Life INSIDE 13 Miller's Court

[Lord-z]

It is still the questions that intrigue me - though i don't for a moment believe them crucial.

That after several months in that room there was scarce a trace of personality - we know there was a pipe on the mantlepiece, so much detail, but nothing that throws light on MJK's personality.

I don't know if she would have that many personal effects. I could imagine that a person in her circumstances would pawn or sell their effects, in order to survive. If they did not have money to pay rent, which Mary Kelly, evident by her being found by a past-due rent-collector, apparently didn't, they were out on the street, and I can imagine that being a problem in November. Not to mention keeping starvation off for a few more days. Plus, the risk of having them stolen. It wasn't that secure of a neighbourhood.

[harry]

From what I remember from the old boards,Kelly's accomodation was part of a room that was at one time a storeroom belonging to Mccarthy's shop.It had been boarded off to form a bed/sitter.If that is true it is not a typical court home.

I was born in an early or pre Victorian court in a city in England.The court entrance was as Millers Court,an arched passageway,on one side of which was a shop.The end of the passage opend up into the court proper,on each side of which were terraced houses.Small three storied affairs,each room approx 12foot by twelve foot and six foot high.At the rear of the ground floor room was a back kitchen slightly higher and longer than the other rooms.Outside of that was an outside toilet and shed.there was no garden.Lighting to the ground floor only, was by gaslight.There was a kitchen range and copper in the kitchen.Cooking was done on the range,and washing in the copper.Washing was dried in the kitchen mostly,but somtimes in the court itself.Ironing was by flatiron heated on the rangeA narrow stairway led to the upstairs rooms.
Food storage was not a problem,as the town centre was a few minutes away.Pigs trotters, tripe,faggots and peas,and fish and chips,were cheap and weekly meals.
I talk about the late 1920's early 1930's,but by my parents and grand parents accounts little had changed since late Victorian times.My grandfather was born 1860's.
I cannot of course say that court was identical to Millers Court,except for the entrance,though I do not think the architecture of courts would vary to any great degree,but one thing I will say.The courts were insulated by their construction from outside noise,so I have no problem at all in accepting that the cry of murder came from within Millers Court.

[Hamrammr]

This is a very interesting/informative post. I can't read it all at the moment but look forward to doing so. It makes me wonder just how much the fire was utilized in these dwellings. Presumably it was used instead of a bin, so everything ended up in there - discarded food, worn clothing, old letters, any broken furniture... and lets not forget 'evidence.'

[Stephen Thomas]

Jane,

Thanks for that informative post. I recall you well from my old association with Casebook in 2005, and you have lost none of your insight and knowledge.

Hi Phil

Yes, Jane is a star and may I say it's nice to see you back (to see you back, nice ).

You were always one of the very best posters here.

Regards

[Rubyretro]

[There had been more clothes there, but they were not Mary's. It was cold and wintry but we are reduced to believing that someone burned clothes to stoke a fire - an experiment someone should try sometime.

I've always wondered if JtR hadn't used the clothes to protect his own, or at least to wipe his hands on, and they hadn't got bloody handprints on them
-so he burned them ? Maybe he had to burn something of his own, and burned the other clothes to disguise it ?

Effectively, if there was no other fuel in the room for the fire, maybe he only had the clothes to burn -but as you say it couldn't have been easy to get them going, nor pleasant in the room.

I believe that women used bundles of rags as sanitary towels, when they had a period (my mum said, still the case in the 1950s), and then put them on the fire -so they did often burn fabric.

[Phil H]

Jane,

Thanks for that informative post. I recall you well from my old association with Casebook in 2005, and you have lost none of your insight and knowledge.

It is still the questions that intrigue me - though i don't for a moment believe them crucial.

That after several months in that room there was scarce a trace of personality - we know there was a pipe on the mantlepiece, so much detail, but nothing that throws light on MJK's personality.

There had been more clothes there, but they were not Mary's. It was cold and wintry but we are reduced to believing that someone burned clothes to stoke a fire - an experiment someone should try sometime.

Fascinating - at least to me - but of minimal relevance perhaps.

Thanks again,

Phil

[gizmo]

Brilliant post Jane. I closed my eyes and felt I was in the room. Thankyou for the guided tour.

[Jane Coram]

Hi All,

Forgive me if some of these points have been brought up in previous posts, but I'm going to get hopelessly lost if I keep going back and forwards to see if someone's said it already.

There's a huge amount of information available about how people lived day to day in the LVP, including people like Mary, I'll try to give a bit of a brief round-up.

Mary's room was very sparsely furnished, but the fixtures and fittings she had was standard for rooms let out by slum landlords like John McCarthy and Alfred Coates. There was a small cupboard next to the fire place to keep crockery and food, but normally Mary would have kept the minimum there. There was apparently some stale crusts of bread in there at the time she was murdered. Most of the time she'd just keep a small amount of tea and sugar in there, and bits like that. Any food there would have been eaten by mice and rats if it was there for any length of time.

