Timelining and revealing the MM

[Stewart P Evans]

Agree

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.

Trevor, I can but agree, it is most odd that neither Cullen nor Farson, both proposing Druitt as the Ripper based on the Aberconway version, published the full document. I am sure that you could teach me a thing or two about dancing.

[Jonathan H]

Thanks so much for that Stewart!

My God, he actually wrote that Sadler was definitely the murderer of Coles, in his opinion.

Once more, we see Macnaghten I think beefing up the official version in the backdated rewrite.

In this case, that the police had the right miscreant for this murder but could not make it stick. Still, that makes the police look infinitely better than the story of 1891; that they had the wrong man completely who successfully sued the press.

It also makes better sense as to why Mac dumped Lawende from existence.

He needed that witness, who had said 'no' to Sadler as Jack to vanish, replaced by a beat cop who saw ... a suspect who resembles Druitt. That's a touch close to the knuckle, especially as he is claiming that the latter was 41 and 'Jack the Sailor' was a young er man, like Montie.

So, he moves the nothing suspect, 'Kosminski', across to the Eddowes murder and we have the ethnicities of witness and suspect exactly reversed.

Remember, this was document, an alleged 'Home Office Report', which would have to fool George Sims -- so the sighting of Druitt with Eddowes would have to go, so that he could tell him that he looked just like the Blackheath Jekyll!

[Chris]

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?

Sorry - I didn't notice the problem with the URL in your previous message. The one you want is:

http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, I can but agree, it is most odd that neither Cullen nor Farson, both proposing Druitt as the Ripper based on the Aberconway version, published the full document. I am sure that you could teach me a thing or two about dancing.

Well we both should be proficent hoofers having regard to the merry dances we have been led over our long and distinguished careers.

I am not so good on the dancing nowadays but still very good at ducking and diving !!!!!!

[Chris]

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 - ..."

I think that extract shows how fascinating it would be to have the full text published (as I've thought for some time).

I trust someone will be contacted the authors of the A-Z to ask if they would be willing to make it available, perhaps on this website? As the material will still be in copyright, I think the family's permission would also be required, so Trevor's approach to them would be valuable in that respect.

[Stewart P Evans]

'Alleged'

Thanks so much for that Stewart!
...
Remember, this was document, an alleged 'Home Office Report', which would have to fool George Sims -- so the sighting of Druitt with Eddowes would have to go, so that he could tell him that he looked just like the Blackheath Jekyll!

I think that it is Keith who should be thanked, for it is credit to him that the early research he carried out ensured that this information was not lost.

I am not sure what "an alleged 'Home Office Report'" is. I am certain that this memorandum was written for the information of Sir Edward Bradford the Chief Commissioner of Police. On reading the reports, and noting parliamentary interest, Bradford would undoubtedly have asked Anderson and/or Macnaghten what it was all about. It seems that Macnaghten wrote his memorandum to provide Bradford with the required information.

[Phil Carter]

Efforts and timelining

Well, getting that published is something I would support wholeheartedly. I know you're not the first to have tried, so good luck.

Hello Chris,

Good morning. Back on post 7 you wrote the above. In conjunction with this, may I kindly ask you if you in your efforts found out where the Aberconway version currently is to try to get it published, and what sort of conclusion you came to as to it's whereabouts after 1974 when Lady Christabel Aberconway died? (and 1975 when Don Rumbelow wrote that it was in her posession)

In advance, thank you for your help.

best wishes

Phil

[Chris]

Good morning. Back on post 7 you wrote the above. In conjunction with this, may I kindly ask you if you in your efforts found out where the Aberconway version currently is to try to get it published, and what sort of conclusion you came to as to it's whereabouts after 1974 when Lady Christabel Aberconway died? (and 1975 when Don Rumbelow wrote that it was in her posession)

I haven't done anything on this myself - I only know that at least one other person has contacted the family to ask about it.

