Frantic Friends?

[Jonathan H]

Here is a new source on a person whim I believe is listed as one of the people at Montague Druitt's funeral: a Mr. Wyke-Smith.

Here is the old one:

Southern Guardian
England
Saturday, 1 January 1889

SAD DEATH OF A LOCAL BARRISTER.

'The Echo of Thursday night says : — "An inquiry was on Wednesday held by Dr. Diplock, at Chiswick, respecting the death of Montague John Druitt, 31 years of age, who was found drowned in the Thames. The deceased was identified by his brother, Mr. William Harvey Druitt, a solicitor residing at Bournemouth, who stated that the deceased was a barrister-at-law, but had lately been an assistant at a school at Blackheath. The deceased had left a letter, addressed to Mr. Valentine, of the school, in which he alluded to suicide. Evidence having been given as to discovering deceased in the Thames — upon his body were found a cheque for £60 and £16 in gold — the Jury returned a verdict of "Suicide whilst of unsound mind."

The deceased gentleman was well known and much respected in this neighbourhood. He was a barrister of bright talent, he had a promising future before him, and his untimely end is deeply deplored.

The funeral took place in Wimborne cemetery on Thursday afternoon, and the body was followed to the grave by the deceased's relatives and a few friends, including Mr. W.H. Druitt, Mr. Arthur Druitt, Rev. C. H. Druitt, Mr. J. Druitt, sen., Mr. J. Druitt, jun., Mr. J.T. Homer, and Mr. Wyke-Smith. The funeral service was read by the vicar of die Minster, Wimborne, the Rev. F.J. Huyshe, assisted by the Rev. Plater.'

From 'The London Gazaette', February 13th, 1877

'Notice is hereby given, that the Partnership herefore subsisting between us the undersigned , William Druitt and Walter Wyke-Smith, of Wimbrone Minster, in the country of Dorset, as Sureons, was dissolved on the 31st day of December last.--As witness our hands this 5th day of February, 1877.'

Wm. Druitt
Walter Wyke-Smith

This was found by a friend of mine yesterday.

So, a friend and former business-partner of the father attended the funeral.

Regarding that different unidentified 'friend' who worked out that Montie was missing from his legal chambers?

Why did he go all the way out to the brother, William, in Bournemouth?

Why not check first the Blackheath School himself?

From these tiny glimpses, it would suggest that Rev. Charles Druitt is not the priest to whom Montie confessed, if that is what he did, because the cousin would go straight to the other cousin.

But the Rev. John Henry Lonsdale could go to William,

What I am getting at is that this 'f'riend' is friendly enough to go and see the brother, for himself and in person, rather than send a message of concern, yet somehow not friendly and inquisitive enough to inquire at the school -- where the missing barrister lived -- as to when he was last seen, or left any word, and so on?

Instead the brother has to come to London and make this elementary inquiry himself.

Were the legal chambers also told that Montie was 'abroad', but that the 'f'riend' believed this to be very unlikely and bery alarming.

In Sims' veiled version the 'friend' and brother are merged into the anomic 'friends' who frantically search for the long-term unemployed 'doctor' after he has disappeared form the place in which he lived
(Druitt had been partially unemployed for only a few days, and perhaps not even alive when it happened).

The 'friends' in Sims already harbour the darkest suspicions because their pal has told doctors in an institution that he maniacally desires to kill harlots.

Thefore, the Ripper is a middle-aged doctor and he confesses to other doctors before the 'autumn of terror'.

Behind this semi-fictional version is a young barrister, and behind the 'friends' is at least one barrister, his brother William, and perhaps another re: the unidentified pal who notices him missing from his legal chambers.

Lonsdale was both a lawyer and a reverend.

The North Country Vicar will claim that the madman confessed to an Anglican reverend.

Behind a veiled tale of doctors are actually lawyers -- one of who is a clergyman too.

A 'friend', moreover, who has no need to check at the school -- instead he immediately heads for the brother.

Lonsdale is not among the mourners at Druitt's funeral, though there could be a number of explanations for this, the most nobvious being that perhaps he did not know Montie well, despite living near him at his school, working near him at his legal chambers, being a fellow barrister, and officiting in a Wimborne parish.

[Roy Corduroy]

Yes Jonathan, here is a thread including info on Wyke-Smith. There is a suicide involved, too. Take a look. (click here)

And yes, Andy leaned towards Lonsdale having some connexion to all this.

Finding things on Casebook is simplified by leaving the message boards by clicking on any other label to the left. Introduction or any of them. Then (at least on my version in the US) a search box will appear.



I typed Wyke-Smith in the box to locate the thread. Typing John Henry Lonsdale will bring up threads. John Ruffels, Robert Linford and many others have contributed.

