The Tower of London

[kensei]

This is something I've always wondered. The Tower of London, one of the most popular tourist sites in the city, lies right up against the area of the Whitechapel Murders, so close that some of the Ripper tours begin at Tower Hill right across the street. It's been a seat of royalty and government, a place of horrible torture and execution, and having been on two of the Beefeater tours there I know it was still being used as a prison at least in part as late as World War 2 when some captured Nazis were held there.

If Jack the Ripper had been caught, his mental competency would have been evaluated. If found insane, he would have lived out his life in Broadmoor or Colney Hatch. If sane, he would have been tried, convicted and hanged. But in the meantime, where would they have kept him? Would he have been jailed in the Tower, or perhaps even executed there? What a dramatic addition that would have made to its already captivating history.

The only mention of the Tower in Ripper lore I recall is that soldiers questioned in the Tabram murder were stationed there. I invite anyone who might know of any other connections, or who can answer the above question, to chime in.

[Dave O]

Hi Kensei,

This isn't really related to what you're asking, but another connection is that Wynne Baxter was the Coroner of the Tower from November 1891 until his death in 1920.

Cheers,
Dave

[Jon Guy]

Hello Kensei

He would have been kept and executed at Newgate Prison. I don`t know if you visited The Old Bailey courts, that is now on the site of Newgate Prison. I`d imagine he would have been kept there pre-trial too, but not sure on that.

[Septic Blue]

Would he have been jailed in the Tower, or perhaps even executed there?

... Wynne Baxter was the Coroner of the Tower from November 1891 until his death in 1920.

'Tower Liberty' (Click to View in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2009

From the 1680's until the onset of the nineteenth century, the Liberty of His/Her Majesty's Tower of London consisted of the following units of civil administration:

- The Liberty of the Tower
- The Precinct of Old Tower Without
- The Tower
- The Old Artillery Ground
- The Parish of Holy Trinity ('Minories')
- The Precinct of the 'Well Close' *

* A very loosely defined 'unit of civil administration'; in as much as it consisted of portions of the following:

--- The Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel
--- The Parish of St. John of Wapping (from 1694)
--- The Parish of St. Dunstan Stepney (until 1729)
--- The Parish of St. George in the East (from 1729)

The jurisdiction, which the Tower of London had maintained over its 'Liberties' (i.e. the Old Artillery Ground, 'Little Minories' and the 'Well Close') throughout the eighteenth century, gradually eroded with passage of the Metropolitan Police Act 1829; Reform Act 1832; Poor Law Amendment Act 1834; and Metropolis Management Act 1855. In fact, by 1867, the Old Artillery Ground and Parish of Holy Trinity ('Minories') had both been granted 'Civil Parish' status, while the Precinct of the 'Well Close' had more-or-less ceased to exist.

However, one facet of jurisdiction, which the Tower of London continued to exercise over its 'Liberties', well into the 1890's, was that of 'Coronership'.

In fact, if any of the 'Whitechapel Murders' had occurred within the red color-shaded areas in the above image (the Precinct of the 'Well Close' being the possible exception), the corresponding inquests would have been administered by the Tower Coroner's Court.

As Rob Clack is well aware of my fascination with Victorian London's political geography, he has been so kind as to photograph any parochial or municipal boundary marks that he happens to come across, during his excursions 'round the metropolis.


Artillery Passage / Artillery Street, Old Artillery Ground (Click to View in flickr)
Courtesy of Robert Clack

Boundary Mark: Old Artillery Ground, 1682-1885

Contrary to conventional wisdom; Alice McKenzie's Gun Street lodgings were not in Spitalfields, but were instead in the Old Artillery Ground, approximately fifty yards off the right edge of the above image. Had her murder occurred in Gun Street, Old Artillery Ground, rather than Castle Alley, Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel, the corresponding inquest would have been conducted by the Tower Coronership.


Brushfield Street, Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields / Old Artillery Ground (Click to View in flickr)
Courtesy of Robert Clack

Boundary Mark: Christ Church Spitalfields, 1871; Old Artillery Ground, 1682-1885

He would have been kept and executed at Newgate Prison.

Having been charged with committing any of the so-called 'Whitechapel Murders'; indeed he would have been tried at the Central Criminal Court, while incarcerated at Newgate Gaol: Both having been situated in Old Bailey, Parish of St. Sepulchre ('without Newgate'), Farringdon Ward Without, City of London.

But what if he had committed murder in the 'Tower Liberty'; or more specifically, in what was the Liberty of Her Majesty's Tower of London, in 1888:

- The Liberty of the Tower
- The Precinct of Old Tower Without
- The Tower

???

Might he, in this instance, have been incarcerated in the Tower?

What if he had been charged with committing murder on Great Tower Hill, Liberty of the Tower, while actually residing in Trinity Mews, Precinct of Old Tower Without?

What if he had been stationed at the Tower?

It's all rather unimportant, at this juncture; but it's rather interesting, nonetheless!