Food would be brought in from either pubs, chandler's shops like McCarthy's, or the fast food stands which were literally every few feet, along every street. Almost all of the fish and chip shops were run by Jews, and were literally run from the front rooms of their terraced houses and the customers served through the window. They would use beef suet to cook the chips in usually. The most popular fish was haddock and sole.

Food shops were usually open until about two in the morning, in fact most places were open until then. The shops closed for just a few hours every day.

Mary's last meal could have been either fish and chips, or boiled fish with mash, with a parsley liquor on. No way of knowing which. This would have cost her about a penny halfpenny - that is half of the price of a large gin, and about a third of what it would cost for a doss for the night.

She could have afforded a bath at the local baths, which was a penny for a cold bath, and tuppence for a hot one. So she could have afforded it quite easily if she wanted. Most of the time, she would have settled for a wash down in the tin bath that was under her bed.

Her clothes were probably not folded up on the chair on the night she was murdered, a newspaper sketch shows them thrown on haphazardly, as the rest of the sketch is accurate, that would seem likely. Normally, she would have hung them over the chair. If she had folded them, they would have got damp and mouldy before too long and also the body odours wouldn't have evaporated. Hung over the chair, they aired overnight and stayed drier and fresher. It' unlikely she would have put her clothes under the mattress for the same reason.

She almost certainly only had the clothes she was standing up in, and at night, she would just take off her dress and go to bed in her underwear. She certainly would have left her underwear on at night in the winter, and possibly her clothes as well, if it was really cold. Quite often in those days, people stitched themselves into their underwear for the winter. There have been horror stories of people's skin being pulled away when they peeled the underwear off in the spring. They also used to rub goose fat into their skin before stitching the underwear on, to keep out the cold. Oh and before you start scratching your head about how they went to the toilet, men's long john's had buttons at the front and a crap flap at the back, and women's drawers were crutchless.

Joe almost certainly only had one set of clothes, and he would have chucked them over the table or the other chair. When he was at Billingsgate, he may have had a uniform and apron and porter's hat, but possibly left them at the market.

She would have washed her clothing in the tin bath, and hung it over the back of the chair or a rigged up clothes line inside by the fire to dry them.
Some people had a clothes horse, but there doesn't appear to have been one in Mary's room. Horse **** and mud would have been brushed off the hem of the skirt when it was dry.

There were also places called 'bagwashes' where you could put all your washing into a pillow case or bag and taken them to a laundry, usually an old shed run by one person and get your washing done for a penny or two. Most working class households could afford a bagwash.

There were some toilets at the bottom of the court and Mary and Joe would probably have used them in the day, but at night, they would have done their business in a chamber pot or bucket and thrown it down the loo in the morning.

Bed bugs could be caught with a wet bar of soap. You pulled the covers back quickly and squashed as many of the buggers as you could before they got away. They stuck to the wet soap.

The room was heated on the coal fire, obviously, and anything that could be found in the streets would be scavenged to burn. Thanks to the railway system fuel was actually relatively cheap and although Mary probably couldn't afford to use it all the time, she could obviously manage a little fire here and there. Lighting was provided by a candle. In Mary's case she used a farthing dip, which was the cheapest sort, and wouldn't have lasted very long.

There's loads more, but I don't want to give you eye-strain!!! There you go, a quick tour of Mary's life. Lol.

Much love

Janie

xxxx

[Rubyretro]

yes, the clothes under the matress -exactly.

It's difficult to judge people's tidyness -some people are minimalist, and others live in clutter..

[Phil H]

I fully agree that late victorian standards and norms were not ours.

Look at any photograph of a man from the victorian period (I say a man, because what I am about to say refers more to them) you'll find no sharp creases, sharp folds on lapels etc (unless tailored in) and quite a few stains etc on suits, even among statemen and public figures.

No dry cleaning - only brushes, sponges etc - valets and maids would have had a few tricks - but then MJK didn't have servants.

A good point about clothes under the mattress - the pratical alternative to a clothes-press. But no mention of anything found.

That's what is odd to me - Maria Harvey's shirts and coat etc are mentioned, even if burned - but nothing about anything further even if heavily bloodstained having been under the body!!

It's just a room without much personality - the print apart - or character. Yes it was a slum, but even poor people - maybe especially the poor - don't usually throw everything out (letters etc, even if, like MJK you probably can't read them).

I recall baths etc in front of the fire as a child - we had hot-water but no heating in the bathroom in winter. It can be done - probably was.

But Mary had had an active night, she had eaten somewhere - she may have done some tidying up - but its still odd that every item of crockery seems either put away or absent.

