Timelining and revealing the MM

[Trevor Marriott]

I was not referring to you Phil.

Well name and shame I wont be offended. !

[mariab]

Phil Carter wrote:
This is correct. The A-Z does not feature the complete Aberconway transcript.
Yes, I would be very surprised if it did, Mr. Carter. (And another reason not to spend my hard-earned cash to buy the A-Z yet – in its current version.)

Trevor Marriott wrote:
what are the reasons they wont publish the document in question, and why wont they come forward and let us know who has it. Being the suspicious person i am I am thinking there might be something there they dont want us to see.
But they did come forward and let us know who has it (in a cryptic fashion). I'm the suspicious type too, but in this case I'm POSITIVE it's NOT because they are allegedly hiding information which would damage their so-called “pet projects“. I can see other reasons why they keep sources to themselves.
By the by, it's amazing how similar Ripperology is to musicology sometimes (when important sources are involved). And it's refreshing to watch internal conflicts unfold in another area than my own line of work.

[Trevor Marriott]

Phil Carter wrote:
This is correct. The A-Z does not feature the complete Aberconway transcript.
Yes, I would be very surprised if it did, Mr. Carter. (And another reason not to spend my hard-earned cash to buy the A-Z yet – in its current version.)

Trevor Marriott wrote:
what are the reasons they wont publish the document in question, and why wont they come forward and let us know who has it. Being the suspicious person i am I am thinking there might be something there they dont want us to see.
But they did come forward and let us know who has it (in a cryptic fashion). I'm the suspicious type too, but in this case I'm POSITIVE it's NOT because they are allegedly hiding information which would damage their so-called “pet projects“. I can see other reasons why they keep sources to themselves.
By the by, it's amazing how similar Ripperology is to musicology sometimes (when important sources are involved). And it's refreshing to watch internal conflicts unfold in another area than my own line of work.

Maria
There is no conflict as far as i am concerned it is quite simple whoever has the document or transcriptions should make it known or give the reasons why they choose to keep it squirreled away.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Maria,

Please call me Phil...I feel more at home with that. :-)

Stewart,

Thank you.

Trevor,

It will be most interesting to see what answer (if any) you get from the Aberconway family.

best wishes

Phil

[mariab]

To Phil Carter:
OK, Phil it is then from now on.
By the by, an unrelated question: I've repeatedly tried to look up for Victorian information at oldbaileyonline.com and this thing most certainly DOESN'T work for researching historical criminal records. (I've tried for Tumblety too, among else.) Does anyone have any idea of what's going on here, and could anyone direct me to the correct internet link for such research (of Victorian criminal records online)?

To Trevor Marriott:
The best of lucks with the Aberconway family.
Hmmm... As I recall you were not very forthcoming yourself neither when Chris and I kept asking you the same question over and over again pertaining to the other 2 suspects (minus "Macgrath“) in the Special Branch ledgers.

[Jonathan H]

I am sorry to be thick, but I am hopelessly confused again?

Let me go back to a basic question -- which I ask of anybody.

Is there a secondary source which I can buy, or download, or whatever, which contains the full version of the Aberconway version of the 1894 Macnaghten Report?

[mariab]

To Jonathan H.:
I'm so sorry, but it looks like NO secondary source features the entire Aberconway file. You could try your luck writing to the A-Z editors, who most certainly own a copy of the entire document (even if they haven't published it in its entirety).
Now I wish someone would answer my own question, and direct me to a database where I could research Victorian criminal records online. (Sigh.)

[Chris]

Does anyone have any idea of what's going on here, and could anyone direct me to the correct internet link for such research (of Victorian criminal records online)?

I think it's just that the Old Bailey Online website covers only the records of the Central Criminal Court, not those of other courts.

I believe ancestry.co.uk has some criminal registers as part of one of its enhanced subscriptions (I don't think they are part of the basic package).

[mariab]

Thank you so much, Chris.
Tom Wescott claimed to me that (years ago, not recently) he located transcripts of the threat letters written by Le Grand to several old ladies at theoldbailey.com, but actually it makes more sense if he located these transcripts in the newspapers. The problem with theoldbailey.com, at least when I access it from my computer, is not simply that it features only the Central Criminal Court, but it's not showing any criminal records at all! Whenever I initiate a search of criminal records, it redirects me to a link to “crime lawyers“. (???) I've been trying this for a week. Any ideas of why this is happening?
An enhanced subscription at ancestry.co.uk is unfortunately out of the question, at least for the moment.
With many apologies for having mis-directed this thread.

[Trevor Marriott]

To Jonathan H.:
I'm so sorry, but it looks like NO secondary source features the entire Aberconway file. You could try your luck writing to the A-Z editors, who most certainly own a copy of the entire document (even if they haven't published it in its entirety).
Now I wish someone would answer my own question, and direct me to a database where I could research Victorian criminal records online. (Sigh.)

Maria
You are most certainly right that our eminemt ripperologists do own a copies and I suspect one may own the original.