[Dave O]

Hi Colin,

Yup, I think jurisdictions are interesting too. Just a quick word--I don't believe there was a Coroner of the Tower at the time Mackenzie was murdered, or if there was, I don't know about it. I believe the previous coroner Thomas Ratcliff resigned in March 1889, and there was a question whether the Constable still had the power of appointment or whether in fact the Local Government Act 1888 had passed that authority to the London County Council. It wasn't until 1891 that the High Court found that it hadn't; that's when the Constable appointed Wynne Baxter and then Baxter's successor, Francis Danford Thomas in 1920. In 1926, an amendment law to The Coroner's Act 1887 removed the Constable's power.

Cheers,
Dave

[Septic Blue]

... I don't believe there was a Coroner of the Tower at the time Mackenzie was murdered, or if there was, I don't know about it. I believe the previous coroner Thomas Ratcliff resigned in March 1889, and there was a question whether the Constable still had the power of appointment or whether in fact the Local Government Act 1888 had passed that authority to the London County Council. It wasn't until 1891 that the High Court found that it hadn't; that's when the Constable appointed Wynne Baxter and then Baxter's successor, Francis Danford Thomas in 1920. In 1926, an amendment law to The Coroner's Act 1887 removed the Constable's power.

Thanks, Dave

I should have referred to the notes that you were kind enough to send me, two years ago:

"One year earlier, March 1889, which coincides with the first election of the London County Council, Ratcliff retired. Whether this had anything to do with the creation of the Council, or whether Ratcliff was ill or just tired, we don't know. However, the Constable doesn't seem to have appointed a replacement—at least not that we could find. The post appears to have sat vacant until 1891, two years later.

The reason why? Well, as you know, everything changed, administratively speaking, in 1889 with the creation of the county councils. It would appear that there was a conflict, a question over whether the Local Government Act 1888 had taken away the power of appointing the Tower coroner from the Constable and transferred it to the London County Council. …

…

So, the situation was this: liberty of the Tower was absorbed into the County of London, and this included the justices and quarter sessions, and any police force that the liberty had, as well as its debts. Furthermore, the county councils now had the power of appointment of county coroners, and the old magisterial power to petition to alter districts had also passed to them. Now, since the coroner was also a magistrate, it would appear that the LCC affirmed that the Tower coronership should also be absorbed into the county, just as its quarter sessions were, with either the county coroner taking over the area, or the LCC having the power to appoint the new Tower coroner. The ancient franchise of the Tower, the LCC contended, was essentially dead. It was now part of the county of London. This, I presume, was objected to, and now the question was whether Section 48 actually was intended to apply to the Tower coroner—one argument being, I imagine, that no justice had ever had the power to appoint the Tower coroner, and therefore the power couldn’t transfer to the LCC as appointment of coroners had never been the business of the magistrates in the Quarter Sessions. The power must remain with the Constable, yes? No! the LCC said.

…

Leave it to the Queen's Bench to figure out, in other words. So again, the office appears to have sat vacant until the High Court heard the case in November 1891. … Essentially, the High Court agreed that only the powers of the Quarter Sessions had transferred to the county councils—NOT the Constable's power to appoint the franchise coroner of the Tower. So, while a lot of the business of the liberties of the Tower was now absorbed into the County of London, the office of coroner wasn't.

Now the Constable appointed Wynne Baxter the new coroner of the Tower. …"

[ATTACH]6548[/ATTACH]
Artillery Passage / Artillery Street, Old Artillery Ground (Click to View in flickr)
Courtesy of Robert Clack

Boundary Mark: Old Artillery Ground, 1682-1885

Contrary to conventional wisdom; Alice McKenzie's Gun Street lodgings were not in Spitalfields, but were instead in the Old Artillery Ground, approximately fifty yards off the right edge of the above image. Had her murder occurred in Gun Street, Old Artillery Ground, rather than Castle Alley, Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel, the corresponding inquest would have been conducted by the Tower Coronership.

Allow me to restate the above assertion, if you will:

Had her murder occurred prior to March 1889, or after November 1891 ; in Gun Street, Old Artillery Ground, rather than Castle Alley, Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel; the corresponding inquest would have been conducted by the Tower Coronership.

So, effectively, … Baxter was the Tower Coroner from March 1889?

Perhaps that helped to assuage the 'impact' of his May 1888 loss of the Liberty of Norton Folgate, as well as the Parishes of Christ Church Spitalfields and St. Mary Stratford Bow, to the newly created 'North-Eastern District'.

[Dave O]

Hi Colin,
Please pardon the delay in my response—my niece was born on the 11th and I’ve been pulling babysitting duty for my nephew And you have thrown me a little curveball, my friend.

When there’s a case of a body being found outdoors, I’d contend that the most relevant factor that determined the coroner’s jurisdiction wouldn’t be the scene of the murder; it would be the “mortuary” or place where the body was taken to. At this point in history--as you know but others might not--the coroner needed possession of the body in order to satisfy the view of the corpse—to hold a valid inquest, he needed to see the deceased, as did the jury. And sometimes in traveling to the nearest mortuary, the body “hopped” boundaries as coroners lost and gained possession of the body.