We aren't misreading MJK's activity are we - had she tidied up specially? was she expecting a visit - from Fleming or Morganstone maybe? Or someone else?

Just questions?

But then with JtR aren't there always questions....?

Phil

[Rubyretro]

But where is anything to hang washing over to dry? (what in England we'd call a clotheshorse).

Phil-she might not have washed clothes in the way that we imagine..

I would think that a heavy skirt, jacket etc would never have been washed as such, but stains sponged down.

A cotton petticoat or blouse or stocking could dry over the back of the chair,
pushed up to the fire at night.

Maybe she had a piece of string that she could string in front of the fireplace to drape them over ?

Maybe the sun reached the window ledge sometimes & she could drape them
out of the window when at home ?

I wouldn't think that she washed sheets very often -especially not in winter. But she could have washed them in her bath and strung them from the bed to the chair in front of the fire, or strung them up in the court -watching over them - when it was sunny & windy.

She could have known a friend with a line in a courtyard, or when richer,
paid a laundress (when she was living with Joe).

Maybe she just sponged down grey or stained bits & dryed those, most of the time ?

I expect that City people got by without the hygiene standards that we expect today ! (obviously, it was much easier in the Country).

[Marc]

during the day the chair(s) would have been required for sitting would they not? so were clothes moved from chair to bed and back again?

Hi Phil,

FWIW, I'd suggest the bed, actually the space between the frame and mattress, was used for storing clothes, which might mainly consist of a few pieces of underwear (shirts included, since these were traditionally regarded as 'underwear' clothes) and, at best, a spare pair of trousers, a skirt, etc...

The point was to keep these out of dirt (well, sort of...) and damp, as well as keeping them well folded.
This is a trick some friends and I played when in the army, with few spare space to store our belongings.
I've been told that jail dwellers sometimes do the same.

The tin bath tube could be filled at the yard water tap, carried back to the room (with someone's help) and warmed by a few kettles of boiling water.

I experienced, as a small boy, the stand-up bath in a tin bath tube at my grand parents home, which hadn't any bathroom.
The washing was done in the kitchen/living-room/entry-hall part of their dwelling
This was a 'modernized' bath tube, since hot water was brought through a flexible from the tap

Of course, the toilets were...over there in the back yard, on your left

I admit all this makes me think of 'living nearer to Mother Nature' with
some reluctant eyes

[Lord-z]

I always figured that the stuff were there, but no one ever bothered to write it down because... Well, I don't know why. Maybe it seemed obvious and not at all important. Maybe the room seems empty because the investigators only mentions things that strikes them as important and/or out of place. There probably was an inventory-list made, but long since lost.

In this thread Jane Coram has a list of things that have been mentioned in various sources.


And then, of course, there is the theory that Mary Kelly had moved out the very night and someone else was killed, but I never had much faith in that.

[Phil H]

[QUOTE=Rubyretro;139116]I think that we would be very suprised at how little material things people need to live :

They cook over the fire, with a minimum of pans, and draw water from a torrent, or a citern collecting rain water ...

Water for washing (done hastily, & standing up), is heated over the fire,
and then re-used for washing any laundry, which is dried in front of the fire.

I expect that newspapers & letters were used to start the fire, and the fire
used to burn any combustible rubbish.

Mary was lucky to be able to buy fresh food, or eat in cafés, and of course there was no layers of plastic packaging !"

Rubyretro

An interesting reply. Thanks. Your experience is valuable and fascinating.

But where is anything to hang washing over to dry? (what in England we'd call a clotheshorse).

I'm pretty sure MJK couldn't have afforded to eat in "cafe's" - but if she did (or used an equivalent) where are the sightings? Did she cook in a lodging house kitchen (Crossingham's maybe) but if so would someone not have seen her?

As for food, I doubt she kept much in - but her jaunts out of her room on the night of her murder are never (to my knowledge) interpreted as to go for food - drink maybe - or provisions.

Phil

[Zodiac]

Mary's autopsy showed that her last meal (eaten only a few hours before she was killed) was one of fish and potatoes. As I don't think that traditional English delicacy "fish and chips" had then been invented (someone correct me if I am wrong), I assume this referred to some sort of white fish probably boiled and either boiled or mashed potatoes. Where did she acquire that food?

Hi Phil,

Regarding "fish and chips." In 1858/63 John Lees opened a fish and chip shop in Oldham and in 1860/63/65 Jewish proprietor Joseph Mallin married together "fish fried in the Jewish fashion" with deep fried chipped potatoes and opened a Fish and Chip shop in the East End. (Actually there is still much debate as to the exact dates and as to which one was really the first to be opened). By the end of the century there were over 30,000 chippies in Britain!

Hope that this helps, of course it doesn't prove that Mary's last meal was in fact "fish and chips", but it was certainly a possibility.

All the best,

Zodiac.