Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mary's Rent arrears and photographs

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

  • #16
    cd

    You may be right.

    Phil

    Comment


    • #17
      My heart is touched and warmed by all the references to McCarthy as a paragon of liberal care
      Phil, I do wonder if you are entirely serious on this point.

      I doubt McCarthy even knew who most of his tenants were - I expect that men like Bowyer, and his lodging house deputies, who collected the rents for him, knew more about the tenants than he did.

      Comment


      • #18
        sorry, Sally -I have to disagree with you there..

        McCarthy had a shop, and Mary had to have bought things there.

        Those little shops were almost bound to have a slate (as Claire pointed out), and McCarthy must have known his regular customers, to whom he extended
        credit, quite well.

        I would hazard that he had often passed the time of day with her, and knew exactly what room she was renting.
        http://youtu.be/GcBr3rosvNQ

        Comment


        • #19
          Yes..

          fair enouogh - he must have known more about those tenants in close proximity, as it would have been difficult not to in the circumstances. That isn't to say that he had any sort of personal relationship with them though.

          I mean, he may have - but I don't think it's implied by what we know.

          Comment


          • #20
            I will agree with you there. He may only have ever chatted about the weather and local gossip, without ever touching on personal histories.
            http://youtu.be/GcBr3rosvNQ

            Comment


            • #21
              I would have thought McCarthy would have a closer 'relationship' with most of his tenants in Millers Court than just to say 'nice day'. They all lived including him and his family in a very tiny space. The privies were at the top of the court, the tap/pump outside Mary's room etc.
              They lived practically on top of each other 24/7.

              I can see the argument for him being a bit lax on the rent collections because he'd have to go to the trouble of finding new tenants but as already said there seems to have been a sort of 'waiting list' of people looking for lodgings so it wouldn't have been too hard for him. Also he let the room to Mary and Joe knowing (I presume) that they were leaving rent arrears behind them so in a way owing rent must have been a sort of accepted 'goes with the territory' sort of issue.

              Comment


              • #22
                Hi,
                McCarthy was no soft touch, I would think that to be a understatement, he was not a man to mess with , however he was know for his work for charity, and allowing Mary, or infact any of his female residents a shelter during that Autumn, might explain his patience for possible rent arrears.
                It would not look good for his reputation, if he turned out one of his private tenants, and they should fall into the hands of JTR.
                We should also recall that Mrs McCarthy spoke to Mary on the thursday about the murderer, which may indicate that she had asked her husband not to evict Kelly some time previous.
                Regards Richard.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by richardnunweek View Post
                  Hi,
                  McCarthy was no soft touch, I would think that to be a understatement, he was not a man to mess with , however he was know for his work for charity, and allowing Mary, or infact any of his female residents a shelter during that Autumn, might explain his patience for possible rent arrears.
                  It would not look good for his reputation, if he turned out one of his private tenants, and they should fall into the hands of JTR.
                  We should also recall that Mrs McCarthy spoke to Mary on the thursday about the murderer, which may indicate that she had asked her husband not to evict Kelly some time previous.
                  Regards Richard.
                  Richard, you raise an interesting point. Men like McCarthy could have afforded their own moral code - which could accept exploiting countless vulnerable people for the sake of profit; but which on the other hand might require acts of charity.

                  For all we know, he may have considered it wrong to turn an unsupported woman to the streets; whether the rent was due or not. Relative protection of women may have been within his moral code.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    It isn’t rare for villains, or people who make money via means of dubious morality, to like to be seen to publicly give to charity. It is fairly common actually and hardly implies that they have a hidden heart of gold or that they are a soft touch.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Hi Sally.
                      Absolutely, many Victorians in all walks of life, had moral codes, Millers court were private tenants, not lodging houses, and McCarthy would have proberly known all of the residents well, they would not only have paid rent, but also obtained provisions in the shop.
                      I am still not certain who was responsible for the back rent?
                      According to McCarthy the deseased came to live with a porter named kelly, posed as his wife, thus became known as Mary Jane kelly, we know that Barnett was Kelly[ alias], and as he was the breadwinner,surely would have been responsible for the rent.?
                      If anybody owed McCarthy money it would have been him , at least prior to october 30th, when he left.
                      I dont buy that MJK rented the room since feb 88, with no income , but it is possible that she hoped to pay one weeks rent which she would have owed to date ie since Barnett left.
                      Regards Richard.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Yes, I didn't really mean that McC was about to open his heart, his wallet and a mission house--rather that even scoundrels are capable of compassion at certain times!
                        best,

                        claire

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          My Random Thoughts

                          Business men are “brutal”. They have to be or they won’t be in business very long. If anybody is allowed to “slide” (as in MJK’s rent), the businessman must be figuring that there will eventually be a pretty much guaranteed payoff. OR- as some have postulated, McCarthy indulged in random acts of kindness or charity.

                          McCarthy seems to have been doing pretty well. He appears to have owned a number of properties in Dorset Street, and to have leased a number of buildings: http://www.casebook.org/forum/messages/4920/9211.html. Perhaps the arrears were “small potatoes” compared to McCarthy’s entire business enterprise. I personally don’t know about trading rent for “services in kind”. (although, a winsome 25 or 26 year old woman may hold more of an attraction than his typical renter)

                          Additionally, if this is indeed our McCarthy, it is one heck of a monument: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2lUI...e=channel_page

                          Edward

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X