Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lusk Letter sent to George Lusk of the vigilante committee

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

  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    Michael.

    I don't think it means he dressed like a Cleric, isn't it just the style of the collar on the overcoat?
    Hi Jon,

    The description appears twice in the quote I posted, in the second case it mentions a "Prussian Style" clerical collar. My suggestion about clerics on the streets was just a coincidental mention really....although clearly interpreting the remark as a religious figure for that purpose. To be honest Im not sure exactly what she intended to convey by that wording.

    Cheers

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

    I find it interesting that the man appeared in a "clerical costume", since it stands to reason that clerics might be some of the only men on the street late at night that might not scare off an unfortunate.

    Cheers
    Michael.

    I don't think it means he dressed like a Cleric, isn't it just the style of the collar on the overcoat?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bridewell
    replied
    The stranger is described as a man of some forty-five years of age, fully six feet in height, and slimly built. He wore a soft felt black hat, drawn over his forehead, a stand-up collar, and a very long black single-breasted overcoat, with a Prussian or clerical collar partly turned up. His face was of a sallow type, and he had a dark beard and moustache.
    Were it not for the 10 year age discrepancy I'd say (Irish-born?) Francis Tumblety.
    Last edited by Bridewell; 12-31-2013, 10:02 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JTRSickert
    replied
    Here is another interpretation I have of the Lusk letter. IF a modern day researcher concludes that JTR was a paranoid schizophrenic with psychopathic tendencies, then the Lusk letter could be further evidence of this.

    It is possible that JTR, in his delusional state of mind, believed Lusk was a threat to him (regardless of whether or not it was a big or small threat), a delusional belief in which a paranoid schizophrenic believes one or several others are "out to get him." This is further referenced by the first two words of the letter ("From Hell"), indicating the author's life has become a miserable one filled with nothing but fear, anger, and hate. ANd, it's possible the letter was meant to be an expression of "getting back" at those the author believes is out to get him. ("I am living in hell, but I will make those that are out to get me pay."

    The kidney and the words "I may send you the bloody knife if you only wait.....Catch me when you can" may be meant to be a way for the killer of saying , "I know you are on to me and out to get me,.....well, guess what? I can get to you too. I know where to find you, and I am ready for you. So, back off before this happens to you next."

    Perhaps the reason the message wasn't expressed more directly (like the words I wrote above), may have been due to the fact the writer was not fluent in English (hence the misspellings) and this was the best he could do with what limited vocabulary he had at the time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    There is a statement by a Miss Emily Marsh on October 19th that confirms Lusks address was easily obtained from the papers,... on Monday October 15th she had the following encounter in her fathers shop, printed in the Daily Telegraph, October 20th;

    "A statement which apparently gives a clue to the sender of the strange package received by Mr. Lusk was made last night by Miss Emily Marsh, whose father carries on business in the leather trade at 218, Jubilee-street, Mile-end-road. In Mr. Marsh's absence Miss Marsh was in the front shop, shortly after one o'clock on Monday last, when a stranger, dressed in clerical costume, entered, and, referring to the reward bill in the window, asked for the address of Mr. Lusk, described therein as the president of the Vigilance Committee. Miss Marsh at once referred the man to Mr. J. Aarons, the treasurer of the committee, who resides at the corner of Jubilee-street and Mile-end-road, a distance of about thirty yards. The man, however, said he did not wish to go there, and Miss Marsh thereupon produced a newspaper in which Mr. Lusk's address was given as Alderney-road, Globe-road, no number being mentioned. She requested the stranger to read the address, but he declined, saying, "Read it out," and proceeded to write something in his pocket-book, keeping his head down meanwhile. He subsequently left the shop, after thanking the young lady for the information, but not before Miss Marsh, alarmed by the man's appearance, had sent the shop-boy, John Cormack, to see that all was right. This lad, as well as Miss Marsh, give a full description of the man, while Mr. Marsh, who happened to come along at the time, also encountered him on the pavement outside. The stranger is described as a man of some forty-five years of age, fully six feet in height, and slimly built. He wore a soft felt black hat, drawn over his forehead, a stand-up collar, and a very long black single-breasted overcoat, with a Prussian or clerical collar partly turned up. His face was of a sallow type, and he had a dark beard and moustache. The man spoke with what was taken to be an Irish accent. No importance was attached to the incident until Miss Marsh read of the receipt by Mr. Lusk of a strange parcel, and then it occurred to her that the stranger might be the person who had despatched it. His inquiry was made at one o'clock on Monday afternoon, and Mr. Lusk received the package at eight p.m. the next day. The address on the package curiously enough gives no number in Alderney-road, a piece of information which Miss Marsh could not supply."

