September 17th Letter

[Cap'n Jack]

Stewart, surely the added 'brown paper wrapper among reports' notation is speaking volumes to you?

[John Bennett]

There's a Spanish - I think - documentary/discussion ('Jack el Destripador') on Youtube which features the 17th September letter in a sequence with several others. The image used is my one that has been posted here - lined paper background and all.

The link is below and the letter appears 3m 15s into the item.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=oom8c7sZm1E&feature=related

Can anybody translate? Are they actually saying anything specific or is it about the letters generally?

[Cap'n Jack]

Yes, Stewart, many shorthand writers employed a pencil rather than a pen,as the specialised narrow nib required could cause a lot of blotting, it could end up looking like someone had thrown red ink all over the page.
I'm not doubting that the 16th November 1888 was written with a nib and ink, what I'm doubting is the width and point of that nib.

'I know you are looking for me everywhere but you will nver find me... I'm on the right side.'

Under his nose then.

[Stewart P Evans]

'Joe the catsmeat man'

AP, the 19 October 1888 'From Hell' letter, ff. 95-96, is written in pencil so is unsuitable for comparison.

The 16 November 1888 'To the Supt' letter, signed 'Joe the catsmeat man', ff. 193-194, is reproduced below and is, I think, pretty obviousy written with a nib dipped in ink -

[Sam Flynn]

The fake 17 Sept. 88 letter resembles none of the 210 letters in MEPO 3/142.

What it reminds me of is a memo by a certain "F. G. Abberline" (who he?) to Goschen, the Lord Chancellor, in 1892 (I'm sure I saw it in a book, somewhere). Not that I'm saying for a moment that "F. G. Abberline" wrote the letter of 17th September - the handwriting doesn't match the "Goschen" memo at all - however the spidery-scrawliness of the one puts me in mind of the other. There is also the correspondence of Henry Crun, late of the Goons, which - although for the most part typed - bears his spidery scrawl of a signature, as seen in this sample below:



Not that I'm saying that Henry Crun wrote the 17th September letter either (he was, after all, a fictional character) but there's something about this forced, wibbly-wobbly writing style that sometimes rings bells with me. They're usually of the "alarm" variety.

[Stewart P Evans]

Letters

Thanks Stewart, sorry about the late reply... I've been in St Malo drinking Ricard and Calvados, in that order.
There are three letters that strike me as sharing some characteristics with the 17th September 1888 letter under discussion, this in general penmanship, content and style.
The 19th October 1888 ' From Hell' letter shows similar scribbled thin strokes... what I call itchy-scratchy.
The 15th November 1888 'Dear Boss' letter appears to share the scribbled thin strokes.
But it is the 16th November 1888 'To the Supt' letter - from 'Joe the cats meat man' - that I think is the most useful comparison, for much of the style, penmanship and content appear similar to the 17th September 1888 letter.
Has it never occured to you that the writer of the 17th September 1888 letter may well have been schooled in the art of 'narrow writing' - which we today call 'Shorthand' - and that employing a specialised nib for such 'narrow writing' in normal script may well have produced the effect which you term as 'roller ball' or 'biro'?

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.

[Cap'n Jack]

Thanks Stewart, sorry about the late reply... I've been in St Malo drinking Ricard and Calvados, in that order.
There are three letters that strike me as sharing some characteristics with the 17th September 1888 letter under discussion, this in general penmanship, content and style.
The 19th October 1888 ' From Hell' letter shows similar scribbled thin strokes... what I call itchy-scratchy.
The 15th November 1888 'Dear Boss' letter appears to share the scribbled thin strokes.
But it is the 16th November 1888 'To the Supt' letter - from 'Joe the cats meat man' - that I think is the most useful comparison, for much of the style, penmanship and content appear similar to the 17th September 1888 letter.
Has it never occured to you that the writer of the 17th September 1888 letter may well have been schooled in the art of 'narrow writing' - which we today call 'Shorthand' - and that employing a specialised nib for such 'narrow writing' in normal script may well have produced the effect which you term as 'roller ball' or 'biro'?

[mac-the-kipper]

There you go again. You seem to like to take claims out of context.

For the kinds of evidence we were discussing, actually seeing the document is pointless. Not having seen the document in person doesn't change the fact that no contemporary report mentions the letter and that plenty of reports mention that th Dear Boss letter was the first to use th Jack th Ripper name. That doesn't suddenly change if I go see the letter myself instead of taking the word of people like Stewart and John who have seen in it.

