Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tumblety in the Evening Post

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

  • Tumblety in the Evening Post

    I found a story about Tumblety in the Evening Post of 10 December 1888. Text as below:

    THE MYSTERIOUS “DOCTOR”

    One of the Numerous Men Arrested for the Whitechapel Murders

    On the name of Francis Tumblety, who was out on bail, being called at the Old Bailey this morning to take his trial for a serious offence, it was intimated to the Recorder by the prosecuting counsel that the accused had left the country for the country’s good. A fresh warrant was asked for and granted for his arrest. Tumblety was taken into custody on November 18 on suspicion of being the Whitechapel murderer and his lodgings being searched by police, he was detained on the charge for which he should have taken his trial to-day. The accused is well known in America, where he called himself “Dr. Tumblety.” About the time the war broke out in 1860, or 1861, Dr. Tumblety made his appearance at St. John, N.B., where he immediately proceeded to cut a great dash. He claimed to be an electric physician of great note, and, lodging at the leading hotel of the city, soon persuaded people to believe that he was all that he represented. With that belief established, there came to the doctor a large practice. Mounted on a fine white horse, followed by several thoroughbred hounds, and flashily dressed, he created quite a sensation when going through the streets. After a while the more intelligent people got their eyes open to the fact that he was a charlatan, and pretty soon afterwards stories began to go round about his indecorous treatment of some of his lady patients. The climax came when a man whom he was treating died, and under very peculiar circumstances. The victim’s name was Portmore. An autopsy was held, death was shown to have resulted from the doctor’s treatment, which was simply atrocious, and the matter was given to a coroner’s jury to adjudicate upon. Coroner’s juries do not move with much alacrity in that part of the world, and by the time this one had arrived at a verdict of manslaughter in the case, the doctor had left town. A few years ago the pimple-banishing exercise was moved to London where the doctor is for a time said to have made money. It was his queer method of spending his money which first attracted the Scotland Yard detectives to him, and after a slight investigation he was arrested, the idea being that if he were not the Whitechapel fiend, he was a dangerous character, and not entitled to his liberty.

    In various cities, the doctor has been shadowed by the police. Detectives have followed him, watched his office, dogged his footsteps, noted his companions and tried, in every way to find out the secret of his private life which he so jealously guarded, and not one of them has been successful. Who is he? What is his nationality? Where is his home, his family? Who are his friends, his associates? None of these questions has ever been answered.

    ENDS

    There are a couple of subsequent references; the first being a rather strange one in a headline the following day but no actual mention of him in the stories below. The headline (in the Evening Post of 11 December 1888) says:

    OLD BAILEY TRIALS

    Putting up the Wrong Man – Widow Irvine – Dr Tumblety again


    However, while the first two stories, about a wrong man being put up for trial and Widow Irvine, are supported by the articles beneath the headline, there is no mention of Dr Tumblety - so whatever they were intending to report did not, apparently, make it into the printed edition.

    The third reference I found was is in the edition of 13 December 1888. It is essentially a long reproduction of the New York World story quoting James McClelland and Colonel Dunham. The story is headlined "TUMBLETY’S CAREER" and begins:

    "The American “Doctor” who was suspected of committing the Whitechapel Murders, but released, is the subject of considerable comment in the New York Press. The man was under recognisances to appear at the Old Bailey on another charge but he failed to surrender. The New York World says...."

    The long extract from the New York World (which can be found online) then follows.

  • #2
    Hi David,

    An excellent find.

    From which city was the Evening Post?

    Regards,

    Simon
    Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi Simon - it was a London evening newspaper.

      Comment


      • #4
        Taken into custody November 18.
        G U T

        There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

        Comment


        • #5
          Hi David,

          Thank you for clarifying.

          Regards,

          Simon
          Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by GUT View Post
            Taken into custody November 18.
            Typo there should have read Nov 8th which when he would have first appeared at court and was remanded in custody having been arrested on Nov 7th

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by GUT View Post
              Taken into custody November 18.
              Typo there should have read Nov 8th which is when he would have first appeared at court and was remanded in custody having been arrested on Nov 7th

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                Typo there should have read Nov 8th which is when he would have first appeared at court and was remanded in custody having been arrested on Nov 7th
                Hi Trevor - there might, of course, be a typographical error in the newspaper report but that typo is definitely not mine and I can confirm that the original says "November 18".

