Barnett's candidacy - a few issues

[Sally]

I remember someone found information on Joseph and Louisa around 1900in the Raine St Infirmary record. Has anyone looked to see if there were any mention of Louisa, Joseph or "Emily" in Infirmary records around 1890 - 91 ? I mention Emily was listed as married to Joseph in the 1891 Census. Do we know where these records are kept (if at all ??)

Yeah, that was me, from 1896 onwards. I don't think there was anything between 1890-91, though. I can't remember whether that was because there wasn't anything in the record or because that record set didn't survive. The records are all available to view online via Ancestry. It's the Poor Law records for London that you want. The originals are kept by the LMA.

Re. Selina Elizabeth Frith - I don't see why not a face value, many people went by their middle name. Do you have any more information on her?

[Craig H]

Hi Craig,

And yes, 3 Raine St. was the address of the workhouse infirmary.

I remember someone found information on Joseph and Louisa around 1900in the Raine St Infirmary record. Has anyone looked to see if there were any mention of Louisa, Joseph or "Emily" in Infirmary records around 1890 - 91 ? I mention Emily was listed as married to Joseph in the 1891 Census. Do we know where these records are kept (if at all ??)

[Craig H]

Regarding, Lizzie Albrook: Albrook, with one L, is not a common name, and there is a Louisa Albrook born in Whitechapel in 1866 but that's ten years too young. Albrook might not be the correct spelling.

Could this be the Selina Elizabeth Frith who married Edward Hampden Allbrook in September 1879 ? This Selina is in the 1891 Census with Edward Allbrook.

[MayBea]

Louisa Day was a woman arrested in Bethnal Green on November 23rd, 1888, for being "out of control". She claimed she was being chased by the Ripper and related to the Royals.

http://www.casebook.org/press_report.../18881123.html

I suggested her because she is in Bethnal Green where our Louisa was born and she seems like someone who would insinuate herself into the case and fancy Joe.

Regarding, Lizzie Albrook: Albrook, with one L, is not a common name, and there is a Louisa Albrook born in Whitechapel in 1866 but that's ten years too young. Albrook might not be the correct spelling.

[Sally]

Hi Craig,

Below is Louisa Barnett's death certificate (November, 1926). Louisa died of pneumonia and described her husband's job as a dock labourer.

Is the address of "3 Raine St" the Raine St Infirmary ?

Thanks for posting those, and for the info regarding Louisa's burial place - very interesting. I'd be interested to see what Brookwood Cemetery come up with.

And yes, 3 Raine St. was the address of the workhouse infirmary.

It also highlights the Barnetts were poor. This suggests they probably didn't have a civil marriage so unlikely to appear in FreeBMD as married. Additionally, they had no children - which may have been a reason to get married.

They were poor - hence their several appearances in the Raine Street infirmary records over several years. Other people were poor though, and were still officially married, so I'm not sure that entirely explains the situation. Certainly two, and perhaps all of Joe's siblings were married.

How do we know Lizzie was sometimes called Louisa ? That would make sense

Well, I don't think we do - isn't that simply a stab in the dark? 'Lizzie' and wouldn't normally be a contraction of 'Louisa' - it'd be 'Lucy' or something of that nature.

I don't know anything of Louisa Day - perhaps somebody would be able to elaborate?

[Craig H]

If we're looking for Louisa from the cast of characters associated with the case, might we not look Louisa Day, who was living in Bethnal Green and testified at her own trial, or perhaps Lizzie Albrook whom some believe might really be named Louisa?
.

Hi MayBea,

Good idea .... I'll look at these folk on Ancestry.com. How do we know Lizzie was sometimes called Louisa ? That would make sense

[Craig H]

Below is Louisa Barnett's death certificate (November, 1926). Louisa died of pneumonia and described her husband's job as a dock labourer.

Is the address of "3 Raine St" the Raine St Infirmary ?

