the Goulston St Graffiti

[GUT]

Long, I think, was said to have written it and it been checked, Halse is said to have copied it before it was erased.

But as I said there are at least 5 versions floating around

Even the sentence construction is cause for confusion, since there are five variations:

*

The first, ‘The Juwes are not the men that will be blamed for nothing,’ is the one recalled by Detective Daniel Halse;

The second, ‘The Juwes are the men who will not be blamed for nothing,’ appears in Chief Inspector Swanson’s summary report;

The third, ‘The Juews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing,’ is used by PC Long in an October 11th deposition;

The fourth, ‘The Jews are the men that won’t be blamed for nothing’, is found in Sir Henry Smith’s From Constable to Commissioner, p153];

...and the fifth from Sir Robert Anderson, who gives it as: ‘The Jewes are not the men to be blamed for nothing,’ in 1910, 22 years after the crimes, which was [sorry, Sir Robert but this may be another one of your ‘definitely ascertained facts’] discussed in a daily paper. Anderson was not even in the country at the time of the Double Event. It may be worth recalling that the two eyewitnesses to the GSG, Long and Halse, along with Inspector Swanson’s recollection, are united in the fact that the letter ‘U’ is the accepted second letter, despite the two ways the word believed to be there is written: Juwes and Juews.

So Iguess you can take your pick.

* I actually copied that from somewhere but can't find the refernce to give credit.

[Natasha]

Sorry it was Anderson who said that it was:

The Jewes are not the men to be blamed for nothing.

But considering there are at least five different versions and in the inquest Jews is spelt off the top of my head 3 or 4 different ways, well it is anyone's guess what was actually on the wall.

Sorry for driving you mad with the nit picking. It is a lil strange that they wrote two different things, it's like they didn't even write it while standing in front of it, more like they wrote it from memory.

[GUT]

Sorry it was Anderson who said that it was:

The Jewes are not the men to be blamed for nothing.

But considering there are at least five different versions and in the inquest Jews is spelt off the top of my head 3 or 4 different ways, well it is anyone's guess what was actually on the wall.

[Natasha]

The short answer is "Who knows", personally I lean towards Halse's version as I think did at least one senior officer, I think [off the top of my head Warren].

I do think the placing of not in the GSG does change the meaning somewhat. Why didn't Halse and Long compare all their notes to make sure the GSG was copied word for word. Long had no problem changing his spelling of jews, so why not the rest? Unless Long's version was actually the version that was written.

[GUT]

Which version was actually written on the wall?

The short answer is "Who knows", personally I lean towards Halse's version as I think did at least one senior officer, I think [off the top of my head Warren].

[Natasha]

Hi All,

Forgive me if someone else has mentioned this before, but why is there discrepancies between Halse and Long's versions of the GSG?

D.C. Halse´s Version - "The Juwes are not the men That Will be Blamed for nothing"

P.C. Long´s Version - "The Juwes are the men That Will not be Blamed for nothing"

I would like to think that if the GSG was important enough to note as evidence in the first place, then it would be copied exactly as it was written. I suppose you could argue that the writing was perhaps sort of indecipherable. I think Long's version sounds more accusatory, while Halse's version sounds more like the jews will be blamed though they didn't do it.

Perhaps I'm reading too much into it, but the placing of the 'not' is very important, as it IMO changes the message somewhat.

Which version was actually written on the wall?

[Monty]

Is there any record of him making this statement at the time or close to it?

I think the investigation clearly indicates no confusion.

No, nor is there any record it wasn't made close to it, however he did join H Division a month after the event.

Warrens actions in seeking advice from the Jewish community also shows there was a degree of confusion, so not clear cut, but the majority ran with an anti semetic message, yes.

Monty

[Batman]

Is there any record of him making this statement at the time or close to it?

I think the investigation clearly indicates no confusion.

[Monty]

We do not know when Dew wrote his recollection, just when it was published.

The fact we have contradiction does, indeed, show a degree of confusion.

Monty

[Batman]

You mean a later life writing?

Monty

Yes, it is one of odd ones. I was talking about the better known memoirs at the end of the 1800s, start of 1900s, to show they hadn't changed position.

The value of a 50 year old memoir, is what it is, 50 years of recollections.

[Monty]

The 'Old Jewery' and the investigators where not confused over its meaning at any point from when it was found to later life writings.

You mean a later life writing?

Monty

[Batman]

Indeed, Dew stated it had nothing to do with the crimes.

Monty

In 1938.... 50 years later.

[Monty]

The 'Old Jewery' and the investigators where not confused over its meaning at any point from when it was found to later life writings. Its just double cockney as pointed out by Martin Fido. If there is evidence they where confused over it, would like to see that.

Indeed, Dew stated it had nothing to do with the crimes.

Monty

[Batman]

The 'Old Jewery' and the investigators where not confused over its meaning at any point from when it was found to later life writings. Its just double cockney as pointed out by Martin Fido. If there is evidence they where confused over it, would like to see that.

[GUT]

Since the "double negative" is written out, it seems much more likely that the intended meaning is, "the Jews will be blamed for something..."

rather than an unintentional double negative as one would say in every day speech, such as, "I didn't do nothing" --intended meaning, "I didn't do anything."

The implication being that having to write something out would negate the tendency to unintentionally invoke a double negative as one would spontaneously do verbally or in every day speech.

For a literate person perhaps, but for one who wrote as they spoke?