I have today heard back from the Aberconway Family who state they do not know where the Aberconway version is. In fact one member was surprised to know of its existence in the first place which would suggest that it has not been around the family home for many years. I would say 20 or more that takes us back to the 1980`s when our eminent ripperologists were going at full throttle having their hands full with the swanson marginlia and the Aberconway version.

Its a sad state of affairs everyone in the world of ripperology should be working together to get to the truth not just as to who the killer or killers were but the truth surrounding all the documents which researchers both old and new seek to rely on. But it seem some cant handle the truth or dont want the truth to be revealed.

I expect Stewart to appear on strictly come dancing any time now he has side stepped my simple question several times without giving an answer.

[Stewart P Evans]

Hide

Now I wonder who those eminent ripperologists could be and what are the reasons they wont publish the document in question, and why wont they come forward and let us know who has it
Being the suspicious person i am I am thinking there might be something there they dont want us to see. But perhaps someone will allay all my fears so i can sleep easy tonight

Trevor, I certainly don't have anything to hide and I don't think that there is anything in the full 'Aberconway version' of earth shattering importance.

As the document is not mine to publish I am obviously unable to do so. From what has appeared in the A to Z it would seem that they do have a copy of the document. Whether or not publication of the full version is planned I do not know. But I certainly wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

Your enquiries with the Aberconway family are certainly interesting and, as you say, raise the question as to what has become of the original. I raised similar queries regarding the O'Donnell manuscript.

[Stewart P Evans]

A To Z

...
I have today heard back from the Aberconway Family who state they do not know where the Aberconway version is. In fact one member was surprised to know of its existence in the first place which would suggest that it has not been around the family home for many years. I would say 20 or more that takes us back to the 1980`s when our eminent ripperologists were going at full throttle having their hands full with the swanson marginlia and the Aberconway version.
Its a sad state of affairs everyone in the world of ripperology should be working together to get to the truth not just as to who the killer or killers were but the truth surrounding all the documents which researchers both old and new seek to rely on. But it seem some cant handle the truth or dont want the truth to be revealed.
I expect Stewart to appear on strictly come dancing any time now he has side stepped my simple question several times without giving an answer.

Trevor, if you have some specific query as to a part of the content of the Aberconway version I might be able to address it for you. I have already answered a couple here, giving the Cutbush family reference.

Back in the 1980s the authors of the A To Z did some excellent work in progressing our knowledge of the case and I am sure that they have no 'agenda' regarding the Aberconway version. As I have stated, I am sure that it was published in an edited version merely to avoid what they saw as unnecessary and word-consuming repetition.

By the way, I never could dance.

[Jonathan H]

Oh, I see: it's being held but not published.

How unfortunate.

Can I ask you, Stewart, if there is any wording different in the way the 'Draft' or backdated rewrite, deals with Coles/Sadler -- presumably at the end?

If you cannot answer because of, you know, the copyright issue, and so on, then that's fair enough.

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, if you have some specific query as to a part of the content of the Aberconway version I might be able to address it for you. I have already answered a couple here, giving the Cutbush family reference.

Back in the 1980s the authors of the A To Z did some excellent work in progressing our knowledge of the case and I am sure that they have no 'agenda' regarding the Aberconway version. As I have stated, I am sure that it was published in an edited version merely to avoid what they saw as unnecessary and word-consuming repetition.

By the way, I never could dance.

Thank you for that I do not have any specific line of enquiry regarding this document but I personally would like to read it so as i can satisy myself that there are no ambiguities that have not alreday been covered or documented pervioulsy.

All part of carrying out a thorough investigation which i am sure you can appreciate and welcome whole heartedly.

By the way I learnt to dance over the years maybe I should come and give you some lessons.

[Stewart P Evans]

Importance

Oh, I see: it's being held but not published.
How unfortunate.
Can I ask you, Stewart, if there is any wording different in the way the 'Draft' or backdated rewrite, deals with Coles/Sadler -- presumably at the end?
If you cannot answer because of, you know, the copyright issue, and so on, then that's fair enough.

It's quite surprising, given its importance, that the Aberconway version has never been published in full. Especially as authors such as Cullen and Farson used it as their main support for their theorising.

On pages 6-7 the Aberconway version states, "(2) Alice McKenzie was found on 17th July 1889 with her throat stabbed in Castle Abbey [sic], Aldgate. No evidence was forthcoming and no arrests were made. The stab in the throat was identically the same as that in the case of (3) Frances Coles in Swallow Gardens on 13th Feb. 1891 for which Thomas Sadler, a Ship's fireman was arrested, and - after several remands - discharged! It was subsequently ascertained that Sadler had sailed for the Baltic on 19th July '89 and was in Whitechapel on 17th the night when Alice McKenzie was killed. He was a man of ungovernable temper, and entirely addicted to drink and the company of the lowest prostitutes. I have no doubt whatever in my own mind as to his having murdered Frances Coles - ..."