September 17th Letter

[Chris]

At the time I understood from information on one of the threads here at the time, that testing had been done on the letter and further testing was in the pipeline,but the staff intimated that yes,certain tests, common to other items in their archives,would have assuredly taken place,but they were not aware of any " recent testing" , either in progress or being contemplated.

What was said last year - or hinted at - was that Patricia Cornwell was funding some tests on the letter. That is for a future book by her, apparently, so the results won't be released until then.

Apart from that I had not heard anything at all about tests having been carried out on the letter - in fact I understood that the P.R.O. (as it then was) had decided it didn't have the resources to test it. That was until "mac-the-kipper" made the claims on this thread that I have been trying to get him to clarify.

[mac-the-kipper]

What was said last year - or hinted at - was that Patricia Cornwell was funding some tests on the letter. That is for a future book by her, apparently, so the results won't be released until then.

Apart from that I had not heard anything at all about tests having been carried out on the letter - in fact I understood that the P.R.O. (as it then was) had decided it didn't have the resources to test it. That was until "mac-the-kipper" made the claims on this thread that I have been trying to get him to clarify.

Why do you need information like this on such an obvious fake?

[Natalie Severn]

Well I am now much clearer about the matter,so thanks Chris.It does add up what you are saying,I must admit.Lets hope we get any results some time soon!
Best
Norma

[Chris]

Why do you need information like this on such an obvious fake?

Obviously, in order to get the facts straight so that everyone can reach an informed conclusion.

[mac-the-kipper]

Obviously, in order to get the facts straight so that everyone can reach an informed conclusion.

Well it's a fake. There you go.

[Cap'n Jack]

Just a quick update on the 'red necklace' reference in the letter pertaining to the wound in Chapman's throat; and the stick I had in the past from posters insisting there was historically no common useage of such a term prior to the 17th September 1888... I would refer them to the 1858 work by Mary Clarke where she uses the term 'A red necklace, red with blood' when referring to the execution of Lady Jane Grey.

[Sam Flynn]

I thought the issue was not so much of there not having been an historical precedent for the phrase, AP, but that it was a perfectly obvious metaphor into which no special significance need necessarily be read. That was my take on the matter, at least. Personally, I had no qualms about the historical precedence of this obvious metaphor at all - I even quoted Georg Büchner's 1830s play, Woyzeck, to illustrate the fact.

[Supe]

AP,

I do believe you are standing your original argument upon its head here as you were the one who at first argued for the metaphor being rare, almost unique, save for its use in an obscure Croyden newspaper days before the letter was supposedly sent.

Don.

[Cap'n Jack]

Thanks boys, but you see sometimes I like to stand on my head as it brings that foot closer when I want to shoot it.

[Sam Flynn]

Nicely put, AP

[Trevor Marriott]

AP
I am surprised you can still walk with all those bullet riddled feet of yours

[Cap'n Jack]

I do stagger, Trev, that much I'll admit, but once I'm on the bar stool I'm fine and dandy, and believe me my aim is true.
Your foot or mine?

Thanks Sam.
Ich bin nur ein geist.

[CitizenX]

Why is Lusk mentioned at all?

Forgetting the "physical" evidence of the letter itself, it's the contents of it which really seal the letter as a fake to me.

1) It's written like a "greatest hits" of ripper phrases and is penned in the classic style.....before the style of the hoax letter had been naturally developed.

2) What really seals it for me is the reference to Lusk...why quote Lusk as an adversary at this point when he obviously wasn't?

This early on Lusk and the Vigilance committee were only small players and not known to the "average" Eastender.

The WVC was formed on 10th September 1888 only one week before the letter was penned. Initially they were more interested in forcing the government to offer a reward than personally catching the perpetrator of the crimes. It was only when they received a reply from the Home Secretary rejecting their request that they convened a meeting on the 19th Sept 1888 to issue their own reward of 50 pounds. The amount offered was derided in the press, being less than the 100 pounds already offered by Samuel Montague M.P. In essence some press reports openly mocked them…

The bills were printed and posted by the 21st Sept 1888. George Lusk’s name was printed on the bottom of these bills and is the probable reason he was sent hoax letters in the first place. There isn't any record of others in the committee being harassed by hoax letters even though they were named prominently in the newspapers.

I'm not sure when the patrols started by the WVC but it's unlikely to have been before the 21st September 1888 because the committee secretary was complaining of lack of funds being pledged because people were waiting for the government to come forward..

Lusk is only mentioned in the letter because he is part of ripper legend...The writer of that letter must have been a time traveller.

Kevin

[Natalie Severn]

On the surface this seems a very good point about Lusk, Kevin.However,he was the newly appointed chairman-by September 10th ctte. of that newly formed " W.Vigilante Society", and as such it was probable that his name adorned the hundreds-if not thousands of fly posters they put up around Whitechapel on trees and in shop windows etc to get people to join them.The fly posters were likely to have been circulated around the 11th or 12th September 1888 and probably acted like a red rag to a bull .
Best
Norma

[Chris George]

Hi Ally,
I would agree with you -usually.However ,in this instance I understand it may be difficult for Mac to give Chris an absolute yes or no on this matter.
The National Archives people reacted with surprise when I spoke to them,about a year ago, about the testing that [I thought] had been recently done regarding the authenticity of Sept 17th letter.They said that as far as they knew there were no questions about it not being genuine.So I was left with the impression that they believed the letter kept in their archives was indeed genuine. They wouldn"t be drawn further.
Warm regards,
Norma

Hello Norma

I have expressed the opinion before that I don't think the 17 September letter is genuine. I find the reaction of the National Archives scary in that they apparently view this document as genuine just because it happens to be among other documents that are demonstrably genuine. Unfortunately alarm bells ring with this particular document for a number of reasons that have been discussed.

It is clear though that fake material can be planted in the archives as was discovered several years ago with World War II material, when officials looked into various claims by historian Martin Allen based on previously undiscussed "genuine" documents, and that he used allegedly in thre books. See the Guardian story "The 29 fakes behind a rewriting of history."

As written therein: "Details of an investigation by the National Archives into how forged documents came to be planted in their files have uncovered the full extent of deception. Officials discovered 29 faked documents, planted in 12 separate files at some point between 2000 and 2005, which were used to underpin Allen's allegations."

This is not an accusation against "Mac the Knife"--I accept his explanation that he innocently discovered this suspicious letter.

Best regards

Chris