Reward For WCM? Excellent 1888 Law Journal Article

[Archaic]

Two things Adam:

1. The first article seems to infer that City Police could opt for a different approach, or did I read that wrong?

2. What does 'additional reward' mean in the 2nd article?

Hi Mike. Who's "Adam"??
I think you mean me, so I'll try to answer you, despite the fact that I just woke up.

The City Police did "opt for a different approach". Catherine Eddowes was murdered within their jurisdiction, and they chose to offer a reward. (I'll see if I can find the text of the reward for you, but it should be easy to find in any good Ripper book.) The City Police are separate from the Metropolitan Police, who did not offer a reward, though four of the "canonical five" murders occurred within their jurisdiction.

In the Parliamentary discussion of Nov. 12, the transcript begins with a question directed to the Home Secretary asking whether he "contemplates offering any additional reward". It's asking if the Government is considering offering a reward of its own. Because the City of London had already offered a reward, any Government-issued reward would be "an additional reward."

Home Secretary Mathews then explains why the Government thinks it unwise to offer a reward- mainly because in past cases completely innocent people were accused and even "framed" in an effort to obtain the reward money. Mathews further explains that he would be glad to offer a reward if there were any information which led them to believe that the offer of a reward might actually help lead to the discovery of the murderer, but no such information had come to light.

I interpret this to mean that the Govt. believed the killer was a lone perpetrator acting without accomplices and without the assistance or knowledge of others after committing the murders. (In other words, it was highly unlikely that anyone was in a position to turn him in.) Mathews therefore doubted that offering a Government reward would be effective in helping to catch the murderer, and he is balancing this view against his definite knowledge via past experience that offers of rewards are problematical because they tend to generate false accusations against innocent persons.


OK, Mike, hope that makes sense. Time for breakfast now.

Best regards,
Archaic

PS: OMG, Mike, you said the "H word" on this thread!!!

[The Good Michael]

Arch,

Sorry about the 'Adam'. I was reading an Adam post and then responded to yours and... my brain hurts.

So the additional was referring to the City reward? That's what I was trying to connect, but I hadn't recalled these put together before. Thanks for that.

Cheers,

Mike

[The Good Michael]

Oh and Arch, just your opinion if you don't mind. Do you think any common, young, and perhaps undereducated Joe would have known that City offered a reward, but Metro was staunchly refusing to? I should think that one hears reward and doesn't really know exactly which patrols covered what areas, and just thinks about rewards.

Cheers,

Mike

[Hunter]

Hi Michael,

Not my good friend, Archaic here, but I may be able to provide an answer. I don't think she'll mind.

The reward posted by the City authorities was well known throughout the metropolis, as well as numerous rewards offered by citizen groups. The debate about a Met reward was discussed in most of the major newspapers and the Home Office increasingly came under fire for its staunch opposition to it.

The Kelly murder was the straw that broke the camel's back that Mathews temporarily wormed out of by compromising with the pardon offer. He probably knew it would be ineffective but it gave the apperance that something more was being done. He got off the hook because no more mutilation murders took place until the following summer.

Just imagine if another had occured. They literally did flips when Rose Mylett was found dead in December.

But, yes, any rewards that did exist would apply to any of the murders despite only Eddowes being murdered in the City... as long as it lead to information that would apprehend someone would could inevitably be linked to Eddowes (for the City reward) or the rest in regards to the other rewards.

Almost everyone would have known about the status of rewards in this high profile case.

.

[Archaic]

Hi Mike, no worries. I figured you were probably responding to multiple threads.

Thanks, Hunter, for answering Mike's question.
I just came in from feeding my horses, and after spending 45 minutes out in snowy 20 degree weather (-6 Celsius for my English friends), then walking back into a warm house, I'm suddenly sleepy all over again...doubt I could have given so coherent an explanation.

Zzzzzz,
Archaic

[The Good Michael]

Then... the idea of someone coming forward, he who is not to be named, in hopes of getting something out of it, is a very likely scenario.

Mike

[Archaic]

Then... the idea of someone coming forward, he who is not to be named, in hopes of getting something out of it, is a very likely scenario.

Hi Mike.

In my opinion it's fair to say it's a possibility that a certain individual might have come forward in the hope of receiving a reward, but I don't think we can call it "a very likely scenario" without making assumptions. People often come forward from a mixture of reasons.

And even a person who is encouraged to come forward in a murder case by the possibility of receiving a reward for helping the investigation can still be telling the truth.
- After all, that's why rewards are offered in the first place, isn't it?

Rewards can help encourage people to "do the right thing" and help investigators even if, for example, they fear for their own safety.

Best regards,
Archaic

[Archaic]

City of London WCM Reward Money In 2011 Figures?

I remember reading somewhere that the £500 reward that was offered by the City of London Police translates to about £41,000 today.

Does anybody know if that's correct, or if at least sounds like a reasonable calculation?

Of course there was additional money offered by private individuals and organizations, so the total reward was much higher.

In the days when a servant girl might work an entire year to earn £5, it was a huge amount of money.

Thanks,
Archaic