[Phil Carter]

I think that it is Keith who should be thanked, for it is credit to him that the early research he carried out ensured that this information was not lost.

Hello Stewart,

Good morning. Do you know when Keith Skinner's efforts in acquiring a copy of the Aberconway version was, and from whom? As Keith does not post on Casebook, (I would of course ask him directly if I could) I kindly ask you, if you are able.

Chris,

The suggestion of yours to ask the combined authors of the A-Z to reprint the socument on Casebook is an excellent one, if not at least a transcribed version of the complete document. If somebody would be so kind as to do this, I am sure that it would be very helpful for one and all.

My apologies for mis-reading your efforts. Would it be possible for you to kindly contact the person of whom you know of and ask how far that person got in trying to trace the document and whom he contacted? Many thanks.

All,

Stewart's mention of the Farson/Cullen involvement and their own interest

"it is most odd that neither Cullen nor Farson, both proposing Druitt as the Ripper based on the Aberconway version, published the full document." is indeed intruiging and odd.

This, together with the posting I had in post No.1 about Lady Aberconway's "mischeivous" comments, the contrary comments as to the destruction/existance of MacNaugthen's "papers", the descrepancies between the Aberconway version and the Scotland Yard version, the introduction of a "false" third version (the Donner version), and the following comment from Colin Wilson and Robin Odell's book from 1988 'Jack the Ripper, Summing Up and Verdict', page 212 of the 1988 version,

"..It was not immediately clear which version of the notes Tom Cullen had used, but Don Rumbelow eventually conformed from Cullen himself that he had referred to the typewritten notes belonging to Lady Aberconway. It was later to emerge that there were at least two slightly different renderings of these." (my emphasis)

Now, according to Stephen Knight's book, "Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution" (1977 and various paperback reprint editions),
"Two authors recently made detailed examinations of the case.. (Farson and Cullen)...Both books are based upon private notes apparently written by Sir Melville MacNagthen , copied by his daughter, the Dowager Lady Aberconway, and recopied by the authors.... the notes used by Varson and Cullen vary in major points from NacNagthen's official notes..."

he continues..

"... the notes used by Messrs Farson and Druitt appear to be rough and inaccurate copies. Whether the mistakes occured in Lady Aberconway's first transcription, or in the subsequent copies, it is impossible to say Over so many years and in so many versions it is hardly surprising that statements have emerged which have little bearing on the originals." ( my edit here..he refers to the Scotland Yard version as "originals")

The above is intruiging. There are suggestions here that the "Aberconway version" was never actually seen apart from Dan Farson. For if he made his own copies, and Cullen did the same, (note: in varying versions, as stated above), we then travel in time to Don Rumbelow in 1975 who confirmed that the "Aberconway version was "in her posession" and confirmed that Cullen used the "typewriiten" notes. (my empahsis)

Now if THAT is the case, and the Aberconway family today do NOT know of the whereabouts of the document (my thanks to Trevor Marriott for his efforts to ascertain where the document is), one starts to wonder if there is, in actual fact an Aberconway version at all, and that it wasn't just a Farson version of the Scotland Yard original? To oppose this, Knight states that neither Farson nor Cullen had access to the Scotland Yard version.

Stewart is wondering about the whereabouts of the "Aberconway version", as we all are. Something about this is odd. Just when was the original "Aberconway version" last seen, as opposed to a copied transcript from either Farson or Cullen, or a photocopied copy of one of a Farson /Cullen version? (my emphasis)

best wishes

Phil

[Jonathan H]

To Stewart

Yes, Keith Skinner needs to be congratulated --and also for finding the MP story. I think that was the best theory that could be come up with that he was the one who found what I consider the 'Rosetta Stone' of the whole mystery.

What do I mean by 'Home Office Report', Stewart?

I mean that the official version was no doubt prepared for that dept. of state but never sent there, never requested, and went into the Scotland Yard archive never to see the light of day until the relevant bits were leaked to Odell in 1966, and the whole thing was published, with permission, by Rumbelow in 1975.