But for the question of what kind of pen it was written with, if AP Wolf wants to claim that the pen strokes are similar to letters he posted, it would of course help to have actually seen it.

And, frankly, it was your saying you had seen it in person that you tried to use as evidence that it's real, but Stewart and John have both seen it and say it isn't, so your original argument was doubly bad.

How desperate are you to try to make this hoax letter sound real?

Oh I see now! How silly of me. So Stewart and John tell you something and that's ok. I tell you something and that's wrong. Hmm.

Now, back to the names of these experts that have disputed Peter Bowers' (unpublished) findings please.

[Chris]

You obviously think I'm lying...

I am not prepared to take unverifiable statements on trust from anyone. That is only common sense in a field that has been as heavily dogged by fakes and hoaxes as this one.

That doesn't entitle you to start flinging hysterical accusations like this about. Kindly stop doing it.

[Dan Norder]

But Dan would argue that you don't need to see any original documents

There you go again. You seem to like to take claims out of context.

For the kinds of evidence we were discussing, actually seeing the document is pointless. Not having seen the document in person doesn't change the fact that no contemporary report mentions the letter and that plenty of reports mention that th Dear Boss letter was the first to use th Jack th Ripper name. That doesn't suddenly change if I go see the letter myself instead of taking the word of people like Stewart and John who have seen in it.

But for the question of what kind of pen it was written with, if AP Wolf wants to claim that the pen strokes are similar to letters he posted, it would of course help to have actually seen it.

And, frankly, it was your saying you had seen it in person that you tried to use as evidence that it's real, but Stewart and John have both seen it and say it isn't, so your original argument was doubly bad.

How desperate are you to try to make this hoax letter sound real?

[mac-the-kipper]

"mac-the-kipper"

Questioning the accuracy of your statement, and asking you to explain what evidence you have to back it up, is obviously not the same as "accusing you of lying". People get things wrong on these boards all the time, for any number of reasons.

To take a case in point, your previous claim - that the folder (or whatever) which apparently contained this letter appeared on the microfilm - turned out not to be true when I checked it. In the circumstances, it's a bit unreasonable of you to make these melodramatic protests when the accuracy of your other statements is questioned.

You wrote 'if this were true' implying it wasn't. I don't have any documentary evidence nor do I intend to provide any, because I don't have any. Go and ask the N/A yourself. There's any number of dividers that don't appear on the film. I'm relying on memory of 20 years ago. You obviously think I'm lying just as a 'most respected' writer informed me that,

'In cases where hoax documents have been discovered historically it is often the caes that the finder or producer of the document is suspected.'

I leave with grace.

[Stewart P Evans]

Which Ones?

Thanks Stewart
I'm struck by the fact that there are several examples in your own volume 'Letters From Hell' which do bare useful comparison with the itchy-scratchy style of the 17th September 1888 letter.
Let's discuss those.

Thanks AP, which ones did you have in mind?

[Natalie Severn]

Norma, when I was doing research at the PRO in the 70s and 80s the security of the documents was not very good. And, of course, it was during these years that a lot was stolen. And, of course, the emphasis was always on theft rather than depositing anything. Hunched over the files with a page to be deposited hidden in your notepad, or inside jacket pocket, it would have been very easy at some moment, of maybe hours poring over the files, to slip in the page. I'm not just saying this for goodness sake - it would have been easily done.

I get the picture Stewart.I hadnt realised how slack things were at that slightly earlier time.No wonder so much got stolen.What a set back to this subject all that has been.
All the Best
Norma

[Cap'n Jack]

Thanks Stewart
but I was attempting to loosely demonstrate how a person not well acquainted with letter writing - in general rather than related to Ripper studies - in the Victorian period might make the simple error of classifying a sharp nib used in a furious fashion from the Victorian period with that of a modern 'biro', or 'roller-ball' as you yourself suggest.
I'm struck by the fact that there are several examples in your own volume 'Letters From Hell' which do bare useful comparison with the itchy-scratchy style of the 17th September 1888 letter.
Let's discuss those.

[Chris]

"mac-the-kipper"

Questioning the accuracy of your statement, and asking you to explain what evidence you have to back it up, is obviously not the same as "accusing you of lying". People get things wrong on these boards all the time, for any number of reasons.

To take a case in point, your previous claim - that the folder (or whatever) which apparently contained this letter appeared on the microfilm - turned out not to be true when I checked it. In the circumstances, it's a bit unreasonable of you to make these melodramatic protests when the accuracy of your other statements is questioned.