Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another report of the burglary at Woolf Abrahams's house, 1886

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Another report of the burglary at Woolf Abrahams's house, 1886

    Considering how much speculative discussion is going on relating to Aaron Kozminski, I was surprised to see that the discovery of an interesting additional report of the burglary at his brother's house in 1886, posted by Chris Scott on jtrforums.com, had gone completely without comment:


    A shorter report, in the Illustrated Police News of 24 April 1886, was discovered several years ago by Robert Linford. I think there are several interesting bits of information in the newly discovered report, which appeared in the Standard of 13 April.

    The exact address of Woolf's house, 12 Greenfield Street, is given. This is a new address in addition to the ones listed in his application for naturalisation in December 1886. Then he stated that since his arrival in England in 1881 he had lived in Greenfield Street, namely "at Numbers 58, 74, 64 and 62." We know he was at number 64 by 12 June 1886, when his daughter Milly was born, so it seems likely that he was at number 12, presumably for only a short time, between leaving number 74 and moving to number 64. Number 74 was the address of the eldest brother, Isaac Abrahams.

    The report also says that on discovering the burglary, Woolf's wife Betsy went to her husband who was at work, and he and his brother-in-law then entered the front room and discovered the burglar hiding there. The brother-in-law must be Morris Lubnowski Cohen, who lived four doors away at number 16, and it seems likely that the place where Woolf was working was Isaac's house, number 74, which was immediately opposite to Morris's.

    I've indicated the positions of these three houses on the 1938 Goad Plan of Greenfield Street.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Burglary.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	115.6 KB
ID:	670717

  • #2
    Another interesting detail in the newly discovered report is the mention of Woolf's gold watch. The total value of the goods stolen by Isaacs, £12, would equate to about £1000 today, in terms of purchasing power. Obviously Woolf was not rich, but he wasn't on the bread line either.

    Comment


    • #3
      (Finally found the time to get back on!)


      Yes, I read this in Rob House's book the other day that Woolf's workshop had been broken into. It appears to me that Woolf might have been struggling financially in the years settling into a life in London since he has obviously moved house a lot more than any of us initially thought, although notably not straying far from Greenfield Street. Agreeing what you said, I don't think that he was in poverty either, and was probably fairing a lot better than most residents in Whitechapel, but compared to Isaac, who appeared to be in a much more stable condition with his business, he was scraping a living from it. But since there is a gold watch mentioned, it seems like Woolf did have a few small luxuries, but in all probability not that many, or not many kept in the open anyway or the burglar would have taken/ attempted to take them too.

      Comment

      Working...
      X