Hope this is helpful,

Roy

[Jonathan H]

Thanks Roy

Yes, Andy's work on all this was extensive and, I argue, brilliant and definitive because he published the first identification of the MP which [provisionally] solved the 'mystery'. I hasten to add that the disgraced cleric never made such an extravagant claim before his own incarceration.


This was -- for me -- a new Wyke-Smith bit, based on what I can scrounge here on the Boards, and so I added it.



Another possibility is that the unidentified 'friend' never existed, for he is never named.

That it was Rev. Charles Druitt, who alerted William that their relative was missing, and that he had confessed to him and now vanished.

This would match Mac's believing 'family' and no mention of outsiders. It would match William claiming falsely that he had heard from a 'friend' and that he was the deceased's only relative apart from his mad mother.

It would match Rev. Charles coming to London and finding that Montie was missing from his legal chmabers only in the sense that he had supposedly gone abroad.

But would a cleric who took such a confession seriously let him out of his sight? Let him just wander off in the hopes that he would do the right thing?

I think it more likely that it was an outsider to the family.

Lonsdale, as Andy always argued, is more plausible.

But it's all just scraps.

Sims has anomic medical men whom the fellow doctor confides in his homicidal desires. The 'friends' who are frantic are separate from those people, the latter being the source of their suspicion.

[Bridewell]

Hi Jonathan,

There's a great deal of fascinating stuff here. Whilst I don't always share your conclusions, I greatly admire the depth and detail of your research. Do you know what branch of the law MJD specialised in? Upon that might depend the likelihood (or otherwise) of his having clients within the Whitechapel & Spitalfields area. Just a thought. Good luck with the ongoing research.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Jonathan H]

Thanks Bridewell

Montague Druitt was a special pleader.

One of his last cases, with his brother, involved helping the Conservative Party in a civil matter.

It was successful, and a short while later -- inexplicably -- he took off perhaps leaving messages with his two work locations and his club that he was going abroad, but actually to kill himself.

The unidentified 'friend' waited a week after Druitt had vanished.

A person with a terrible secret, especially if had been given in sacred circumstances, might feel paralysed for a while. eg. Not wanting to break the seal of the [Anglican] confessional.

As the days and nights ticked by, and there was no sign of Mad Montie, the cleric/lawyer -- say Lonsdale or somebody like him -- finally cracked and went not to the school (no need) but instead to the brother, in person, and told him the whole horrific story.

William scrambled to London desperately trying to find his tormented and dangerous sibling, arriving at the school on the 13th.

[lynn cates]

just in case

Hello Jonathan. Can you tell me which case that was and the parties involved?

Cheers.
LC

[Jonathan H]

Sorry, I don't have my stuff here.

There is a piece by Martin Fido, very good on all this.

I can't remember what it's called?

This detailed dissertation by Adrian Morris, from this site, will help (it should come as no surprise that the moment he discovered that I thought that Druitt was probably the Ripper all communication ceased)

From 'The Diminishing Case for Mr. Druitt'

'Yet more evidence was also researched on Druitt's flourishing legal career by the researcher, D. S. Goffee. This time Druitt was engaged in an even more complex case concerning an electoral dispute in Christchurch, Dorset. Druitt had in fact been hired by his brother, William's firm of solicitors in Wimborne to fight a very tricky case on behalf of the local Conservative Party.

The dispute centred round a claim by the local Liberal party that a supplementary (Conservative) tenant in a house mainly occupied primarily by a (Liberal) tenant did not pay a sufficient amount (£100 per annum) towards the local rates to qualify to vote in elections. Such disputes were common in the 19th century ever since the 1832 Reform Bill based electoral rights on rate paying requirements. It wouldn't be until 1928 that full universal suffrage would eliminate such disputes.

The advocates for the Liberal Party in Christchurch had won the first hearing managing to strike the Conservative tenant off the electoral register. However, the Gladstone admiring, but Liberal Party hating Druitt managed to skilfully argue in the High Court in London before the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Coleridge that the supplementary (Conservative) tenant did indeed pay the requisite amount of rates thus overturning the original ruling on appeal.

It was obvious that William Druitt Jnr. had employed Montague as a way of throwing business his brother's way and also because Montague was based in London. However, Montague proved his mettle in this long and tricky appeal. The case itself would last from 1st October to 22nd November 1888 - only a short period before Montague's eventual suicide!

