New Article on the Swanson Marginalia in Ripperologist 128

[Phil H]

Good post Hunter. Excellently put.

Phil H

[Lechmere]

I actually said this about DS Swanson’s role as described in the Warren letter:

“The other significant item to come from the DS Swanson collection is the note from Warren appointing Swanson as a species of superannuated clerk at Scotland Yard, through whose office everything related to the Whitechapel Murders should pass on its way in or way out.
“It is routinely and entirely inaccurately claimed that this note appointed DS Swanson in operational control of the Ripper investigation.
“For example in ‘The Man who hunted Jack the Ripper’ by Nicholas Connell and Stewart Evans (I am only using this example as I am reading this otherwise excellent book now), it states:
“‘Thus Warren designated one man, with his own office at the Yard, to take full control of the Whitechapel inquiry.’
“Actually the note makes it explicit that DS Swanson was only allowed to take control of directing events in an emergency and that his function was to coordinate the incoming and outgoing information at Scotland Yard. However it is actually the ‘superanuated filing clerk’ role that would have provided DS Swanson with the potential to know that ‘Kosminski was the suspect’.
“So the Warren document is important.”

The English language employs literary figures of speech called metaphors. Clearly I do not think that Swanson was a filing clerk, although he may well have been on a superannuation pension scheme.
I used the term to emphasise the mistake commonly made which is to attribute Swanson with operational control of the Whitechapel Murder investigation.
The use of the term ‘superanuated filing clerk’, in contrast to the received wisdom that DS Swanson was in operational control of the investigation into the Whitechapel murders, is an example of another literary devise, one that is known in the English language as ‘irony’.

It seems that after the ‘Autumn of Terror’, probably out of frustration, Scotland Yard took more of a hands-on role. We see this with Anderson interfering in the Mylett case, and Swanson’s involvement in the Sadler investigation for example.
Of course Swanson also – in a clerkly manner - prepared consolidated reports for his superiors prior to this.
But he was never in operational control of the investigation. He was never put in charge of it.

If it be asked what possible reason someone might have to forge the Warren note, then consider that without this document we would have much less with which to weigh the importance of the addendum to his annotation – ‘Kosminski was the suspect’. There are various other references from other sources which hint at Swanson’s role, but the Warren note greatly adds to Swanson’s credibility as someone in the know and so potentially in a position to speak about potential suspects. Hence just as it was thought advisable to subject the Marginalia to analysis (even if that analysis was imperfect) then surely the Warren note should be properly scrutinised. If it ever surfaces again.

On the pencil issue, we are not talking about annotations – I agree that annotations are often made in pencil. We are talking about DS Swanson writing a longish letter from his home in pencil. I was also asking why a comparison was not made with a document written (presumably in the same shaky style) in pen from the later part of DS Swanson’s life as the date of the ink can be more readily checked.

In order to support the theory that DS Swanson had shaky hands is it now being denied that he was a keen fly fisher who liked nothing more than spending his declining years threading fiddly flies onto hooks?
And there is a fundamental difference between weakness due to heart disease or the hardening of the arteries and tremors caused by a disease such as Parkinson’s. A massive difference.

July 2011 seems to really have been significant month in the history of the News of the World.
The News of the World announced it was going to cease publication on 7th July 2011 (although this had been anticipated).
On 23rd July 2011 Chris posted that the Swanson family had informed him they had come across some new correspondence (presumably the News of the World material).
The abortive draft story was also discovered in the Scotland Yard Museum in July 2011.

Adam – if you read the letter from Robert Warren to Jim Swanson dated 1st October 1987, that Charles Nevin he remembers seeing, it says:

Many thanks for your letter.
I am happy to release you from your contract with us.

That is hardly conclusive proof that the Marginalia, in the form in which we have it now (minus the red lines) was ever offered to the News of the World, is it?

Also Adam I didn’t suggest that any ‘Ripperologist’ would have been in a position to advise the Swanson family in 1981. I suggested that the Swanson family would have known of the importance of any DS Swanson related documents back then as we are told they sold the Marginalia story to the News of the World at that time.

I am surprised that various ‘Ripperologists’ didn’t urgently press the Swanson family to go through and produce every single item relating to DS Swanson at the earliest opportunity. Maybe they did and they were ‘knocked back’.
How big is this pile of papers that needs to be gone through?

As for the address books, the only relevant parts are those in shaky hand writing, not other bits which may be in pencil.

If there is no shortage of shaky DS Swanson writing in ink then the sensible thing is to produce them and have them tested. That at least will help to clear this mess up.

[Chris]

I think the one thing that really needs to be cleared up now is Trevor Marriott's claim earlier this year that a "leading handwriting expert" had stated that in their opinion the marginalia were not written by Swanson, and that these findings were "conclusive".
http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=14187&page=6

Sadly, Trevor Marriott refused to give any further details of the alleged "expert" who had provided him with a "conclusive" finding that the marginalia were not written by Donald Sutherland Swanson. That claim was, of course, in flat contradiction of the findings of two bona fide document examiners.

However, he himself has rendered this unsubstantiated claim even more implausible by his own recent statement that "you [Paul Begg] and everyone should know that a handwriting expert needs original handwriting for accurate handwriting comparison":

http://www.jtrforums.com/showpost.php?p=184880&postcount=62

About the only thing he has told us about his "expert" is that his opinion was based on sight of "a copy of it [the marginalia]", not the original. Presumably Mr Marriott's latest statement constitutes a recognition that the opinion he previously considered "conclusive" can not in fact be considered accurate.

