the police career of Sir Melville Macnaghten

[Johnr]

Lately the pendulum appears to have swung back slightly in favour of MM having had some good points as a police administrator.

There have been mentions of him correcting a junior officer's minor mistake in
identification which had later greater importance on the case.

He was in charge when fingerprinting replaced the Bertillon method of criminal investigation.(I believe this was partly influenced by the Adolph Beck cases of 1896 and 1904, where an extraordinarly number of women wrongly identified Beck as the swindler, when, in fact, it was William Thomas).

I understand the use of albums of mug-shots of repeat offenders was introduced around 1889, and MM mentions something like " using our albums against them..".

I would be interested to hear pluses and minuses for actions Sir Melville Macnaghten approved or instigated during his term as head of the C.I.D. then as Assistant Commissioner.

Too much emphasis on the (important) mistakes in the Macnaghten Memorandum may have coloured our view of him perhaps too distortedly.

Doubtless, his memoirs trace some of this interesting history - for it is not just Macnaghten's history but the whole Metropolitan detective forces history.

I should be very interested to have other people's opinions.JOHN RUFFELS.

[lynn cates]

Sir Melville's memory

Hello John. Funny you should mention his mistakes in the memorandum. These seem to be minor errors and based upon the memory of an older chap. Take the Druitt information. He spews out a 4 instead of a 3 in the left digit of his age. Is that really a major error--especially in a memorandum of that kind? And he said "doctor" instead of doctor's son. (Of course, it is possible, after all, that Montague had some training in medicine, or so I have been given to understand.)

All in all, I don't see these errors as the kind of damning indictment against Sir Melville that some others see.

The best.
LC

[Sam Flynn]

And he said "doctor" instead of doctor's son.

Actually, he says "said to be a doctor", which - to me - clearly shows that he was willing to accept hearsay as evidence, and that he was prepared to use rumour to drive a point home. I certainly see that as "damning", considering his position at the time and the subsequent influence his writings have had on the Ripper case.

[lynn cates]

old chaps

Hello Sam. Of course he had private information which, likely was hearsay or rumour. You must remember how we old chaps behave. We recall olden days, etc. and think a good deal about them. But don't count us out just yet!

Besides, one may unofficially subscribe to any theory.

The best.
LC

[Sam Flynn]

Hello Lynn

Of course he had private information which, likely was hearsay or rumour.

If Macnaghten was happy to go into writing with a mere "said to be", furthermore using this factoid in support of his own pet theory, it casts rather a pall over his critical faculties, if you ask me.

[lynn cates]

raconteur

Hello Sam. There are critical faculties and there are critical faculties. Sometimes we employ one hemisphere of the brain; sometimes another.

What's wrong with using one set of skills to write up an official police report; a different set of skills when musing about an old case and being a bit of a raconteur?

The best.
LC

[Sam Flynn]

What's wrong with using one set of skills to write up an official police report; a different set of skills when musing about an old case and being a bit of a raconteur?

As I said earlier: "considering his position at the time and the subsequent influence his writings have had on the Ripper case".

Irrespective of the context, for a man like Macnaghten to have used hearsay - incorrect hearsay, at that - as the basis and support for a pet theory is gob-smackingly naive, and profoundly worrying for that very reason.

[lynn cates]

hearsay

Hello Sam. By "incorrect hearsay," I presume you refer to MJD's occupation?

The best.
LC

[Sam Flynn]

Hello Sam. By "incorrect hearsay," I presume you refer to MJD's occupation?

Predominantly that, Lynn - although I dare say that there are other points covered by Macnaghten that might not have been fully substantiated either. Not that ensuring the facts were correct before arriving at his conclusion seems to have troubled Macnaghten much in this specific context. Another tick in the "profoundly worrying" box as far as I'm concerned.

[Robert]

Among other errors he says that Druitt disappeared at the time of the Kelly murder, and that Supt Cutbush was Thomas Cutbush's uncle. As the year was only 1894, this is a bit worrying.

[jason_c]

Actually, he says "said to be a doctor", which - to me - clearly shows that he was willing to accept hearsay as evidence, and that he was prepared to use rumour to drive a point home. I certainly see that as "damning", considering his position at the time and the subsequent influence his writings have had on the Ripper case.

Sam

I dont believe it is damning.

MM admitted Druitt was "said to be" a doctor - he is not misleading himself or any reader of the memorandum. He also said Druitt was "more likely" to have committed the murders than Ostrog/Kosminski. He is not convicing us of Druitt's guilt. If MM had used these "facts" and rumours to attempt convict Druitt in a court of law then it would be damning.

He is not using hearsay as any sort of legal evidence, more using hearsay to promote a pet theory to his employers.

[Sam Flynn]

I dont believe it is damning.

His opinions have damned Druitt to a posthumous ignominy he scarcely deserved, Jason.

MM admitted Druitt was "said to be" a doctor

And in using those words, he demonstrated quite clearly that he was acting on partial information. In other words, he admitted to not truly knowing what he was on about.

he is not misleading himself or any reader of the memorandum.

He included an almost certainly innocent man on a list of "more likely" Ripper suspects, on the basis of mere hearsay and/or demonstrably faulty information. For a man in his position, that was an utterly astonishing thing to do. I mean, he didn't even check! It's not as if he couldn't have easily verified his "more likely" suspect's particulars before putting pen to paper.

He is not convicing us of Druitt's guilt.

Quite a few have been, on the basis of Macnaghten's sponsorship of him, and it seems that Macnaghten himself personally suspected Druitt was a strong suspect - on the basis of no concrete evidence at all! I'd say that was pretty much indefensible, irrespective of whom he intended his "audience" to be.

[lynn cates]

MM

Hello Sam. Your dictum:

"His opinions have damned Druitt to a posthumous ignominy he scarcely deserved."

might be a bit of a petitio principii. Perhaps some day, when the good reverend Spallek finishes his investigation, we'll know for sure.

I'm not altogether convinced that MM had no concrete evidence. Perhaps he did and it, too, was consigned to the flames.

The best.
LC

[Robert]

Hi all

Just to day that John's thread was meant to be about MM's whole career, pluses and minuses.

So, what kind of cop was this dude?

[Sam Flynn]

I'm not altogether convinced that MM had no concrete evidence.

If so, Lynn, whence "said to be"? It's surely as plain as a pikestaff that he was relying on hearsay, and not fact. That the hearsay has been shown to have been erroneous in key areas only compounds MM's lack of judgment in this specific matter, and the fact that he himself could have avoided those errors by means of a simple check only serves to underline it.