Anderson - More Questions Than Answers

[Septic Blue]

the simple fact that this scenario - were it (or any variant thereof) to be a reality - would lend... credence to the content of the margin/end notes...

An interesting, and valid, observation, Colin.

Thank you, Gareth!

It should be noted that the general basis of the hypothetical scenario and corresponding observation is not my 'baby', so to speak, but that of another interested party, with whom I have had lengthy discussions regarding the issue at hand, i.e. the so-called 'Swanson Marginalia'.

For objectivity's sake, I will paraphrase the observation in somewhat the same manner that you have effected:

While the above hypothetical scenario may seem somewhat … unlikely; it is indeed "reasonable".

The scenario - were it (or any variant thereof) to be a reality - would lend a degree of much needed credence to the content of the margin/end notes, i.e. the so-called 'Swanson Marginalia'.

[robhouse]

Colin,

I have to admit, I have absolutely no idea what you are getting at here. It seems that you are saying the content of the marginalia would be more credible, if it had been instead forged by one of DSS's children (and signed with his initials).

How would this make the content of the marginalia more credible than if DSS himself simply wrote it?

Can you please try to explain more clearly what you mean... in layman's terms?

RH

[Sam Flynn]

How would this make the content of the marginalia more credible than if DSS himself simply wrote it?

Can you please try to explain more clearly what you mean... in layman's terms?

My understanding of Colin's post is that, if one of Swanson's children wrote the marginalia based on an account passed down to them by their father, then he or she would be documenting what their father said. They would, in effect, have been acting in the role of a de facto amanuensis, preserving for posterity the content of what Swanson himself believed to be true. The content has perhaps become secondary to the debates over provenance of late. It would naturally have been better if the marginalia were actually penned by Swanson - but Colin's point wasn't about that.

[Septic Blue]

My understanding of Colin's post is that, if one of Swanson's children wrote the marginalia based on an account passed down to them by their father, then he or she would be documenting what their father said. They would, in effect, have been acting in the role of a de facto amanuensis, preserving for posterity the content of what Swanson himself believed to be true. The content has perhaps become secondary to the debates over provenance of late. It would naturally have been better if the marginalia were actually penned by Swanson - but Colin's point wasn't about that.

Very well stated, Gareth!

I will only add that the reality of such a scenario, would maintain the integrity of the 'marginalia' content, while lending a degree of explicability to its inconsistencies with the documented fate of Aaron Kosminski.

[Stewart P Evans]

Point of Fact

...what does it mean to you that the eminent gentleman & scholar Dr. Fido is a qualified historian who has a good insight into the mind of SRA by virtue of reading and analyzing his collected works?

This is not a personal attack nor is it meant to 'devalue' anything, but merely as a point of fact surely Martin Fido is not entitled to be called 'Dr.' (someone please correct me if I'm wrong for he may have since qualified) nor is he a qualified historian.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Howard

Firstly my apologies for not replying sooner. However I had the kids yesterday, and thought a few well off hours had been deserved enjoying their company.

“Jeff...what does it mean to you that the eminent gentleman & scholar Dr. Fido is a qualified historian who has a good insight into the mind of SRA by virtue of reading and analyzing his collected works?”

Well that’s not what I said. I said that Martin Fido was an expert in Victorian literature. I’ll quote Martin: “In retirement Anderson devoted himself to charitable work and writing. A prolific author, he produced nearly two dozen books on theology, numerous articles for various journals, a book on penology (criminals and Crime), and an autobiography (the lighter side of my official life) His last years were spent in isolation caused by deafness. “

While I’m aware that Martin Fido is also a recognized authority on ‘Jack the Ripper’ and the period, it is his expertise in Anderson’s writings that I was alluring to and the specific point of whether Anderson was capable of inventing the story of an ID parade. Martin ‘As an expert in Victorian literature’ does not believe him capable of inventing such a story. And I was quoting Martin as I would quote or use any expert in a certain field.

(Of course, my old boss once told me that an expert is anyone who has read more than two books on a subject and is willing to sign a release form for less that a hundred quid. But it’s NOT an opinion I share or would work to myself.)

