September 17th Letter

[Natalie Severn]

I discovered tonight that there is documentary evidence from Scotland Yard files which proves that as late as 1896,eight years after the ripper reign of terror,the police still did not know who had written the original letter and post card [see ch 13, Philip Sugden].Here yet again we have an example of another stunning porkie from Anderson who claimed "the identity of Jack the penman was "positively established" as that of a London journalist".It was not and Anderson was wrong in what he claimed.

[Cap'n Jack]

But, Natalie,it was a 'porkie' that Littlechild supported:

'With regard to the term 'Jack the Ripper' it was generally believed at the Yard that Tom Bullen of the Central News was the originator, but it is probable Moore, who was his chief, was the inventor. It was a smart piece of journalistic work. No journalist of my time got such privileges from Scotland Yard as Bullen. Mr James Munro when Assistant Commissioner, and afterwards Commissioner, relied on his integrity. Poor Bullen occasionally took too much to drink, and I fail to see how he could help it knocking about so many hours and seeking favours from so many people to procure copy. One night when Bullen had taken a 'few too many' he got early information of the death of Prince Bismarck and instead of going to the office to report it sent a laconic telegram 'Bloody Bismarck is dead'. On this I believe Mr Charles Moore fired him out.'

[Chris]

Natalie

I'm puzzled by the phrase you include in quotation marks ("the identity of Jack the penman was "positively established" as that of a London journalist"). Is that meant to be a quotation from Anderson? Or is even the phrase "positively established" meant to be?

As for Cap'n Jack's point, it seems to me this is not so much Littlechild "supporting" a lie told by Anderson, as Anderson turning a suspicion into an unqualified statement of fact.

But maybe this belongs on the "Anderson" thread.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Ap,
Yes,that is true.
However,there is a vast difference between "a general belief" ---meaning that without proof certain people may have suspected Bullen or his boss to have been the authors to leapfrogging to having Anderson"s now very familiar "Definite Certainty" .
So in this particular case ,while certain of the police force were apparently content to simply "have their suspicions" about the letter and postcard"s author ,we get Anderson busy "reformulating" and "redefining" it into "definite certainty".Maybe he was an alchemist?

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Chris,
While searching for a statement last night about Kosminski I came across this quote in Philip Sugden"s "Complete History of Jack the Ripper":
" Anderson"s contention that the identity of Jack the penman was positively established as that of a London journalist is equally untenable.I have dealt with this matter elsewhere...."see ch 13 ".
When I scanned chapter 13 last night,skimming across Philip Sugden"s research ,I came across the following:
....Anderson categorically asserted in 1910 that the letter was the creation of "an enterprising London Journalist" .He was tempted ,he added, to reveal his name ,provided his publishers would accept responsibility in the event of a libel action,but demurred because "no public benefit would result from such a course, and the traditions of my old department would suffer".
Now apparently Swanson"s annotations also endorse that "head officers of CID at Scotland Yard also know the identity of the journalist.
Philip Sugden adds :

"In asserting a conclusive identification of the hoaxer Anderson"s memoirs went beyond the truth.This should caution us as to their worth as historical evidence."

On pages270/1 Sugden points out documentary proof from eight years after the event [1896] that CID still didnt know who had written the original Jack the Ripper letter.These letters concern correspondence between Melville Macnaghten and Chief Inspector Moore .It followed another letter ,in 1896,having been received by Commercial Street Police station allegedly from the Ripper.Macnaghten asks for help in digging out the old letters and comparing them.
The entire chapter is so clearly written and brilliantly researched it is worth reading-[or rereading which I am sure is the case.
Best

[Chris]

Natalie

Thanks for explaining.

I think it's fair to point out that Anderson doesn't say explicitly anything about the identity of the author being "positively established" or about a "conclusive identification" - he just states that the author was "an enterprising London journalist".