[Bridewell]

About the only thing he has told us about his "expert" is that his opinion was based on sight of "a copy of it [the marginalia]", not the original. Presumably Mr Marriott's latest statement constitutes a recognition that the opinion he previously considered "conclusive" can not in fact be considered accurate.

Hi Chris,

If your assumption is correct, I hope that Trevor will now issue the fulsome apology to which the Swanson family is entitled.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Cogidubnus]

Well you and I might think that Colin...however there might be some practical difficulties involved in that, not least of which might be he's banned here...

Every good wish

Dave

[APerno]

As I wrote earlier,

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.)

If you think about it, before the 50s and the arrival of cheap "Bic" biro pens, there was a limited choice of things to write with.

There were fountain pens, and dip pens, but pencils were easy and readily shapenable. It is quite obvious why people used them - especially if somewhere where ink wells and bottles were not easily to hand.

Indeed, as I remember well from my time researching Foreign Office files in the (then) Public Records Office in Chancery Lane- now National Archives, Kew - King Edward VII annotated official dispatches in pencil or crayon. So Swanson was not idiosyncratic at all.

Phil H

I hope this is not too weird a digression, but I noticed in the recent film Valkyrie that the German General singed the order to begin the coup in red pencil. At the time it struck me strange that such an important document would be accepted signed in pencil, and wondered why the filmmakers would choose to portray it as such; your post is enlightenment to my wonderment regarding the filmmaker’s decision.

Anthony Perno

[Wickerman]

He still could have ultimately been wrong in his assessment of the suspect he is relating to. Not surprising in an unsolved case with no consensus. But Donald Sutherland Swanson is as good as it gets in any evaluation of the police investigation and what it encompassed... whatever value that even has at this remove.

I see some wrestle with the apparent contradiction of a highly respected, highly professional Detective making some highly subjective, highly erroneous and very controversial decisions.

If anyone should care to read up on the role played by Assistant Chief Constable George Oldfield, Senior Detective in the West Riding Police Force, at the time of the Yorkshire Ripper murders, we can see that a well respected and highly professional detective can make some deplorable, in some cases disastrously subjective decisions.

It is not doing Swanson an injustice to accept he was human.

Every coin has two sides.

Regards, Jon S.

[Bridewell]

Of course Swanson also – in a clerkly manner - prepared consolidated reports for his superiors prior to this.
But he was never in operational control of the investigation. He was never put in charge of it.

Yes he was - by Warren.

If it be asked what possible reason someone might have to forge the Warren note, then consider that without this document we would have much less with which to weigh the importance of the addendum to his annotation – ‘Kosminski was the suspect’.

Wouldn't your postulated 'forger' of the Warren note need to have knowledge of the existence of the Swanson Marginalia in order to have such a motive?
Who or what started this recent trend for suggesting that any document used to support an argument is a forgery?

Regards, Bridewell.

[Lechmere]

I’m a bit of a military history buff and have a reasonable collection of Victorian British militeria, including campaign medals.
One is the Afghanistan Medal which was awarded to participants in the Second Afghan War of 1878-1880.
Six clasps were awarded to go with the medal, for those who participated in six actions.
My medal has two clasps – Kandahar and Ali Musjid.
I bought it at a militaria fair. I knew it was good value for a two clasp Afghanistan War Medal.
Although I have a fairly good knowledge of this campaign I do not know off by heart every battalion involved in every engagement.
Mine was awarded to a rifleman in the 4th Battalion, The Rifle Brigade.
When I got home I checked my books and found that the 4th Rifle Brigade fought at Ali Musjid but not Kandahar.
I looked at the medal and could see that the clasps had been re-soldered. This is not uncommon as they often come loose. I also know that dealers often have spare clasps from broken medals and they fit different ones together to make up more attractive sets.
An original item was adulterated by the addition of something else.
I think of myself as a bit of an expert of the British Army in the Victorian period.
Yet I had been done. Lesson learnt.

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Lechmere

Very interesting medal and clasps. Good pick up from you that the man could not have won both clasps. As you imply, it looks as if someone along the way has "mocked up" the medal with the erroneous clasp to make the medal more attractive to a buyer.

As you may know, I am a military historian (on the War of 1812) and have also written about the suicided Jewish Met policeman P.C. Richard Brown who was a veteran of the Afghan War.

Best regards

Chris

[Lechmere]

That’s interesting.
Brown would have had the Afghanistan Medal, Egypt Medal (1882 version with clasp Tel-el-Kebir) and the Khedive’s Star (an Egyptian Medal automatically given to recipients of the Egypt Medal).
He could have got the Kabul to Kandahar Star as well while in Afghanistan.
There wasn’t much in the way for a humble gunner to honour bravery in 1880.

[Steve S]

Silly question..Is it possible an individual could have been at an action,even 'tho his unit wasn't?..I'm afraid my late 19th century military thing is the French Colonial Forces............

[Lechmere]

There's a very small chance someone could be attached or serving in some other capacity

[Steve S]

There's a very small chance someone could be attached or serving in some other capacity

Just a thought..........The little I've read on British campaigns do seem to show a lot of detached Officers,who I presume took their batmen with them?

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Steve

When Major General Robert Ross led a British expedition to the Chesapeake in August 1814, the British Army regiments that he had under his command were the 4th, 21st, 44th, and 85th Regiments of Foot. But his ADC was Captain Thomas Falls, who was detached from Ross's own regiment, the 20th Regiment of Foot, of which Ross was the commanding colonel; another aide was Captain Harry Smith, of the 95th Rifles; and reportedly he also had along a mounted courier who was a sergeant of the Enniskillen Dragoons.

Best regards

Chris