 12 Bishopsgate