Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Elamarna 2 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - by MrBarnett 14 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Packer and the Pinchin Street torso - by Abby Normal 17 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - by MrBarnett 31 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Joshua Rogan 40 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Packer and the Pinchin Street torso - by Joshua Rogan 1 hour and 9 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (68 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - (47 posts)
Visual Media: New play about Jack the Ripper (Denver, CO) - (3 posts)
Martha Tabram: Probibility of Martha Tabram Being a JtR Victim - (3 posts)
Non-Fiction: Scholes of the Yard: The Casebook of a Scotland Yard Detective 1888 to 1924 - (2 posts)
Witnesses: Packer and the Pinchin Street torso - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Suspects > Barnett, Joseph

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-18-2012, 09:35 AM
miss marple miss marple is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 722
Default John Barnett

As Joe continues elusive in the 1891 census, thought I 'd check out John the youngest.
Bruce Paley thought that only Denis and Catherine of the five siblings had married, but John might have married.
So in 1881 John was residing at I Horatio St, vistor Joe.
1891 John Barnett 30 born Whitechapel, general labourer is living at doss house at 46 Hanbury St.
In June 28th 1888 John Barnett Labourer 28 of 46 Hanbury St was admitted to Whitechapel infirmary with rheumatism.
In 1901 Census John Barnett 41 dock labourer,born Whitechapel, was living at 18 Ocean St with wife Emma 41, no children.
Then it gets complicated
1911 Census
11 Pickett St Bow
A family of Lambeths
James 39
Amelia 33 wife
James 16 son
Florence 14 daug
Millicent 9
John Barnett 49, married, dock Labourer father in law born Whitechapel.
How is he a father to a woman of 33? also he has no children and where is Emma? of course it may not be him.
More questions.

Miss Marple
Although the three Barnetts Joe, Daniel and John had Fishporter's licenses at times, none of them were permanently employed so were working as general labourers and dockworkers at various times. Their father had been a dockworker.

Last edited by miss marple : 08-18-2012 at 09:43 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-18-2012, 09:39 AM
Sally Sally is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Badgers Drift
Posts: 2,094
Default

Hi Miss Marple

I think I found John Barnett when I was researching Joe. Far as I remember, he married late - I'll dig out my notes when I have a minute.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-18-2012, 12:37 PM
Sally Sally is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Badgers Drift
Posts: 2,094
Default

Alright -

This John Barnett married Emma Matilda Starke in 1900. The marriage certificate lists his father as a Hugh Barnett, but I think this may be an error - it wouldn't be the only one.

In 1911, Emma is living at 13 Barnwood Road, Victoria Docks East. I think this is may be the marital home, John simply staying with his wife's family at the time of the census. The listing is as follows:


Walter Starke, Head Single aged 24 b. 1887 Pile Driver b. Whitechaple London

BARNETT, Emma, Mother, Married, aged 53 b. 1858, Bishopgate London

BARNETT, Bella, Sister, Single, aged 17, b. 1894, Soap Wrapper, b. Mile End London

BARNETT, Voilet, Sister, aged 14, b. 1897, Soap Wrapper, b. Mile End London

From memory (I can't find my notes and it was a few years ago now) it seemed likely that Violet was the child of John and Emma; the other children are Emma's by her previous marriage - she was a widow when she married John.

Walter kept his father's name, Starke, the daughters took the name Barnett.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-19-2012, 08:44 AM
miss marple miss marple is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 722
Default

Hi Sally,

I am glad you confirmed Emma Starke, I saw the the marriage entry, but was not sure. Still some puzzles, who are the Lambeths? Was that Emma's name before she married Starke, I will check. And if Violet is John's daughter, she was born out of wedlock.

Still wondering where Joe is in 1891 Daniel Barnett is in 1891 in Whitechapel doss house, fishporter. Could not get address. No Daniel in 1901


Miss Marple

Last edited by miss marple : 08-19-2012 at 08:49 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-19-2012, 02:10 PM
Robert Robert is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,654
Default

Hi Miss Marple

Daniel was at the Victoria Home.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-20-2012, 07:56 AM
Sally Sally is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Badgers Drift
Posts: 2,094
Default

Hi Miss Marple - as I recall, Emma's first husband had died before Violet was born. Of course Violet could be the child of another man, but it seems reasonable to postulate that she may have been Emma and John's child. The only way to know would be to look at her birth certificate.

Emma was the child of John Collopy, who was born in India and was (from memory, I confess) a seaman. The marriage certificate for John and Emma records no occupation for him, but cites him as 'deceased'. Certainly, he was not deceased at the time. John's father is cited as 'Hugh', a Dockworker. I can find no such person in the record, so wonder if this is an error as well - perhaps it should be John's father who is deceased?

I have records for Daniel Barnett, I'll have a look.

Last edited by Sally : 08-20-2012 at 08:06 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-20-2012, 09:33 PM
miss marple miss marple is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 722
Default

John Barnett senior, father of Joe and siblings died in 1864, He was a dockworker. There must be mistake on the certificate.

Miss Marple
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-11-2012, 11:25 PM
RivkahChaya RivkahChaya is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: US
Posts: 1,382
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miss marple View Post
A family of Lambeths
James 39
Amelia 33 wife
James 16 son
Florence 14 daug
Millicent 9
John Barnett 49, married, dock Labourer father in law born Whitechapel.
How is he a father to a woman of 33? also he has no children and where is Emma?
He could be her "father" if he is her step-father, and her original father is not living. People were much more casual about that, back when it was more common to lose a parent. My grandfather's father was actually his stepfather, whose name he took at age 8, in 1913, when his mother remarried; his own father had been dead for 3 years. He was never legally adopted, but he always used this name on every official document in his adult life; he was a reporter, and it was his by-line. He gave it to his children, so it was my maiden name.

Barnett would be 16 years older than The daughter. I did the math available from the two families, assuming that Amelia was a daughter of Emma not mentioned in the earlier census because she wasn't living in the home. (I don't know this to be true, I was just seeing how the math came out.)
Quote:
1911 Census...
Amelia 33 wife...
John Barnett 49, ... father in law born Whitechapel.
Quote:
BARNETT, Emma, Mother, Married, aged 53 b. 1858, Bishopgate London
Quote:
BARNETT, Voilet, Sister, aged 14, b. 1897, Soap Wrapper, b. Mile End London
If Emma was born in 1858, she could be Amelia's mother, because that would put her age at 20 when Amelia was born.
In 1897, when Violet was born, and which we are assuming is around the time John and Emma got married, John is 35, and Emma is 39. There's nothing unreasonable about that. I'm four years older than my husband, and we were married in our early 30s.

But, then it might be two different families. Still, I'm sure lots of women because mothers when they were teenagers, and probably some men did too. Lack of fecundity, due to poor nutrition, rather than Victorian modesty was what kept teenage parenthood in check, I suspect.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-02-2013, 03:41 PM
miss marple miss marple is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 722
Default

James Lambeth married Amelia Emily Starke in DEC 1894 She was a sister or daughter of of Emma Starke.

Miss Marple
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.