Jack a too hated toff?

[mpriestnall]

Jack was a middle class gentleman for me.

[Damaso Marte]

I agree there's no guarantee that a single eyewitness saw the Ripper: but there's a decent chance that at least one of them did, and only one of them describe a wealthy individual. And as I understand it, Hutchinson was describing a stereotypical depiction of a wealthy Jew, not a member of the traditional British upper class. (Hutchinson is also widely derided around these parts as somebody who was likely fabricating his testimony).

[Wickerman]

In fact, the only person to mention a top hat was Mrs Paumier, who was approached by a strange man on the day of Kelly's murder.

"..man had a black moustache, was about five feet six inches high, and wore a black silk hat, a black coat, and speckled trousers. He also carried a black shiny bag about a foot in depth and a foot and a half in length".

A 'silk hat' is a top hat.

[MrBarnett]

I’m sure many people will be familiar with this image of Jem Mace, the legendary bare-knuckle boxer. Wearing an astrakhan trimmed coat and a top hat, he was neither Jewish nor a member of the upper classes.

I’m not sure we can draw any definite conclusions concerning ethnicity or ‘class’ from the clothing or headgear of those seen wandering the East End at night.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’m sure many people will be familiar with this image of Jem Mace, the legendary bare-knuckle boxer. Wearing an astrakhan trimmed coat and a top hat, he was neither Jewish nor a member of the upper classes.

I’m not sure we can draw any definite conclusions concerning ethnicity or ‘class’ from the clothing or headgear of those seen wandering the East End at night.

The only conclusion I could draw Gary would be that it wouldn’t have been a good idea to try mugging him. There are a couple of great pictures online of him in old age.

[Wickerman]

Im not sure we can draw any definite conclusions concerning ethnicity or ‘class’ from the clothing or headgear of those seen wandering the East End at night.

I certainly agree with your point, but you are suggesting us today wouldn't or couldn't.
In the days the photograph was taken they probably would. Why else did he dress that way if not to suggest a persona that was not true?

In the late 19th century a person was identified by his attire. To dress out of your class would often bring scorn, suspicion or ridicule.

[GUT]

I’m sure many people will be familiar with this image of Jem Mace, the legendary bare-knuckle boxer. Wearing an astrakhan trimmed coat and a top hat, he was neither Jewish nor a member of the upper classes.

I’m not sure we can draw any definite conclusions concerning ethnicity or ‘class’ from the clothing or headgear of those seen wandering the East End at night.

I believe he was a somewhat distant relative of mine, but so far have been unable to solidly confirm it, my Great great grandfather was also named James Mace and family folklore says they were cousins, a bit surprised to see his picture pop up here.

[MrBarnett]

I certainly agree with your point, but you are suggesting us today wouldn't or couldn't.
In the days the photograph was taken they probably would. Why else did he dress that way if not to suggest a persona that was not true?

In the late 19th century a person was identified by his attire. To dress out of your class would often bring scorn, suspicion or ridicule.

Not sure I understand your last point, but I do agree that people back then would have had a finer-tuned sense of the clothing appropriate to various occupations.

The wearing of such items as top hats, astrakhan trimmed coats and gold watch chains was determined by financial status rather than social status. I doubt many would have been able to identity John McCarthy’s humble beginnings from his attire alone. I imagine there were hundreds of Whitechapel men who dressed like toffs.

[MrBarnett]

I believe he was a somewhat distant relative of mine, but so far have been unable to solidly confirm it, my Great great grandfather was also named James Mace and family folklore says they were cousins, a bit surprised to see his picture pop up here.

The description of A-man’s attire, particularly the horseshoe tie pin, has always said ‘sporting man’ to me. And bearing in mind that the Blue Coat boy was a popular boxing venue, I would imagine a few similarly dressed men frequented it.

[MrBarnett]

The only conclusion I could draw Gary would be that it wouldn’t have been a good idea to try mugging him. There are a couple of great pictures online of him in old age.

Yes, a tough old bugger. There was money to be made in boxing and those who were successful at it would have dressed fairly well. They didn’t suddenly become ‘toffs’ but provided the didn’t open their mouths, they may have been mistaken for such.

[Wickerman]

Not sure I understand your last point, but I do agree that people back then would have had a finer-tuned sense of the clothing appropriate to various occupations.

Yes, and this is an interesting point. How many times does the occupation of someone arise in these cases, we see questions like "did he look like a sailor, or a Clerk?"
We don't get that classification today when trying to identify a suspect, what someone looks like is rarely an issue but back then it was part of the social structure. Many occupations had a sort of dress code, a doctor was expected to dress like a doctor, or Lawyer, or Banker, or Clerk.

The wearing of such items as top hats, astrakhan trimmed coats and gold watch chains was determined by financial status rather than social status. I doubt many would have been able to identity John McCarthy’s humble beginnings from his attire alone. I imagine there were hundreds of Whitechapel men who dressed like toffs.

Agreed, Astrachan wasn't necessarily a Jew, but again this was how Victorian society thought. People were categorized according to how they dressed. Your photo of Jem Mace suggests to me he dressed up for the photo, to look affluent, but he clearly did not go for the Dandy look with gold chains & anything that glitters.

[MrBarnett]

Yes, and this is an interesting point. How many times does the occupation of someone arise in these cases, we see questions like "did he look like a sailor, or a Clerk?"
We don't get that classification today when trying to identify a suspect, what someone looks like is rarely an issue but back then it was part of the social structure. Many occupations had a sort of dress code, a doctor was expected to dress like a doctor, or Lawyer, or Banker, or Clerk.




Agreed, Astrachan wasn't necessarily a Jew, but again this was how Victorian society thought. People were categorized according to how they dressed. Your photo of Jem Mace suggests to me he dressed up for the photo, to look affluent, but he clearly did not go for the Dandy look with gold chains & anything that glitters.

Yes, people were said to look like carmen or drovers. There must have been subtle clues in combinations of clothing and accessories that spoke to contemporary observers but are invisible to us.

In other photos, Jem Mace can be seen sporting watch chains and tie pins. We’ve recently seen a great photo of Stephen Maywood, seemingly a brothel-keeping pal of Johannes Morgenstern from Breezer’s Hill, wearing an impressive watch chain and there’s one of his blind brother, Henry, wearing a horshoe tie pin. Judging by the clothing alone, A-man was not distinctly Jewish, I’d say.

[caz]

Another point to make is that the markets did a roaring trade in cheap jewellery and second-hand clothing, so you didn't need to be filthy rich to get rigged out for a night out in the East End. Shabby-genteel would describe anyone wearing respectable attire that had clearly seen better days, while the real toffs up west would be able to distinguish one of their own from a pretender who bought his clobber from Petticoat Lane, also known as The Jews's Market.

A-man could have been in that category, or able to afford the good stuff if he was a bit of a wheeler-dealer Del Boy type.

Love,

Caz
X