“Tell you what it means to me. It means he has a well-formed opinion of SRA based on his written work. It in no way makes me think that Anderson's words can't be separated from his actions. I can think of many people whose written works are at odds with their deeds....NOT that Anderson was significantly different if one compares the written with the actual, but that instances such as Anderson claiming to be able to deduce the guilt or innocence of a man accused of a crime by his physical reaction... need to be taken into consideration when we assess what he wrote...and he indeed did write that. He also wrote that no one would have believed Rose Mylett was murdered had it not been for the Whitechapel Murders.

Yes, my confusion was that what is known of his actions are also in written form and all analysis of his character is in writing. But I take your point.

Martin goes on. “ Anderson was obviously a complex character, but for the researcher trying to access his statements about the identity of jack the Ripper, it is his honesty which is of overall importance.”

At no point have I ever suggested that Anderson is NOT a complex issue. However it would be totally irresponsible for anyone researching the subject not to take very seriously indeed the claim by the person in charge of the case that the ‘identity’ was a ‘definitely ascertained Fact”

And as this claim is backed up by the person with over all responsibility for the investigation in a set of notes only ever intended for private use. I’d say that it is most improbable that the story of an ID parade is complete fabrication.

What I was doing was agreeing with Monty that it’s probable that we don’t have the full story. However given Andersons and Swanson’s claims together, and taking into account expert opinion, I think it fair to say that some sort of ID probably took place.

“Its difficult to make posts which mention Dr. Fido's knowledge of SRA and while deferring sincerely and openly to the great man's extraordinary acumen, at the same time honestly mentioning that one person's observation of what Anderson was really like based on what he wrote proves only that what someone with the extraordinary knowledge a Dr. Fido has is still his esteemed opinion....and opinion only.”

This is true. However as already explained it is his opinion as an ‘EXPERT’ in a specific field that I was seeking rather than an authority on jack the Ripper.

“It does not mean that Anderson was able to walk between the raindrops in life and not occasionally stretch the truth of a matter or if not necessarily prevaricating, being completely or nearly completely in the minority of a contemporary position....such as his choice of whom the Ripper was...the determination of Mylett's murder...and the poor sap who was found guilty by virtue of his reaction.. in the court of law that was SRA on occasion.”

Again no one is disputing the complexity of Andersons Character. It is an area I have much discussed and listened to from various authorities on the case. And indeed an important and complicated area when considering the supposed identification. However it is on the specific area of Andersons claims about Jack the Ripper and whether, on balance, his claims might have been fabrication and Lies that I was interested in addressing here.

For what its worth my opinion is that something else was going, which is why Anderson was careful with his words in public and why Swanson only released the name in private. And it is with Rob House’s ideas and theories on the subject of the Crawford letter and Kosminski's sister that I am in most concordance.

As a number of other posts have arisen I will quickly address them:

To my knowledge Martin Fido is not a Dr, although clearly there can be few people more deserving of being made so.

As for the ‘Hollywood’ opus magnus scenario, my suggestions are Johnny Depp as Jim Swanson, and his evil brother and master forger played by Russell Crow, with Kate Winslett playing the younger sister who has a photographic memory and gets the spelling spot on while creating all the other bits of Marginalia and impersonating Donald in a frock. In the end jack the Ripper himself comes down in a spacecraft and flies away with the Fairies.

All the best
Pirate

PS Dr John Watson: Congratulations you were the only person to come up with a scenario that could truly be described as RESONABLE.

[Septic Blue]

To my knowledge Martin Fido is not a Dr, although clearly there can be few people more deserving of being made so.

You left a drop on your chin, Jeff!

As for the ‘Hollywood’ opus magnus scenario, my suggestions are Johnny Depp as Jim Swanson, and his evil brother and master forger played by Russell Crow, with Kate Winslett playing the younger sister who has a photographic memory and gets the spelling spot on while creating all the other bits of Marginalia and impersonating Donald in a frock. In the end jack the Ripper himself comes down in a spacecraft and flies away with the Fairies.

I didn't think you were capable of offering an honest appraisal of the hypothetical scenario that I proposed. You have shown that indeed … you are not!

PS Dr John Watson: Congratulations you were the only person to come up with a scenario that could truly be described as RESONABLE.

Do you actually believe your own bullshit?

[Natalie Severn]

psst...Colin,Its actually "Dr Jeff" ----he"s got a Ph d now in bullshit,following his double first in bollocks and quackery!

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Colin

It’s Not a question of not being able to Colin but simply not having the time to check dates and names.

