Double Event Timeline

[Jon Guy]

Hi Lynn

They pop the boots Friday night (that's what the ticket said). Should have enough for 8d doss. After all, there would still be 1/10 left over. Surely enough for supper and breakfast?

If they had taken a double bed for 8d it would have wiped them out financially. They had spent the previous night at the Casual Ward because they didn`t have enough money, and it seems that John earned his doss that Friday afternoon and could afford a bed, Kate didn`t and returned to the Casual Ward. Simples.

It wasn`t just supper and breakfast, they bought drink too, which was probably the influencing factor in their choice of Lodging House or Casual Ward for Kate.

"They weren`t together on Friday night. They parted company at about four o`clock that afternoon."

So when did they pop the boots? Before 4.00 I take it?

I guess so.

No problem with spending some on food (Friday night supper/Saturday morning breakfast). Drink? Well, not Saturday morning when observed by Wilkinson, surely?

Yes. I`ll quote John Kelly again:
We had been drinking together out of the 2s 6d. All of it was spent in drink and food."

Lynn, I believe the majority of the Spitalfields populace were permanently pissed, even the kids. When someone from 1888 Spitalfields describes someone as sober they really mean they weren`t staggering all over the place or slumped against a wall.

Nor yet Friday after 4.00--as they were not together. Then when?

When Eddowes returned to the Lodging House at 8.00am on Saturday morning and continued together till 2pm that afternoon.

So they went drinking after breakfast at Flower and Dean? Very well. They drank the remainder of the 2/6 and noticed it was all gone. So now she heads to Bermondsey to get more?

That`s what we`re told, nowt strange about that.

Good, she is heading to Bermondsey. But she stops off in Aldgate, penniless, and some Good Samaritan stands her treat for 2-3 large glasses of gin (or ?)--enough to get roaring drunk, etc.
Whom was the Good Samaritan? Surely not another unfortunate?

No, she parts company with Kelly at 2.00pm with Bermondsey in mind and the next we hear of her is 6 hours later when she is found paralytic on the High St.
We don`t know that she stopped off in Aldgate, only that the time she was found there at 8pm which was the usual time she returned to her lodgings, so she may have been working her way home when she was found.

Feel any strain yet?

Oh yes, Lynn.

[Bridewell]

I was just thinking (always dangerous, I know!) if Kate pawned Kelly's new boots, she not only acquired 2/6d, but also severely curtailed her man's movements as well. I can't imagine that Kelly spent money on new boots unless the old ones were well and truly past it.

On another point, why did she promise to be back by 4 o'clock when (according to Kelly) she often came back much later?

Regards, Bridewell.

[lynn cates]

story

Hello Jon

"That`s what Kelly tells us in the inquest reports."

Very well, let's proceed. They pop the boots Friday night (that's what the ticket said). Should have enough for 8d doss. After all, there would still be 1/10 left over. Surely enough for supper and breakfast?

"Full enough for what?"

An extra tuppence for doss.

"They weren`t together on Friday night. They parted company at about four o`clock that afternoon."

So when did they pop the boots? Before 4.00 I take it?

"Kelly: We had been drinking together out of the 2s 6d. All of it was spent in drink and food."

No problem with spending some on food (Friday night supper/Saturday morning breakfast). Drink? Well, not Saturday morning when observed by Wilkinson, surely? Nor yet Friday after 4.00--as they were not together. Then when?

"Kelly and Eddowes were together in Houndsditch till two pm."

So they went drinking after breakfast at Flower and Dean? Very well. They drank the remainder of the 2/6 and noticed it was all gone. So now she heads to Bermondsey to get more?

"As I recall, when Kate left, she had no money at all."

"Yes, that`s what Kelly tells us?"

Good, she is heading to Bermondsey. But she stops off in Aldgate, penniless, and some Good Samaritan stands her treat for 2-3 large glasses of gin (or ?)--enough to get roaring drunk, etc.

Whom was the Good Samaritan? Surely not another unfortunate?

Feel any strain yet?

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Hi Lynn

If so, I presume they bought it Saturday morning.

That`s what Kelly tells us in the inquest reports.

So on Friday night their coffers should have been full enough from the boot popping for an extra 2d.

Full enough for what ?

Alcohol? When was that consumed?

1. Friday night AFTER the pawn shop visit and BEFORE Kate was supposed to be at MECW?

2. Friday night AFTER Kate left for MECW?

They weren`t together on Friday night. They parted company at about four o`clock that afternoon.

3. Saturday morning for breakfast AFTER the money was gone and Kate was heading to "Bermondsey" for more?

Kelly: We had been drinking together out of the 2s 6d. All of it was spent in drink and food.
Kelly and Eddowes were together in Houndsditch till two pm.

As I recall, when Kate left, she had no money at all.

Yes, that`s what Kelly tells us?

[lynn cates]

drink

Hello Jon. If so, I presume they bought it Saturday morning. So on Friday night their coffers should have been full enough from the boot popping for an extra 2d.

Alcohol? When was that consumed?

