New Article on the Swanson Marginalia in Ripperologist 128

[Simon Wood]

Hi Adam,

Thank you.

In stating the memo was "believed lost" I was merely quoting a footnote from the 2006 book JtR:SYI, in which the first page of the memo was reproduced.

Regards,

Simon

[AdamNeilWood]

Hi All,

I have a question which I am not certain is awkward or not.

When exactly, following its first page having been photographed and published, did Sir Charles Warren's 15th September 1888 "eyes and ears" Swanson memo become "believed lost"?

Regards,

Simon

Hi Simon,

I wouldn't say it's "believed lost" as such, Nevill Swanson says "present whereabouts unknown", believing it's in the family somewhere. Remember, he still has a pile of papers to go through so it could very well be amongst those.

Best wishes
Adam

[AdamNeilWood]

I was expecting someone to say that the news of the world items had been seen in 1990 or something - or failing that then someone with the right connections might chip in and say that they would recommend that the news of the world items be gathered together and taken to news international for an opinion.

If you take the trouble to read the article, it's clear that Charles Nevin of the Telegraph knew that Jim Swanson had approached the NOTW in 1981 - Jim showed him the letter from Robert Warren releasing him from their contract. Regarding anyone seeing the correspondence since, here's a post by Chris dated 23 July 2011. The first line will tell you why no Ripperologist has seen these letters until very recently:

The Swanson family recently came across Jim Swanson's correspondence from the 1980s concerning the 'marginalia', and kindly made it available to Keith Skinner. Keith suggested it might be useful if I posted a summary of the salient information here. This post summarises the chronology. Below I'll post some extracts from the letters, in which Jim Swanson wrote about his grandfather, described the material and explained his reasons for offering it for publication.

So despite it being clear that the NOTW were involved in discussions with Jim Swanson, you want someone to contact the families of dead journalists to ask whether the signatures are genuine? Shall we get someone to authenticate Nevin's emails to me as well while we're at it?

Or someone might say that the warren letter was indeed closely examined before it was mislaid - whenever it was mislaid. Or some sort of exPlanation might be forthcoming as to why the Swansons did not check through their documents back in 1981 when they first - we are told - tried to sell the story. Why didn't they check everything then? Did anyone in this field who met with them subsequently ask if there was anything else?

Seeing as the first any Ripperologist knew of the Marginalia was when Charles Nevin contacted Martin Fido and Don Rumbelow for opinion in 1987, I don't see how anyone could have asked Jim Swanson what else he might have had in 1981, apart from Charles Sandell of the NOTW. Perhaps someone should contact his family and while authenticating his signature ask if he happened to keep a diary detailing what he asked Jim Swanson back in 1981?

It's already been posted that Nevill Swanson is presently collating documents and papers from all sides of the family, and that further information might very well come to light (including the Warren letter). But you've already cast doubt on this drip-feed of information, and that it's suspicious all the evidence is coming from one source. So what would be the point of finding further information?

I was expecting something to be said about this rather than silence. Everything I have raised Could be addressed and it hasn't been.

I gave you a possible explanation for the unused NOTW article appearing in the Crime Museum and you dismissed it. Just because you didn't agree with the idea, it doesn't mean it wasn't addressed.

What is actually known about ds swanson's medical condition in his latter years? Am I right in suggesting that nothing is known? Apart from the snippet that he liked threading flies for his fishing trips. A fiddly job if ever there was one.

Putting aside whether or not Swanson could thread one, where does it say that he enjoyed fly fishing?

As for the pencil writing, I would suggest that adults from a professional background would tend not to write letters in pencil - annotations fair enough. There should surely be suitable examples in pen.

What about address books? Or police notepads? Would you expect Swanson to use ink when writing in those? The address book contains entries in ink, but the majority in pencil. Perhaps someone researched all his friends and acquaintances and knocked up an address book to show Swanson did write in pencil, even going as far to identify his dentist, tailor and estate agent?

[Phil H]

As far as I know, you're the first person to suggest Warren's order putting Swanson in charge of the case is (or may be) a fake. It was photographed, and the photograph was published.

I don't recall ever seeing this document described as a "fake" but I seem to remember that it was for many years ascribed to Anderson and not Warren.

As an aside, in my youth (1950s) my father (a local Government official), writing at home, often used pencil - and indelible pencil at that. Tolkien, writing in the 20s/30s and later, often wrote initial drafts in pencil,. (His son's History of Middle Earth - about the development of JRR Tolkien's fiction, describes this in detail.)

Phil H

[Chris]

As for the pencil writing, I would suggest that adults from a professional background would tend not to write letters in pencil - annotations fair enough. There should surely be suitable examples in pen.

As far as I know, no one has suggested there aren't examples written in ink. I believe there's no shortage of such examples.

What Dr Davies said in his original report was that writing in pencil could be different from writing in ink, and that he might be able to be more definite in his conclusions if he had examples written in pencil for comparison. In other words, examples of DSS's handwriting in ink are of less relevance, because the annotations were written in pencil.

As for the rest of your comments, what can one say? Apparently if one says nothing, you're going to present that as further evidence to support your suggestion that these documents may have been faked. So, to be brief:
(1) As far as I know, you're the first person to suggest Warren's order putting Swanson in charge of the case is (or may be) a fake. It was photographed, and the photograph was published. What more you expect in the way of "close examination" I don't know. Have you actually any reason to think it may not be what it seems? And why do you think this document is relevant in any way to the authenticity of the annotations?
(2) What exactly are you suggesting the Swanson family should have checked for in 1981, and why? Obviously they were in a position to know that the annotations hadn't been faked (unless someone had broken into the family home and faked them). No one suggested in 1981 that they had been faked. So what do you think they should have been checking for, and why?
(3) If you do a Google search, you will find that arteriosclerosis/atherosclerosis can indeed cause tremor.