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by David Orsam View Post
                  Hi Trevor - there might, of course, be a typographical error in the newspaper report but that typo is definitely not mine and I can confirm that the original says "November 18".
                  Hi David
                  I wasn't suggesting it was your error, it is the original which is clearly wrong date wise.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Hi David,

                    This is indeed an excellent find! I just saw it and I'll make more comments later. The later section of Tumblety's US history was taken from a different cable source, while the first clearly came from London. Notice the December 10 date, and everyone knew Tumblety was safely in New York by December 2nd or 3rd.

                    It was his queer method of spending his money which first attracted the Scotland Yard detectives to him, and after a slight investigation he was arrested, the idea being that if he were not the Whitechapel fiend,

                    If the above statement is true, the slight investigation would not have predated his initial arrest on suspicion, since the last phrase about the Whitechapel fiend explains its purpose.

                    Sincerely,

                    Mike
                    The Ripper's Haunts/JtR Suspect Dr. Francis Tumblety (Sunbury Press)
                    http://www.michaelLhawley.com

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by mklhawley View Post
                      Hi David,

                      This is indeed an excellent find! I just saw it and I'll make more comments later. The later section of Tumblety's US history was taken from a different cable source, while the first clearly came from London. Notice the December 10 date, and everyone knew Tumblety was safely in New York by December 2nd or 3rd.

                      It was his queer method of spending his money which first attracted the Scotland Yard detectives to him, and after a slight investigation he was arrested, the idea being that if he were not the Whitechapel fiend,

                      If the above statement is true, the slight investigation would not have predated his initial arrest on suspicion, since the last phrase about the Whitechapel fiend explains its purpose.

                      Sincerely,

                      Mike
                      Dont forget the issues are, was he out on bail on Nov 8th or had he been remanded in custody ?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Trevor,

                        Can't you see? It's only your issue. It wasn't an issue for the British press, because he was roaming the streets at the time Kelly was murdered. But of course, the British press, the US press, Littlechild, Andrews, and Assistant Commissioner Anderson didn't do their homework to see Tumblety was in jail at the time. Or, they did, they're not that stupid, and your interpretation is wrong. Hmmm.

                        Mike
                        The Ripper's Haunts/JtR Suspect Dr. Francis Tumblety (Sunbury Press)
                        http://www.michaelLhawley.com

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by mklhawley View Post
                          Trevor,

                          Can't you see? It's only your issue. It wasn't an issue for the British press, because he was roaming the streets at the time Kelly was murdered. But of course, the British press, the US press, Littlechild, Andrews, and Assistant Commissioner Anderson didn't do their homework to see Tumblety was in jail at the time. Or, they did, they're not that stupid, and your interpretation is wrong. Hmmm.

                          Mike
                          But there is nothing official to support your ramblings about Anderson, Andrews and Littlechild.

                          I am not going to argue again the same points again with you. It has previously been fully explained to you the workings of the police and the judicial system at the time of his arrest but you wont accept that. It is primary evidence and irrefutable. As against newspapers you seek to rely on which are secondary sources and has been proved with this one prone to get the facts wrong.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Tumblety was taken into custody on November 18 on suspicion of being the Whitechapel murderer and his lodgings being searched by police, he was detained on the charge for which he should have taken his trial today.

                            1. Why would he have been taken into custody on suspicion of being JtR if he was in jail at the time MJK was murdered?

                            2. How could he still be in jail by November 18th if they had to go looking for him?

                            3. Why search the lodgings if they only believed he was engaged in some homosexual activity in the city?

                            Everything points to this guy being out of the police eyes on the night MJK was murdered.

                            Doesn't make him JtR though... just an American charlatan of interest at the time.
                            Bona fide canonical and then some.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Batman View Post
                              Tumblety was taken into custody on November 18 on suspicion of being the Whitechapel murderer and his lodgings being searched by police, he was detained on the charge for which he should have taken his trial today.

                              1. Why would he have been taken into custody on suspicion of being JtR if he was in jail at the time MJK was murdered?

                              2. How could he still be in jail by November 18th if they had to go looking for him?

                              3. Why search the lodgings if they only believed he was engaged in some homosexual activity in the city?

                              Everything points to this guy being out of the police eyes on the night MJK was murdered.

                              Doesn't make him JtR though...
                              Well based on your ramblings

                              1. According to court records he was bailed on Nov 16 so he could not have
                              been in jail on Nov 18th

                              2. According to what has been suggested previous he was allegedly arrested
                              on Nov 7th for being the killer

                              3. There is no other corroboration to the statement that his lodgings were
                              ever searched not even in connection with the indecency charges

                              4. The date of the newspaper article is Dec 10th almost a month after his
                              arrest- Reliable or not ?

                              But of course here we have another example of a newspaper article being used as an accurate and informed article to prop up a theory

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X