Besides if I went through every Fairy tale in detail I could be stuck here to Christmas arguing the toss over something that is further out there than Stephen Knight or the Maybrick Diary.

However against your scenario (and off the top of my head) and against my better judgment.

There is a limited time frame in which the information contained in the marginalia could have been forged. I believe that the name Kosminski first appeared around 1959.

And that the Marginalia was first offered for publication in the 1980’s. That gives no more than 10 to. 20 years.

Also my understanding is that Kosminski may not have been a logical or popular choice for Anderson's jewish suspect for most of this time frame.

To my knowledge none of the people you mention have any criminal record for fraud and deception. Indeed the entire family to my knowledge are whiter than white.

Most authorities I have spoken to about Jim Swanson do NOT believe him capable of creating a hoax.

The Sums of money involved are so small they defy a logical explanation for a comparatively wealthy family having done so for money.

So your scenario relies on a load of kids giving a damn?

The idea that anyone in there teens is capable of such an act is simply beyond belief. Teenagers are interested in the contents of their pants NOT JtR. If only I had written down my Granddads deeds at Dunkirk (He was the last man to leave) However I did NOT and I expect that most of you also failed to record your family history and now also regret not having done so, when you were kids of this age.

Both handwriting Experts who have studied the marginalia believe it was probably written by Donald Swanson.

The provenance of the marginalia is excellent.

There are other examples of Donald Swanson making other similar marginalia. Well recorded. And also available for analysis.

You have nothing what so ever to back up or prove your fantasy. Not one shrap of evidence not one piece of proof to justify your allegations at innocent people.

As I originally alluded to your claim relies on the said teenagers being able not only to memorize what Donald said but also to get the spelling correct.

In short you have nothing what so ever to substantiate your claim, and it is about as probable as Millwall beating Westham in the FA cup this season.

However my major concern is that if enough Ripperologists throw this sort of unsubstantiated MUD about the authenticity of the Marginalia, then some poor sap might actually believe that there is some evidence to back it up, which there is NOT

The Marginalia is as genuine as most historical records can be…if we question its authenticity then almost all of our historical records must also be questioned. British History collapses.

Thankfully however, It’s a DUCK

Pirate

[Jeff Leahy]

psst...Colin,Its actually "Dr Jeff" ----he"s got a Ph d now in bullshit,following his double first in bollocks and quackery!

Dr who?

These are words NAT, provide the proof, or apologuise, Jeff

[Septic Blue]

Hi Colin

It’s Not a question of not being able to Colin but simply not having the time to check dates and names.

Besides if I went through every Fairy tale in detail I could be stuck here to Christmas arguing the toss over something that is further out there than Stephen Knight or the Maybrick Diary.

However against your scenario (and off the top of my head) and against my better judgment.

There is a limited time frame in which the information contained in the marginalia could have been forged. I believe that the name Kosminski first appeared around 1959.

And that the Marginalia was first offered for publication in the 1980’s. That gives no more than 10 to. 20 years.

Also my understanding is that Kosminski may not have been a logical or popular choice for Anderson's jewish suspect for most of this time frame.

To my knowledge none of the people you mention have any criminal record for fraud and deception. Indeed the entire family to my knowledge are whiter than white.

Most authorities I have spoken to about Jim Swanson do NOT believe him capable of creating a hoax.

The Sums of money involved are so small they defy a logical explanation for a comparatively wealthy family having done so for money.

So your scenario relies on a load of kids giving a damn?

The idea that anyone in there teens is capable of such an act is simply beyond belief. Teenagers are interested in the contents of their pants NOT JtR. If only I had written down my Granddads deeds at Dunkirk (He was the last man to leave) However I did NOT and I expect that most of you also failed to record your family history and now also regret not having done so, when you were kids of this age.

Both handwriting Experts who have studied the marginalia believe it was probably written by Donald Swanson.

The provenance of the marginalia is excellent.

There are other examples of Donald Swanson making other similar marginalia. Well recorded. And also available for analysis.

You have nothing what so ever to back up or prove your fantasy. Not one shrap of evidence not one piece of proof to justify your allegations at innocent people.

As I originally alluded to your claim relies on the said teenagers being able not only to memorize what Donald said but also to get the spelling correct.

In short you have nothing what so ever to substantiate your claim, and it is about as probable as Millwall beating Westham in the FA cup this season.