Yet, a more pivotal court case that may have proven highly important in terms of Druitt's legal prowess and life and death decisions was researched by me in 1994. This case was to be conducted in the Old Bailey itself in September 1888 by Montague as sole leading counsel for the defence. The case in question was just as demanding on Montague's mental and professional resources as it was to be a case heard in the Central Criminal Court (Old Bailey) before the wily judge, Justice Charles. Montague was definitely up against it, for, whilst Montague was representing the defendant, the prosecution was being represented by the exceptional Charles Frederick Gill who would later find lasting fame in the infamous Moat House Murder case. As the writer Bill Beadle would note, not even the great Edward Marshall Hall got the better of Charles Gill!

Druitt's case at the Old Bailey was a malicious wounding case; Peter Black vs. Christopher Power. It took place during the month of September 1888 and would have involved Druitt compiling some very detailed information and constructing a complex plea of insanity on behalf of his client, Christopher Power who had attacked a former friend, Peter Black at Black's address in Canterbury Terrace in Kilburn. Druitt, whilst understanding a 'not guilty' plea as being practically untenable, nevertheless fought and got a verdict of guilty - but through diminished responsibility. Montague's skill as a barrister in a high profile case was obvious as The Times carried the case. So we can see that Druitt was far from being a failed barrister. In fact, as the writer and researcher Keith Skinner has often reminded me, Druitt was 'on his way up!'

Not only does this explain Druitt's funds and healthy income after his death; he left £1,300, it also shows that he was, as the writer Philip Sugden was to remark on discovering this research of mine, "continuing to function…" conducting serious and involved legal cases where he would have to be prepared and composed whilst conducting these cases, (the Black vs. Power case in particular), at a time when many Druittists felt he was out and about in Whitechapel killing unfortunates! I personally find the whole prospect of Montague John Druitt being the Whitechapel murderer a fading proposition.'

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello Jonathan. Thank you so much. Think I'll poke my nose in a bit.

Cheers.
LC

[Jonathan H]

No worries, Lynn

You can see the ingredients which will make up the MP story of 1891

- the Druitt family who still live in Wimborne, Dorset
- the middle and upper classes, who hob-knob to some extent.
- the local Tory Party branch, of which Farquharson is the national rep.
- If Druitt confessed to a cleric and if it was Lonsdale, well, he's there too.

[lynn cates]

interest

Hello Jonathan. Thanks. That third item interests me a good bit.

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

I've never really understood why, if his legal career was as successful as it appears to have been, MJD felt the need to continue his teaching in Blackheath.

It certainly looks, from the above, that he had a great deal of work on his plate between September & late November 1888, on top of his cricketing commitments. Why was he driving himself so hard? It doesn't seem to have been necessary for him to do so. Could he really have functioned as a barrister in court by day, whilst killing and mutilating whores by night at weekends?

Regards, Bridewell.

[lynn cates]

workaholic

Hello Colin. Could be the classical workaholic. A bit of a driven personality type.

Cheers.
LC

[Jonathan H]

Al these questions about Montie's schedule and work habits, and so on, are exactly the ones Macnaghten would have assessed too.

The Victorian police chief could not get a fellow gent off the hook as either dismissed, deviant, or delusional.

The best affable Mac could do was try and protect everybody's reputations, even that of the deceased maniac, and yet make it clear to the public -- from 1898 -- that it's not a mystery (and that 'Jack' was not a poor foreigner either).

[Cogidubnus]

I've never really understood why, if his legal career was as successful as it appears to have been, MJD felt the need to continue his teaching in Blackheath.

By all accounts it wasn't a very big school was it? Do we know for sure that after his admission to the bar, this was actually still paid work? And if so, exactly what was he teaching, and for how many hours a week?

Dave

[Jonathan H]

Let me just wipe away this ton of excrement I get covered in whenever I try and debate anything rational about the dodgy 'diary' ...

OK, I think that Druitt may have been teaching the boys how to do better in exams since the school, was for crammers. Or perhaps he was teaching Latin, or the Classics or both.

The point is he lived there, and may have only taught athletics, or that as his legal practice picked up he was phased out from severalc lases to one.

I think two things are critical here.

One is that the old paradigm that he was sacked whilst alive on the 30th of Dec. is now shown to be much shakier as it could refer to Dec 13th, when William arrived at the school searching for his missing sibling, and thus that he was sacked for being AWOL as with his cricket club.

And secondly, the profound coincidence that Macanghten's Ripper was a [part-time] school master at a [modest] private boys school, when he loved his days at Eton and claimed, in 1914, that he knew they would be the happiest of his life -- while he was living them! There's arrested development for you!

I argue that Mac's machinations were not just about protecting the Druitt family, it was also about protecting that school and shielding the memories of those boys' sshool days, ones already traumatised by their sporty Mr. Druitt inexplicably taking his own life.