Toffs in Spitalfields

[John Bennett]

Thanks John, Nats... but were they actually resident there, and - if so - did they go out a-wenching after dark? Plus, these were locally-based philanthropic charity workers - not Timon the Totty-Tourist from Teddington.

Fair comment Sam.

George Yard Buildings were taken over by Toynbee to provide accommodation for the Oxbridge students who came to the East End to do their philanthropic bit in the East End, so the answer to your first question is yes, they were certainly resident.

As to the possiblility of them going 'a-wenching' after dark, I am not in a position to say!!

[Sam Flynn]

Thanks John, Nats... but were they actually resident there, and - if so - did they go out a-wenching after dark? Plus, these were locally-based philanthropic charity workers - not Timon the Totty-Tourist from Teddington.

Sorry to bang on about "specifics", but it's essential. To think otherwise would be like looking at a painting of a Scutari hospital and concluding that significant numbers of women in the Crimean Peninsula dressed as nurses; furthermore, that they made a habit of clambering into the hills of an evening looking for sex with local men.

[John Bennett]

And here are the very types Nats is talking about.

A group of 'students' at Balliol House, Toynbee Hall, 1904.



Balliol House was actually George Yard Buildings (taken over and renamed by Toynbee Hall in 1890) and that's it to the right, partially obscured by the dining hall behind the group.

JB

PS Don't forget John Profumo!

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Sam,
Well I visited Toynbee Hall twice last year and noted the monthly minuted meetings attended.At these there were definitely some members of the aristocracy---the Dyke-Acland chap played a very significant part in the proceedings and I have the others listed somewhere.Even the Duke of Clarence attended several of the meetings and spoke on a few occasions and his words are minuted in the archived materials.However I am not suggesting these people were out "prowling "at 2am, but since they did constitute the larger numbers of St Jude"s" vigilante committee "--from just after MarthaTabram"s murder-in August 1888 ,so they would have been out on the streets late at night most definitely-[dressed in overcoats and hats no doubt but not the fancy stuff].
Ofcourse the Toynbee Hall itself backed immediately onto George Yard and it gave everybody a very rude awakening, having Martha"s frightful murder on their doorstep.

But Whitechapel did have numbers of Dr Barnado and Salvation Army types as well as people like Prime Minister Gladstone taking pity on prostitutes and having them back "for tea"........
So the "upper middle" class male was certainly sometimes "called" to Whitechapel to do various "good works" and for some, such as the "decadent" poet Ernest Dowson and the painter Whistler ,their experience of the slums of Whitechapel and its docks and prostitutes [Whistler ]fed their art , and whose poems and paintings serve as testimony .

Your point about Census information,Sam:Almost all Rev.Barnett"s first resident graduates were from Oxford or Cambridge University---none as far as I could see-between the years 1884 and 1888 were from any other University or other walk of life.That did come later but not in the 1880"s.

[Sam Flynn]

At any one time there were approximately 50 toff"s,helping with the Vigilante Committees

Hello Nats,

There were only a comparatively modest number of Toynbee Hall residents of the Oxbridge type - what one might loosely call "toffs" - in the censuses, as far as I can recall.

I assume you meant "50 toffs in Toynbee Hall", incidentally, and not "50 toffs prowling the streets as vigilantes". Either way, I'd be interested in knowing more.

[Natalie Severn]

On the ins-and-outs of toffs in Whitechapel, and the thought of coach and carriage-- what was the nearest underground station-- was there one in the district by then? And at what hour did service for the night end? (oooooh, I never thought about walking through the tunnels after the trains stop running....)

First, thanks WH for your kind words. Yes, I did get pretty fed up with this thread a few weeks back,especially when it seemed to me to get itself bogged down with arguments that only concerned the "particular" , rather than the wider " general "perspective.
So thanks, Lady G this the first post in a long time that has raised the wider issues of available transport.Joe C posted information on another site that focussed on the activities of a certain "toff" [or member of the upper middle or upper classes],who was able to leave his exclusive West End Club on the night following Martha Tabram"s murder and speed over to Whitechapel to ferret about in George"s Yard for a while in the early hours.
Access to Whitechapel was easily available to those with the money for a cab fare.It was easily available by rail-Whitechapel Station was/is immediately adjacent to Wood"s Buildings,an alley over the railway ,long believed to be the Ripper"s escape from Bucks Row after the murder of Polly Nichols.
Having a "pied a terre" was and very much still is, part of the City Financier"s " bolt hole" in Victorian London ,and would have served to "clean up".
There were indeed numbers of Toffs in the immediate surrounds of Whitechapel,and Commercial Street would have been a familiar road to most of these especially during the day----as it is today.
A few yards from George Hutchinson"s Lodging House in Wentworth Street,was/is " Toynbee Hall" and although the toffs in question were charity workers,there were certainly members of the aristocracy among them including the brother of Dr William Gull"s son -in -law, A. Dyke Acland,who served on the committee and whose name I have seen on every statement from 1885-1888 and including Montague Druitt"s schoolfriend/university colleague/ and Blackheatrh neighbour,William Stead"s Editor of the Pall Mall Gazette,E .Cook. At any one time there were approximately 50 toff"s there,helping with the Vigilante Committees,