However my major concern is that if enough Ripperologists throw this sort of unsubstantiated MUD about the authenticity of the Marginalia, then some poor sap might actually believe that there is some evidence to back it up, which there is NOT

The Marginalia is as genuine as most historical records can be…if we question its authenticity then almost all of our historical records must also be questioned. British History collapses.

Thankfully however, It’s a DUCK

Pirate

And to think that 'Ripperology' is not considered a legitimate academic discipline!

I can't imagine why!

[Jeff Leahy]

Now whose avoiding the questions?

[Stewart P Evans]

Fakery

...
To my knowledge none of the people you mention have any criminal record for fraud and deception. Indeed the entire family to my knowledge are whiter than white.
Most authorities I have spoken to about Jim Swanson do NOT believe him capable of creating a hoax.
The Sums of money involved are so small they defy a logical explanation for a comparatively wealthy family having done so for money.
Both handwriting Experts who have studied the marginalia believe it was probably written by Donald Swanson.
The Marginalia is as genuine as most historical records can be…if we question its authenticity then almost all of our historical records must also be questioned. British History collapses.

A few points regarding the above -

Is a criminal record a prerequisite for fakery? Even a seasoned police officer would be incapable of assessing whether any particular person was capable of creating a hoax. I often had an elderly grandfather or grandmother under arrest for theft lying through their teeth that they were innocent when the evidence against them was solid. You lose faith in human nature as a police officer.

The motive in this case, if the fakery scenario were correct (and I am not suggesting that it is), would be to boost the status and recognition of an ancestor rather than any monetary gain.

Only probably written by Donald Swanson? Surely the A-Z tells us that "...the handwriting has been confirmed as Swanson's by the Home Office document examiner". This is a very precise and definitive statement, so why are you saying 'probably'?

"British history collapses"! That's a bit of an exaggeration isn't it? Or does the veracity of 'British history' really depend upon the authenticity of some obscure pieces of scribbling in an old book?

As a footnote I must add that I am not saying here that I think the marginalia is faked. I am merely responding to the ridiculous statements made above.

[Stewart P Evans]

The Swanson Marginalia

Apropos of 'the Swanson Marginalia' it should be noted that had it been properly examined when it entered the public arena in 1987/88 the present debates would in all probability, not be taking place.

Obvious points were missed and no proper forensic document examination was carried out. When I first examined the annotations in 2000 I immediately noticed that the pencil used on page 138 of the book was not the same as the one used on the endpaper notes which were shown as a continuation of the first notes. If I, no document expert, could spot these problems, why hadn't they been noted before?

Whilst not proving any sort of fakery these differences should have been addressed and explained years ago, and the present queries would not have been raised. The points I raised as a result of seeing the annotations 'in the flesh' were proved to be correct when the book was examined by Christopher Davies M.A., D.Phil. in 2006 when the book was donated to the Crime Museum.

Moreover, the difference between the handwriting in the body of the book (page 138), and on the rear free endpaper, according to the expert, may have been because they were written some time later when the writer was much older. He found that Swanson was probably the writer of the annotations. The fact that it is likely that the endpaper notes (where the problems lie) were written later and at a more advanced age is, of course, very relevant.

[Jeff Leahy]

I used the word PROBABLY because that was the word I required.

And while the annotations MAY have been written some time later there is also the possibility that they were written later on the same day when the author was tiered or simply had a drink. As you well know an exact estimation of the time lapse between annotations has not been given.

My theatrical use of the ‘collapse of British History’ was intended as a humorous response to a scenario that involved teenagers creating the Marginalia in order to save Daddy’s reputation. Clearly if the provenance and authenticity of every historical document from Magna-Carter onwards were called into question it would greatly alter our perceptions of what was.

I was NOT suggesting that a Criminal Record was a prerequisite for fakery, I was merely pointing out that there is no evidence to suggest that the people named in the scenario had any criminal record or convictions, and thus was establishing their ‘good characters’. Which is fair game for any defending Barrister in a hypothetical scenario.

As you well know the above A to Z quote was made before the results of the second examination. However the most important fact is that both handwriting experts confirmed that the writing was in all probability made by D S Swanson.

Therefore in matters relating to the supposed ID I think it fair, in the context of this thread, to state that Andersons claims in the book ‘The Lighter side of my official Life” about an identification appear to be corroborated independently by D S Swanson.

All the best
Pirate