Special Branch Register and Ledger-decison Notice

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

Hi Trevor.

Wolf
Your last para is probabaly spot on but the problem is that so many of those who favour Tumblety will not be disuaded, and will still seek to rely heavily on the letter to suport their beleifs.

Oh, I know. Logic and actual facts seem to play only a very little bit part in the arguments of Tumblety supporters.

As for Robert Churchill I only mention him as a "R Churchill" who is already part of Ripperology. Nothing more.

Wolf.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trevor.



Oh, I know. Logic and actual facts seem to play only a very little bit part in the arguments of Tumblety supporters.

As for Robert Churchill I only mention him as a "R Churchill" who is already part of Ripperology. Nothing more.

Wolf.

Your input is much appreciated

[Trevor Marriott]

Nekked.


Nice to know.

Attack on all fronts then

Well I will launch a rear guard attack then if you are leading

[mariab]

I'll officially shut up now, if someone answers me on this:
Did anyone find a reference to a detective agency called “Neilson of Wealdstone“ inside of the SB ledgers??? Please?

[Trevor Marriott]

I'll officially shut up now, if someone answers me on this:
Did anyone find a reference to a detective agency called “Neilson of Wealdstone“ inside of the SB ledgers??? Please?

I think they got itrong there was a reference to a company who went under the name of Freeman Hardy and Willis

[mariab]

(Did Mr. Marriott just take a viagra or something?)
I'll find out about Neilson of Wealdstone anyway.

[Lechmere]

A quick question.
Are the entries stricly alphabetical or is there for example a page or two for each letter of the alaphabet?
In other words is there a page for J with 'Jack the Ripper' contained somewhere on it but not necessarily between Jack Smith and Jack Ullswater (in case you are wondering I made those up).

[mariab]

They are alphabetical in the sense of following every letter of the alphabet plus 5 subcategories of the vowels (A, E, I, O, U), in the sense that “Jackson“ comes before “Jenkins“, but then under subcategory “JE“ they are not strictly alphabetical anymore, but possibly chronological; as in “Jenkinson“ might come before “Jenkins“.

[Lechmere]

Ah!
Most indexes in that period were kept up in that manner – I presume the subdivision by vowel within each initial letter was necessary because there were so many entries (or it was anticipated that there would be a lot of entries).
Do we actually know that they were catalogued retrospectively?

[Trevor Marriott]

Ah!
Most indexes in that period were kept up in that manner – I presume the subdivision by vowel within each initial letter was necessary because there were so many entries (or it was anticipated that there would be a lot of entries).
Do we actually know that they were catalogued retrospectively?

Yes we do

[Chris]

Yes we do

Again, unless you want to keep the evidence about this under your hat pending a future publication, it would be interesting to know more. Registers like this would normally be kept chronogically as correspondence and documents were received. As I mentioned above, Clutterbuck's comments appear to imply that was the case with the Chief Constable's Register.

[Trevor Marriott]

Again, unless you want to keep the evidence about this under your hat pending a future publication, it would be interesting to know more. Registers like this would normally be kept chronogically as correspondence and documents were received. As I mentioned above, Clutterbuck's comments appear to imply that was the case with the Chief Constable' Register.

Well I have seen the regsiter and I can confirm that fact. It is also the case that although the entries in the register were not entered until after 1894 there are some references I saw which indicate files were entered in them which related to 1887.

Another gem you will be please to know which may stop you questioning everything I seem to have posted on this topic is that I have had it confirmed that the Churchill entry does exist and I will publish a copy of that entry later today

At least i am sharing all of this information with you just think if it had fallen into the hands of others !!!!!!! we would never have seen or heard anything ever again and if we had managed to find out what would they have told us ?

[Chris]

Trevor

As I have said, if there's some reason you don't want to explain your reasoning, that's up to you.

But if you were in the position of someone else reading this thread, wouldn't your first instinct as a detective be to ask "How do you know that?" or "Why do you think that?"

[Lechmere]

Yes and this is an interesting subject which really should be pursued. I’m trying to get straight in my mind what we are dealing with that’s all.
Incidentally as this is possibly the last untapped official source, it should be in the interests of everyone involved in this field to contribute to a fighting fund to assist with an appeal... Having said that I would not expect Special Branch to hold that much detailed information relating to Jack the Ripper although obviously as we have seen there will be useful information touching on the case.
Anyway I have a few questions – friendly questions hopefully rather the type which would be put by a hostile interrogator...

So the Special Irish Branch which was formed in 1883 and became just the Special Branch in 1888, had a growing collection of files and in 1894 (or so?) it was decided to keep certain of these files indexed in this ledger. And we know that Littlechild was in charge until he resigned in 1893. This means that none of the ledger entries can be in Littlechild’s handwriting surely?

Do we know how many people worked in Special Branch around this time?
It cannot have been many. Would not a clerk have done an administrative chore like compiling the ledger?

There are 36,000 entries – do we know up to what date this ledger was kept?
I would presume that once the ledger was put up to date (i.e. in 1894 - or so?), new entries would just be added as and when?
Is there any idea of what proportion predate and how many postdate 1894?

[Phil Carter]

Hello all,

For all those following this thread, about the decision notice itself and the revelations within the ledgers and registers, there may be some that perhaps have not seen, nor perhaps read, the original thread about these ledgers and registers. In which case, much of the history about them is here:-

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=4688

I make no presumptions corncerning any individual, but add this for the interest of all, which may or may not be helpful in some way, just in case.

best wishes

Phil