The Curtis Bennett Inquiry

[David Orsam]

So the senior officer in Scotland Yard to whom all murder reports were to be sent during the summer of 1888 - and to whom the report into the murder of Martha Tabram was indeed sent - was severely reprimanded within barely a week of Tabram's murder.

A curious turn of events and, no doubt, for someone inclined to think that the murders might have been committed by a senior police officer, we even have a potential motive of revenge!

[David Orsam]

Letter from Home Office to Curtis Bennett dated 1 August 1888:

I am directed by the Secretary of State to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 27th ultimo as to the demeanour of an officer of the Metropolitan Police in giving evidence at the recent enquiry held by you and I am to inform you that the officer in question has been severely reprimanded. The Secretary of State has to express his regret at the conduct of the Police Officer in this matter.

[David Orsam]

Letter from the Home Office to the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police dated 31 July 1888:

With reference to the report from Superintendent forwarded by you on the 23rd instant respecting the evidence given by him before Mr. Curtis Bennett I am directed by the Secretary of State to transmit herewith a copy of a further letter on the subject from Mr. Bennett and to request that Superintendent Cutbush may be severely reprimanded.



N.B. Sir Charles Warren was on holiday at this time and it was Colonel Pearson who was Acting Commissioner on this date.

[David Orsam]

And me!

I don't suppose there's anything here? :
http://discovery.nationalarchives.go...ils/r/C4133082

I have to hand it to you Robert, you have done it again! I had previously searched the catalogue for that very file using the correspondence reference A48348 but I sheepishly now realise I transposed two of the numbers and thus thought the file had been destroyed like a large number of files from the period. Other word searches of mine didn't find it for some reason.

But, yes, this file does contain Curtis Bennett's report. In fact, I think it is probably the most complete file I have ever seen in all my researches; for it not only contains the report but also the full original manuscript notes of the evidence given at the inquiry as well as all the key original underlying documents. It's a researcher's dream! The only thing it doesn't have is the Home Office out-correspondence but that is in the confidential correspondence file HO 151/4 so between the two files I now have a 100% complete picture of what happened.

Bear with me because there is a huge amount of new material for me to absorb. But I will continue posting the correspondence I already intended to post in order to reveal the surprising outcome of this inquiry.

Thanks Robert!

[Mayerling]

I haven't been able to locate the Curtis Bennet report which would reveal everything (and I was wondering if anyone had seen it when I started this thread) but there is nevertheless a surprising - startling even - conclusion to this episode regarding Cutbush which I will be posting in due course.

It looks very promising and interesting I'm looking forward to this.

I keep thinking of the late 1940s and the "Lynsky Tribunal". But those results were published (I'm pretty certain).

Jeff

[Robert]

And me!

I don't suppose there's anything here? :

http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C4133082

[Abby Normal]

I look forward to that.

Steve

me too!

[Elamarna]

I haven't been able to locate the Curtis Bennet report which would reveal everything (and I was wondering if anyone had seen it when I started this thread) but there is nevertheless a surprising - startling even - conclusion to this episode regarding Cutbush which I will be posting in due course.

I look forward to that.

Steve

[David Orsam]

Looking very interesting, do you have an idea of the details of the comments by and regarding Cutbush.

I haven't been able to locate the Curtis Bennet report which would reveal everything (and I was wondering if anyone had seen it when I started this thread) but there is nevertheless a surprising - startling even - conclusion to this episode regarding Cutbush which I will be posting in due course.

[Elamarna]

Mr Evans gets his pension after all...

Letter from the Home Office to the Receiver dated 31 July 1888:

With reference to former correspondence I am directed by Mr. Secretary Matthews to inform you that he has now been pleased to grant a Superannuation Allowance of £195:6:9 per annum to Mr. H.K. Evans, late Clerk in your Office, and to signify to you his authority for the payment of the same from the 30th ultimo.

Looking very interesting, do you have an idea of the details of the comments by and regarding Cutbush.


Steve

[David Orsam]

Mr Evans gets his pension after all...

Letter from the Home Office to the Receiver dated 31 July 1888:

With reference to former correspondence I am directed by Mr. Secretary Matthews to inform you that he has now been pleased to grant a Superannuation Allowance of £195:6:9 per annum to Mr. H.K. Evans, late Clerk in your Office, and to signify to you his authority for the payment of the same from the 30th ultimo.

[David Orsam]

Letter from the Home Office to Curtis Bennett dated 26 July 1888:

With reference to your recent Enquiry into certain charges against a clerk in the office of the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District I am directed by Mr Secretary Matthews to forward herewith for any observations you may have to offer a copy of an explanation by Mr Cutbush as to the evidence given by him before you.

[David Orsam]

Letter from the Home Office to Alfred Richard Pennefather, Receiver of the Metropolitan Police, dated 14 July 1888.

I am directed by the Secretary of State to transmit herewith copy of the report of the enquiries conducted by Mr. Curtis Bennett into the charges made against a clerk in your office; and I am to express Mr. Matthews’ satisfaction at the general tenor of this report. It is unnecessary to say that the borrowing from any Police Contractor by a member of your staff is a grave impropriety: but the practice which appears to some extent to have obtained in your Department of members dealing for private purposes with Police Contractors or receiving Christmas presents or gratuities from them is one which cannot be permitted: and the Secretary of State relies on you strictly to enforce the Rule which you have issued on the subject. I am to call your attention to the evidence given before Mr. Bennett by Mr. Cook: “I lent him (Mr. Mills Jr) £10 about last August: his accounts were incorrect he told me” and I am to call for a full explanation of what was meant by the accounts being incorrect. I am further to say that the conduct of Mr. Cook in lending money with little or no expectation of repayment to Mr. Evans and Mr. Mills, appears to the Secretary of State to disqualify him from taking any Police Contract. A separate letter will be sent you with respect to Mr. Evans.

[David Orsam]

Letter from the Home Office to Sir Charles Warren dated 14 July 1888:

I am directed by the Secretary of State to transmit herewith copy of the report of the Enquiry conducted by Mr Curtis Bennett into certain charges made against a clerk in the Office of the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District. With reference to Mr. Bennett's observations I am to suggest that you should issue a police order prohibiting all members of the Metropolitan Police Department and Force from receiving any gratuity or present from any person whom they have reason to believe to be a Contractor to the Police or from having any pecuniary or business dealings with such persons. I am to call your attention to Mr. Bennett's remarks respecting the conduct of Superintendent Cutbush and to say that Mr. Matthews would wish you to obtain from that officer and forward to the Home Office any observations that he may think fit to offer.

[David Orsam]

All the following correspondence is from HO 151/4.

Letter from the Home Office to Mr Curtis Bennett dated 14 July 1888

I am directed by the Secretary of State to express to you his thanks for the very careful enquiry which you have conducted into certain charges brought against a clerk in the office of the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District, and for the report made by you thereon.