[Natalie Severn]

With due respect Chris, he did not "only say he was an enterprising London journalist."
He says he is very tempted to reveal the journalists name ie he is tempted to provide concrete proof [but for fear of libel costs].Thus he is being "categorical".
Contrast this with Macnaghten,who would only own a suspicion as to the hoaxer--- -and Macnaghten was freshly retired from 10 years of being HEAD of CID:

"In this ghastly production I have always thought I could discern the stained forefinger of a journalist,indeed a year later I could shrewd suspicions as to the actual author! But whoever did pen the gruesome stuff,it is certain to my mind that it was not the mad miscreant who committed the murders."

Nothing categorical there about the identity .

[Chris]

With due respect Chris, he did not "only say he was an enterprising London journalist."
He says he is very tempted to reveal the journalists name ie he is tempted to provide concrete proof [but for fear of libel costs].

Sorry, but you're just putting words into Anderson's mouth now.

He doesn't either say or imply anything about "concrete proof". Quite the opposite, if the reference to the publishers of Blackwood's taking responsibility in case of a libel action relates to the letter - if he had concrete proof he would have no cause to fear a libel action!

[Stewart P Evans]

Agenda

But, Natalie,it was a 'porkie' that Littlechild supported:
'With regard to the term 'Jack the Ripper' it was generally believed at the Yard that Tom Bullen of the Central News was the originator, but it is probable Moore, who was his chief, was the inventor. It was a smart piece of journalistic work. No journalist of my time got such privileges from Scotland Yard as Bullen. Mr James Munro when Assistant Commissioner, and afterwards Commissioner, relied on his integrity. Poor Bullen occasionally took too much to drink, and I fail to see how he could help it knocking about so many hours and seeking favours from so many people to procure copy. One night when Bullen had taken a 'few too many' he got early information of the death of Prince Bismarck and instead of going to the office to report it sent a laconic telegram 'Bloody Bismarck is dead'. On this I believe Mr Charles Moore fired him out.'

That's the thing I don't like about you AP. You twist meanings to suit what you want to say. Littlechild does not support a lie.

Littlechild makes the simple statement that there was a general belief at Scotland Yard that Bullen [Bulling] and/or Moore were responsible for the term 'Jack the Ripper.' We had known for years that both Anderson and Macnaghten believed that a journalist had written the Jack the Ripper letter and Littlechild confirms this and actually supplies the name of that journalist. However, quite correctly, and unlike Anderson, Littlechild does not claim that Bulling did write the letter. He merely describes a belief held at Scotland Yard.

But you always seem to put your own perverted spin on things to suit your own agenda. Otherwise, for all know, you might be a dear old boy.

[Cap'n Jack]

Thanks Stewart
but I do not have an 'agenda'; and I'm certainly not here to be 'liked'.

[Stewart P Evans]

Like

Thanks Stewart
but I do not have an 'agenda'; and I'm certainly not here to be 'liked'.

Oh you do have an agenda AP - and high on that is the disparagement of Littlechild.

On the second point I did not suggest that you were 'here' to be liked. In fact, I made a statement about the thing I do not like about you. That was because from our past telephone conversations, as you know, I rather like you.

[Cap'n Jack]

'Oh you do have an agenda AP - and high on that is the disparagement of Littlechild.'

What a lovely word that is, Stewart... 'disparagement'.
If by that you mean that I clip away at him until he disappears, you are right.
If I could prune him with one quick and clean cut I would do it.
But my game is up; and I resort to chemical elimination.
Forgive my sins, for they are legion, but the host is comfortable.

[mac-the-kipper]

The fake 17 Sept. 88 letter resembles none of the 210 letters in MEPO 3/142, nor the paper. I shall endeavour to post some images of interest to you. Meanwhile - scratch that itch.

What's wrong with the paper?

[Stewart P Evans]

Wrong

What's wrong with the paper?

"Somehow the texture of the paper feels wrong. Rather like a page from a cheap notebook you would buy at Woolworths...looks suspiciously modern - texture of paper and the appearance of ink - it looks too fresh..."

[Monty]

Apart from Stewart and John, who has actually seen the letter first hand?

Monty