But Major Griffiths did not see this significantly different document, in which Druitt is almost nothing -- but better than Cutbush -- instead seeing the other version.

The Major, and later Sims, was not told that this was a flawed 'draft'. They were told that this was an exact copy of a 'Home Office Report'. That it was sent to the Home Office, and furthermore that it was 'final' and 'conclusive'.

Not only is this not true, but it does not even reflect the character of the actual document which resided in SY files. [Plus both versions seriously mislead in implying that Druitt was known to the Ripper hunters either before he died, or just after].

Yet, in 1903 Sims as Dagonet would claim it was the definitive Report which meant that it was the monolithic opinion of the Yard and the govt. that the 'Drowned Doctor' was almost certainly the fiend.

It is Sims' ace in the hole in his media war with Abberline [and to a lesser extent Reid?] in slapping him down for daring to question his pompous pontifications about the suicided suspect. He also, as part of his ace, alludes to who wrote the Report: the Assisstant Commissioner himself, eg. Macnaghten.

Even somebody as shrewd, as experienced, and as well connected as Jack Littlechild shows in his 1913 letter to Sims, trying to alert him that 'Dr D' could not be a suspect contemporaneous with the 1888 to early 1891 investigation, does not realize that it was Macnaghten who was the progenitor of the 'Drowned Doctor' mythos -- he thinks it must be the egocentric Anderson.

[Stewart P Evans]

The Ripper Legacy

Jonathan, an essential book for anyone interested in this aspect of the case is The Ripper Legacy by Martin Howells and Keith Skinner, 1987, in which the Aberconway version and its provenance is discussed in some detail (pp. 124-126). I suggest that you read and internalise this and then decide which questions remain unanswered.

[Stewart P Evans]

Relevant

Keith is happy for the relevant pages of his book to be reproduced here for those who may not have a copy.

[mklhawley]

Keith is happy for the relevant pages of his book to be reproduced here for those who may not have a copy.

[ATTACH]10477[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]10478[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]10479[/ATTACH]

Stewart,

Small favor. Since you are uploading things, would you please upload your JTR memory files? I believe the USB port is behind your left ear. Thanks.

Mike

[Phil Carter]

Hello Stewart,

Thank you for contacting Keith Skinner and please thank him for allowing the presentation of his pages from his book. The indication is that Daniel Farson recieved copies re-typed out by Lady Aberconway's Secretary. Likewise Tom Cullen. The originals having disappeared in India, or since then, 1968.

I do however wonder of the following comment from Lady Aberconway in reply to Philip Loftus, as reported to Donald Rumbelow..

"My elder sister, ten years older than myself, took all my father's papers when my mother died, which is why Gerald has them. I have never seen them. But in my father's book "Days of my Years" he talks of "Jack the Ripper"... that is all the information I can give." (my emphasis)

I reflect upon this as I also do with the statements quoted from in post no. 1.

best wishes

Phil

[mariab]

Thanks so much to all for all the pertinent information, and I fully agree that someone ought to ask the A-Z editors to post the Aberconway full text version on casebook.
Jonathan H. wrote:
It also makes better sense as to why Mac dumped Lawende from existence.
He needed that witness, who had said 'no' to Sadler as Jack to vanish, replaced by a beat cop who saw ... a suspect who resembles Druitt.
I think I agree.
To Chris:
Thank you so much, I'll try the oldbaileyonline.org site. The oldbaileyonline.com is a pain in the butt, and doesn't seem to contain any historical records. By the by, Debra Aliff (I hope I spelled her last name correctly) PMed me with more info pertaining to this. And I'll attempt to look up for possible criminal records for Le Grand in Paris, either at the Archives Nationales or in police records. (With apologies for drifting off-subject again.)
And I can't take off my mind the image of SPE and Trevor Marriott waltzing together(wearing police attire and helmets?).