    It appears that the package with the note had a single London postmark, indicating that it was mailed and delivered within the same district, the East End.

    I find it interesting that the man appeared in a "clerical costume", since it stands to reason that clerics might be some of the only men on the street late at night that might not scare off an unfortunate.

    Cheers

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Damaso Marte View Post
    I don't think any of the major letters were addressed to [Abberline], no?
    I can't recall one that was definitely addressed to Abberline, DM; in contrast, some 24 surviving letters were addressed to Sir Charles Warren. In second place, with 9 specific entries, comes "Boss" (one of which is, in fact, addressed to "Head Boss of the Met", presumably Warren again).

    Leave a comment:


  • Damaso Marte
    replied
    The media narrative is related to a point I've made repeatedly in Maybrick diary threads. The vision people have today is of the Ripper and Abberline being involved in a two person chess game a la Holmes and Moriarty. I think this is an utterly modern view and that somebody on the ground in 1888 would not have thought of Abberline as "the" investigator, but rather as just one out of many and I don't think even the most salient. I don't think any of the major letters were addressed to him, no?

    It would be interesting to step in the shoes of an 1888 newspaper reader and see who he identifies as the major anti-ripper leaders.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
    Yes. They could have learned about Albert Bachert as well. Or the CNA, police, etc. So...why Lusk?
    Well, it might have been Bachert or anyone else, I suppose. Perhaps "Lusk" is simply where the pin landed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    Not offhand, Tom, and I'm not overly concerned either. All I'm saying is that somebody seeking a target for a jolly hoax could easily have learned about Lusk from the newspapers.
    Yes. They could have learned about Albert Bachert as well. Or the CNA, police, etc. So...why Lusk? And those who saw the 'Box of toys' postcard sent around Oct. 9th believed it from the same hand as 'From hell'. We then have a hoaxer who sent a postcard that Lusk failed to report and publicize. So why then send a kidney that might meet the same fate?

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
    Do you know why there was a 'spike' in the couple of days prior to receipt of the kidney?
    Not offhand, Tom, and I'm not overly concerned either. All I'm saying is that somebody seeking a target for a jolly hoax could easily have learned about Lusk from the newspapers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Do you know why there was a 'spike' in the couple of days prior to receipt of the kidney?

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
    And Sam Flynn's post in part supports my conclusion, though I suspect his purpose in going to the trouble of creating that graph was to create an argument that Lusk was a high profile person.
    I don't believe that Lusk was "high profile" at all, but - as the graph shows - he was certainly in the papers at various times during the "Autumn of Terror". The graph also shows there was a slight spike in terms of Lusk's being mentioned in the papers in the very days that led up to the creation of the From Hell letter. Anybody reading the Ripper coverage in the press at that time (surely a significant percentage of the population) would have known about Lusk and his Vigilance Committee.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Originally posted by JTRSickert View Post
    So Tom, in your opinion, do you believe the package he received was authentic, or just another hoaxer wasting everyone's time?
    I'm not sure it was either, Sickert. And it might have been both. And Sam Flynn's post in part supports my conclusion, though I suspect his purpose in going to the trouble of creating that graph was to create an argument that Lusk was a high profile person. And compared to Joe Blow or Bob Smith, he certainly was. But compared to the police, the Star, and the CNA which had received the Dear Boss letter and proved they could get maximum publicity from it, Lusk was a non-entity.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by c.d. View Post
    if the individual who took offense at how he was treated didn't know the name of the particular person who hassled him, he might have seen Lusk's name in the paper
    A survey of all the London newspapers shows how often Lusk's name was in the press leading up to (and after) the 16th October 1888. He'd received quite some coverage in mid-September, and his profile was again on the rise in the days before he received the From Hell letter.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Lusk in the Papers.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	91.3 KB
ID:	665346

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    It could have been from somebody who was hassled or roughed up a bit by one of Lusk's people being a bit overzealous. As Damaso stated, if the individual who took offense at how he was treated didn't know the name of the particular person who hassled him, he might have seen Lusk's name in the paper and determined that his treatment came at Lusk's direction.

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X