Cheers
Norma

[LadyG]

On the ins-and-outs of toffs in Whitechapel, and the thought of coach and carriage-- what was the nearest underground station-- was there one in the district by then? And at what hour did service for the night end? (oooooh, I never thought about walking through the tunnels after the trains stop running....)

[White-Knight]

mmmmm...

I still think there's more to be said for the latter than the former..but you are right, this is a question of semantics , how about compromising on 'a' or 'some' possibility, (but Ben and WK can't agree how much lol! )


WK.

[Ben]

Hi WK,

Without wishing to get too bogged down in semantics here, you're still referring to a "strong possibility"; a description which, as far as I'm concerned, refers to an idea that stands a good chance of being correct. We cannot prove the ripper's motive, but personally, I don't belive the Royal Conspiracy motive is a "strong possibility", or even that it "could be" described as such, and I believe the same to be true about toffs making a beeline for the murder district for sexual gratification.

Substitute the word "strong" for "remote" in your post above, and we're in agreement.

Cheers,
Ben

[White-Knight]

ha ha ..very funny, Ben. yes you are quite right to point out the silliness of that statement...no, I'm not that deviant!
I meant in certain instances relating to the case, but didn't and should have said so! I shall qualify for you then, you rascal..

Regarding the possibility of any toff venturing into Spitalfields, in the absence of any logical reason to be there, ANY POSSIBILITY, as to his motives for being there could therefore be considered a strong possibility.

there, that's what I meant..and should have said.o.k.?

WK.

[Ben]

Hey WK,

On that basis then, would you say it's a "strong possibility" that the ripper was Sir William Gull?

Ben

[White-Knight]

'I agree that all possibilities should be considered, but would respectfully beg to differ with the view that all possibilities should be considered "strong" in the absence of anything concrete to rule them out.'

If we were talking about almost any other case, Ben, I would tend to agree with you there. But in this one, I make that exception! That would be my own little deviancy!

WK.

[Ben]

To me the notion of a swell in Whitechapel is spot on, considering his prime goal was not sexual diversion but murder.

The majority of prostitute-killers tend to be prostitute-users though, LadyG, and the prostitutes they did use tended also to originate from the same area in which they were subsequently murdered. They killed where they were familiar with the district and its occupants, rather than establishing two dislocated prostitute venues; one for murder, one for sex. There were plenty of prostitutes in that one tiny-pocket of the East End, but there were even more in Greater London as a whole, and a hypothetical toff was better equipped that an impoverished local to change his venues and so reduce the risk of capture.

The act of commuting from a far into the same small, easily-walkable region to kill prostitutes despite the police and vigilante presence being stepped up after each murder, would tend to militate against the concept of an offender disposing of the type of victim least likely to be missed and thus draw potential attention to himself.

More often, we learn that serial killers who operate within a small, concentrated locality tend to be those with a base in the district, and the vast majority of those with a base in the district tended to be the working class men who lived there. A poor prostitute would be considered a "toss-away" to anyone with murder in mind, including those who came from the same social and ecomomic class as they victims.

The options for a violent or murderous local candidate would perhaps never be exhausted.

Which would be remarkably convenient for the blend-into-the-crowd local nonentity who was neither outwardly "dodgy" or menacing, nor conspicuously upper-class and out-of-place for the area.

Best regards,
Ben

[LadyG]

Whoops-- and regarding the term 'brothel'-- granted some of my research comes from 19th century American and NYC police records-- it seems to refer to both to the higher class 'gentlemen's clubs' and houses of pleasure as well as the dingy dens with open stalls where the more thrifty and down-and-out would frequent. In some cases it also refers to lodging houses where several prossies shared use of a room, even though other boarders were not engaged in the business. When speaking of Whitechapel, I have heard an account of near 70 such houses of carnal worship existed there in the 1880s, and would be interested to know the limitations or qualifiers that were used to label them. Basically, what did the records use as a basis for this, if anyone out there knows. Thanks for your help.

[Ben]

for whom nearly every possibity, for me at least, remains a strong one.

I agree that all possibilities should be considered, but would respectfully beg to differ with the view that all possibilities should be considered "strong" in the absence of anything concrete to rule them out.

thanks for the interchange..really enjoyed it..

Likewise, WK.

Best regards,
Ben