[Lechmere]

Chris
I was expecting someone to say that the news of the world items had been seen in 1990 or something - or failing that then someone with the right connections might chip in and say that they would recommend that the news of the world items be gathered together and taken to news international for an opinion.
Or someone might say that the warren letter was indeed closely examined before it was mislaid - whenever it was mislaid.
Or some sort of exPlanation might be forthcoming as to why the Swansons did not check through their documents back in 1981 when they first - we are told - tried to sell the story. Why didn't they check everything then?
Did anyone in this field who met with them subsequently ask if there was anything else?
I was expecting something to be said about this rather than silence.
Everything I have raised Could be addressed and it hasn't been.
What is actually known about ds swanson's medical condition in his latter years? Am I right in suggesting that nothing is known? Apart from the snippet that he liked threading flies for his fishing trips. A fiddly job if ever there was one.
As for the pencil writing, I would suggest that adults from a professional background would tend not to write letters in pencil - annotations fair enough. There should surely be suitable examples in pen.

[Chris]

The most noteworthy aspect of this is that (leaving aside a few minor details such as Swanson’s death certificate) not one of the substantive issues I have raised in this entire thread has been addressed.

The whole point about the kind of innuendo you've been posting is that it cannot be addressed.

I mean - for heaven's sake - what response do you expect if you post something like "This document is written in pencil" as a reason for doubting its authenticity? Do you want someone to compile a list of authentic documents that were written in pencil for you?

[Lechmere]

Chris
You suggested that the tests to establish the legitimacy of the Swanson collection were too stringent so I took the trouble to set out what the relevant tests might be. I am sorry if you think it was a tedious meaningless screed.
Would have to guess that your vague pointer to the Casebook Wiki was a reference to Swanson’s death certificate, reference to which I found there.
You invited me to conduct my own research to answer the issues I raised. Unfortunately I do not have access to the Swanson Collection nor to Scotland Yard and this makes it a little difficult.

The issues I raised I hope might be of help to those with an interest in the Collection and be a spur to closing off any potential points of dispute. It is in their interest to do this. This would be a more fruitful avenue for them to explore rather than aiming ire at me for having the impertinence to be the boy pointing at the Emperor’s new clothes.

The most noteworthy aspect of this is that (leaving aside a few minor details such as Swanson’s death certificate) not one of the substantive issues I have raised in this entire thread has been addressed. That speaks for itself.

Incidentally one of DS Swanson’s secondary causes of death was Asthenia – which meant weakness or a lack of strength and was in all likelihood associated with his heart disease The pencil written letter used to corroborate the secondary marginalia entries is dated 15 months prior to DS Swanson’s death. There is no evidence to suggest an affliction such as Parkinson’s Disease whohc had been defined as an illness in the 1880s.

Until the Swanson Collection is properly authenticated then I would recommend that Patricia Cornwell holds onto her Yankee Dollars. Of course one danger is that if someone were to pay a considerable sum for the collection then they would have a financial interest in maintaining its authenticity.

John
I have not suggested that the ‘Ripperologist’ article constituted collusion - however it is referenced in the Swanson Collection on line sale catalogue under the Swanson Marginalia tab:

http://www.donaldsutherlandswanson.co.uk/marginalia.html

Monty
I eagerly await the dull thud of a summons landing on my doorstep.

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

I have a question which I am not certain is awkward or not.

When exactly, following its first page having been photographed and published, did Sir Charles Warren's 15th September 1888 "eyes and ears" Swanson memo become "believed lost"?

Regards,

Simon

[Chris]

Is it the crime of asking awkward questions? Yes that must be it.

If only you were coming up with some awkward questions, rather than endlessly regurgitating the same tedious and meaningless innuendo.

[Monty]

I wouldn't say it's a hefty allegation, Neil, just that suggesting that the article may be little more than a marketing ploy could be hurtful.



One should hope not.

JB

I disagree John,

Collusion is a hefty accusation in my book, and an offence in some legal ones.

Monty

[Monty]

Are we seeing an attempt to silence discussion on this subject?
I would be fascinated to know what legal action I might face.
Is it the crime of asking awkward questions? Yes that must be it.

Looking at the scattered number of responses received on this thread since you re-ignited it clearly shows that you've killed all discussion on this thread by yourself Edward.

The asking of questions is fine, its the faint accusation of collusion which raises concern. However that's not for me to decide upon.

Fortunately.

Monty

[John Bennett]

Having requested Trevor Marriott to either provide evidence supporting an equally hefty allegation, retract it or face legal action, I suspect Edwards post equally will not be missed by Nevil.

I wouldn't say it's a hefty allegation, Neil, just that suggesting that the article may be little more than a marketing ploy could be hurtful.

Are we seeing an attempt to silence discussion on this subject?

One should hope not.

JB

[Lechmere]

Are we seeing an attempt to silence discussion on this subject?
I would be fascinated to know what legal action I might face.
Is it the crime of asking awkward questions? Yes that must be it.

[Monty]

That's quite an allegation. I can only imagine what Adam, Keith and more importantly Nevill Swanson would make of it. Personally, I would say it's cobblers.



Considering what the News Of The World published throughout its controversial history, I'm not convinced that the families of the deceased journalists would care or even necessarily remember this matter.

JB

Having requested Trevor Marriott to either provide evidence supporting an equally hefty allegation, retract it or face legal action, I suspect Edwards post equally will not be missed by Nevil.

I also find his post very hypocritical, seeing as he accuses on nothing more than conjecture.

Monty