So in your Alice Mackenzie hypothetical, my question would be “where’s the nearest mortuary?” If she’s outdoors, and the police are removing the corpse, I feel they would likely seek the nearest mortuary, without regards to which coroner’s district it was in, ala Annie Chapman. But if her body’s inside her lodgings, then likely the police would have time to summon the coroner’s officer to remove the body. He would take note of the district boundary, so it would be unlikely that the body would hop coroner’s jurisdictions—a Mary Kelly scenario.

Now, what happens if Mackenzie dies insider her lodgings, and her body remains in the area of the Tower, but there’s no Tower coroner? Who would hold the inquest? This is an area where an example would be very helpful, but I don’t know of one. I do know that in the counties, where appointment was by freeholder election, the law permitted coroners within a particular county the ability to act outside their jurisdiction given the unavoidable absence or illness of the sitting coroner. Also, the senior coroner of the county (“senior” means the coroner who had held his office the longest) could hold an inquest anywhere in the county. When the coroner was dead and the deputy coroner’s tenure expired with the death, for example, as was the case with Thomas Diplock in 1892, you see neighboring coroner George Danford Thomas holding inquests in his place. But it’s also not so clear cut. I know of a case of Dr. Macdonald being away in Scotland during a railway accident, leaving his deputy Alfred Hodgkinson to act in his places. In this railway accident, the victims were numerous and their bodies were dispersed to mortuaries between both the North East and Southeastrn districts. So you have a case of two coroners, Hodgkinson and Wynne Baxter, in the same county investigating the same disaster—essentially the ratepayers are going to pay double to investigate the same disaster twice. As the law seemed to allow, Hodgkinson invited Baxter to the North East district to hold a joint inquest, but Baxter declined, saying he didn’t want to set a precedent of acting outside his jurisdiction. In that case, Baxter saw some sort of nuance in the practice of the law that a modern reading of its text doesn’t supply.

In an ancient franchise like the Tower or the City, there’s no neighboring coroner within the district to slide over and fill in. As far as appointment goes, they’re little worlds unto themselves. When there was no City coroner, the Mayor and the Court of Common Council chose one through a process of interviewing a pool of candidates. And while that process was underway, a temporary coroner could also be appointed, and sometimes when they were in between coroners in the City, you find the Town Clerk or the City Solicitor holding inquests. In the Tower, perhaps there was an officer, maybe the Constable or the Steward, who was regarded as a coroner himself and could act temporarily until a permanent appointment was made?

That’s the rub when you’re talking about Alice Mackenzie: what happens when the Constable’s power to appoint the Tower’s coroner is being challenged by another local authority, as was the case in the 1889-1891 period? Evidentially, at the very least, we can suppose the Constable’s power to appoint a coroner was in limbo. I’m not sure about his or the Steward’s own ability to hold an inquest themselves as I haven’t researched it.

To further obscure matters, I’ve come across a puzzling case in The Times from 1843 of the City coroner, William Payne, holding a suicide inquest “in the Tower of London, Westminster-bridge Road”. The body was in what seems to be some sort of lodging house at no. 67 Tower-street, and the jury viewed the body there. As this was the scene of death, there doesn’t appear to have been any removal of the body (I suspect they had even fewer mortuaries in 1843 than in 1888), so no opportunity for the body to “hop” coroner’s jurisdictions. Should this not be a case for the Tower coroner? So far as I can tell, there was no vacancy in the Tower coronership, but perhaps I’ve missed it. I’ve read that there was a boundary conflict between the City and the Tower, but my geography is lacking so I don’t know if it’s relevant. And in any case, I don’t understand how the City coroner is holding an inquest inside the Tower. Did the City coroner have a jurisdiction in the liberty? At some point I will try to re-read the Court case from 1891 to see if they talk about it.

Cheers,
Dave

[Fantomas]

A friend of mine - a sergeant in situe at Glasgow Army recruitment office, Queen Street - regularly attends and assists at Winchester. Many young Scottish recruits are trained and have their passing out parade down there.
Ok, possible tinfoil hat time here. One of the cadet trainers at Winchester is a former Grenadier guardsman. He has discussed the Tower of London several times and the fact that, while stationed there, it is a working but cut above a barracks - Beefeaters house their families within the walls.
While there he attended nights out with the 'Henry VIIIIth Club' also called 'The Wide Awakers', very infrequent drinking clubs who had to "pub crawl" all night because the Tower locks its denizens in and visitors out at ten. O'clock each night and still does. The former guardsman stated that there were far older clubs and that some - going back centuries -was a club notorious for carousing with prostitutes and drinking.
Does anyone have further information or heard about these barrack "Hellfire Club" type organizations or is it all just so much hearsay?