I have an email from City of London Cemetery to say "Louisa was buried in a 2nd class commons (paupers/public) grave in Square 415 grave number 100354." Unfortunately, as it is a common area, it is currently being re-used with new burials being placed on top of it.

Below is death certificate for Joseph Barnett, three weeks later.

The informant, Arthur Denis, lived at the same location as the Barnetts.

He was not buried or cremated at City of London Cemetery, where his wife was buried. I understand a large number of poor folk were buried at Brookwood Cemetery. I have emailed them to request any information.

It also highlights the Barnetts were poor. This suggests they probably didn't have a civil marriage so unlikely to appear in FreeBMD as married. Additionally, they had no children - which may have been a reason to get married.

[MayBea]

If we're looking for Louisa from the cast of characters associated with the case, might we not look Louisa Day, who was living in Bethnal Green and testified at her own trial, or perhaps Lizzie Albrook whom some believe might really be named Louisa?

The fact that Joe and Louisa agreed to 1888 as the date that they 'married' suggests they met because of the case.

[curious]

Don't you love a long weekend !!



Hi Curious,
Did you mean Mary Ann Cox was "homely" or "not homely" ??
I was reading on the link below that she was charged several times with assault.

http://www.casebook.org/witnesses/w/Mary_Ann_Cox.html

Hi, Craig,
To me and my area of the country (U.S.) "homely" is the same as unattractive.

I can see that it might have other meanings.

curious

[Sally]

The other thing is that this Joseph Barnett's parents were from the Midlands, if memory serves. I think his father John was from Birmingham.

[Sally]

I recall looking into the Barnett/Chambers marriage when I was looking for Joseph Barnett in the record. This Joseph Barnett was married on Christmas Day, 1876 at Holy Trinity Church Bermondsey. His father John was a Copper Smith and he was a dyer.

He was 24 when he married, and Louisa Chambers was 23, so he was born 1852/3 and she was born a year later.

Once again, the details don't match what we know of Kelly's Barnett, so I don't think this couple is the right one.

I think if, as seems likely, Joseph Barnett and his common law wife Louisa were not officially married, it will be difficult to track them down. I was lucky (and patient!) with the Raine Street infirmary records. We can see that from that point on, at least, they were living in the same small area of London. Nonetheless, I haven't identified them anywhere to date earlier than 1896.

Those eight years from 1888 are still a mystery and a puzzle.

[Craig H]

Hi MayBea,
I'm wondering if this is the Louisa Barnett bn 1854 (so could have been 22 y.o when married Joseph). They have a 3 year old which also supports that idea. However, this Joseph was a dyer and born in 1853.
Craig

[MayBea]

Regardless, we are left with a record which tells us, definitively, that Barnett and 'wife' Louisa had been in a relationship since 1888.

I'm willing to accept that our Joe Barnett did not officially marry Louisa in 1887.

But before we move on to an unofficially-married situation, what about the only Joseph Barnett/Louisa marriage in the record? A Joseph Barnett married a Louisa Chambers in 1876 when our Joe and Louisa were 20 or close to it. Could this be them? Perhaps they got back together after Mary died?

[Sally]

But would another woman put up with him giving money to MJK? when there isn't much doubt that even when working Joe was not exactly rolling in money.

Who knows? She may have been the tolerant type; she may not have known that he was giving money to his ex - there are many possibilities.

Regardless, we are left with a record which tells us, definitively, that Barnett and 'wife' Louisa had been in a relationship since 1888. That being so. they either began that relationship before, or after Kelly's death.

If Barnett had in fact 'met somebody else' when Kelly was murdered I can quite see why he may not have wanted to reveal the fact. I think that we should remember that as far as we can determine, Barnett was the one who ended his relationship with Kelly, not the other way around.

[GUT]

G'day Sally

Its possible that Barnett did hook up with another woman shortly after Kelly's death. Its also possible that he's already done so when she died.

But would another woman put up with him giving money to MJK? when there isn't much doubt that even when working Joe was not exactly rolling in money.