1. Friday night AFTER the pawn shop visit and BEFORE Kate was supposed to be at MECW?

2. Friday night AFTER Kate left for MECW?

3. Saturday morning for breakfast AFTER the money was gone and Kate was heading to "Bermondsey" for more?

As I recall, when Kate left, she had no money at all.

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Doss for 2 at Flower and Dean was 8d. Doss for 1, plus MECW, would have been 6d. Was there not even tuppence left from the 2/6?

Didn`t they enjoy a slap up full English breakfast, as well as buying some sugar for their tea, and no doubt some baccy, booze and other every day bits and bobs.

[lynn cates]

2/6

Hello Bridewell. Given the boots were popped on Friday night for 2/6, where did all the money go? Caviar and Dom Perignon?

Doss for 2 at Flower and Dean was 8d. Doss for 1, plus MECW, would have been 6d. Was there not even tuppence left from the 2/6?

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

Have just done a bit of digging. I'd always thought that Kate & Conway split sometime in 1880. In the 1881 census, though, there's a Kate Conway, (38) Charwoman living with a Thomas Conway (46) Labourer at 71, Lower George Street, Chelsea. The children living with them are Thomas & George. He's shown as born in Ireland; she's shown as born in Staffordshire (which included Wolverhampton).

Can we say for sure that this is not them? If it is, there were clearly together rather later than previously thought.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Bridewell]

Which Bit?

Hello MB. Well, I can't speak for others, but my take is that a string of coincidences is assumed by a good many theorisers.

But that does not bother me HALF so much as John's testimony under oath. Read it lately?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

Which part concerns you? I've just re-read it. He distances himself from any suggestion that he was living on her immoral earnings, for obvious reasons. He also distances himself from any suggestion that he knew who supplied her drinks on the day in question. The biggest issue, I guess, is the fact that they had lived together in the same house for seven years, but had spent the Friday night apart. An argument? A lover? Perhaps the people seen by Lawende were Kate and her new boyfriend - so maybe not her killer. Is this what you're thinking?

Regards, Bridewell.

[lynn cates]

tryst

Hello Dave. Well, it could be a tryst while Kate's away--nothing more. But it could be something else.

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

"The early release from the Casual Ward doesn't seem to have aroused THAT much suspicion either."
Really? Even the jury cried "Foul" on this one.

Hi Lynn...I did say it didn't raise THAT much suspicion...as far as I can see, all that was said was:-

"A Juryman: Is not eight o'clock a very early hour to be discharged from a casual ward? - I do not know.
[Juryman ?] There is some tasks - picking oakum - before you can be discharged. I know it was very early."

After which they passed on to the boots...I don't think they made a great deal of it...And no I don't suppose she was at MECW - which is precisely what I was implying ...and it may be (I'm not saying more than that) all that he was covering up...after all her daughter's there and he may feel he'd be further shaming her mother, and simultaneously losing face in front of her...

He's no angel, but I don't think he's THAT much of a villain either!

All the best

Dave

[lynn cates]

lying

Hello Dave.

"The early release from the Casual Ward doesn't seem to have aroused THAT much suspicion either."

Really? Even the jury cried "Foul" on this one.

"Perhaps he didn't want to admit she'd actually been out most of the night on the game...he does seem to be consistent in wishing to deny her status as an unfortunate - see his earlier comments re walking the streets...it probably came across as just that at the inquest...and to the police too..."

If so, then she was NOT at MECW.

"They've been together seven years in a reasonably stable relationship...I don't doubt he's covering up certain information (weren't they all - and don't many people even now?) but somehow I can't see him as her killer."

Well, let's not suggest that. But he is lying about something.

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

Early boots

Hi Lynn

Well I suppose the boots could easily be explained by somewhat drunken confusion...after all he was straightforward about producing the ticket at the inquest...he thought they'd pawned the boots on the 29th...the ticket said the 28th...it doesn't seem as if this aroused any suspicion at that time...(I'd be more interested in what he wore on his feet in the days after, and if/when did he retrieve the pawned boots!)...

The early release from the Casual Ward doesn't seem to have aroused THAT much suspicion either...Perhaps he didn't want to admit she'd actually been out most of the night on the game...he does seem to be consistent in wishing to deny her status as an unfortunate - see his earlier comments re walking the streets...it probably came across as just that at the inquest...and to the police too...

They've been together seven years in a reasonably stable relationship...I don't doubt he's covering up certain information (weren't they all - and don't many people even now?) but somehow I can't see him as her killer

All the best

Dave

[lynn cates]

story

Hello MB. Well, his boots story doesn't work, nor yet his early release story.
And his, "We were talking about the WCM and I didn't want the knife to get to Kate . . ." smells to high heaven.

Cheers.
LC

[moonbegger]

Hello MB. Well, I can't speak for others, but my take is that a string of coincidences is assumed by a good many theorisers.

But that does not bother me HALF so much as John's testimony under oath. Read it lately?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn .. Thanks for your reply to my " Lucky ol Jack " question . As regards to John Kelly , i think he was prob still drunk and confused at the inquest .. as a matter of interest , What part of Kelly's statement bothers you so much ?

Moonbegger .