Druitt in the confessional?

[aspallek]

In my opinion, druitt definetely was not the ripper. The only reason he's been fingered is because he killed himself soon after the murders finished, a spurious connection to say the least. The poor man has been slandered as being the ripper.
W.H Bury and james kelly are much more likely suspects to me.

I realize you are new to the boards and I don't wish to be unkind but your response is extremely simplistic to the point of naiveté.

There were many other suicides in Greater London from November 1888 through January 1889. There is no indication that the police ever suspected any of them. Clearly Druitt's timely suicide is not the primary reason he was suspected, let alone the "only" reason.

Furthermore, you are correct in your implication that Druitt seems an unlikely person to be suspected of murder. But don't you see that this unlikelihood is precisely what makes him such a compelling suspect? Surely Macnaghten knew that Druitt was a gentleman with no known criminal history or history of violence and in spite of this knowledge Sir Melville suspected him.

I have no idea whether Montague Druitt was guilty of the Whitechapel Murders but I am certain that Macnaghten had good reason to suspect him.

And if you want to talk about suspects with no known conncetion to the Whitechapel murders, Bury and Kelly fall into that category.

[sauniere]

In my opinion, druitt definetely was not the ripper. The only reason he's been fingered is because he killed himself soon after the murders finished, a spurious connection to say the least. The poor man has been slandered as being the ripper.
W.H Bury and james kelly are much more likely suspects to me.

[BeckyUK2001]

The murderer was a man of good position and otherwise unblemished character. Hmm, Druitt was a bit blemished when he lost his job for possible homosexual relations at a school or indecent exposure I never heard that he suffered from Epilepsy though he had a family history of insanity but not Epilepsy. A nice juicy story though. In my opinion he seemed too meak to kill anybody, a tiny little chap. What he had in his pockets when he jumped did not add up either

[Johnr]

Didn't Montague Druitt's brother, Edward, turn catholic?

Hello Chris and Andy et al,

Another very tantalising find Chris. Well done.
I am sure you understand any criticism of the content of these is not meant to reflect on you as the very important Discoverer.
I wonder has anyone made a thorough study of the Houses of Parliament Debates reports - the Hansards?
Given we had been looking for a western member ( of parliament) who claimed to know who JTR was. And the few details of that theory demonstrated a more than usual accurate knowledge of the Druitt Suspicion..
And now a suggestion (surely it cannot be genuine?) of a mooted Royal Commission....
Also, it would be good to see if any other M.P.'s have announced an obscure piece of evidence handed to them by one of their constituents...
JOHN RUFFELS.

[dougie]

Just noticed this thread today,cant say Im entirely convinced Its not a piece of media fabrication,but its certainly intriguing.Would be very interested in any updates......
regards

[Chris Scott]

Hi guys
Thanks for the responses
I agree that this report raises problems. As to the timing of the confession, this, of course, can only be guessed at. An important phrase is "It is understood that the death of a Catholic priest in the East End of London has placed some important revelations in the hands of the police." As the article is dated January 1892, this implies that such a priest would have died somewhere in the East End in late 1891 or very early 1892. Whether it would be possible to trace such a death is doubtful but I'll see if I can find anything
Chris

[joelhall]

Thanks Chris for this find also! I recall reading something quite like this before but not this very article. My gut feeling, however, is that it is unrelated to the previous story (from 1899) that you posted. I think it is a coincidence, though it is impossible to be sure. To me the phrase "brother clergyman" in the 1899 article implies an Anglican clergyman rather than a Catholic priest. I think there were probably a lot of such "confessional" rumors circulating at the time.

i thought this too, but given the clergyman of the first stories unwillingness to go into details, could it be that this priest was actually the originator of his knowledge? obviously its impossible to tell, and perhaps even the confessional booth attracted its share of nutters confessing to crimes they didnt commit.

nonetheless, as it was initially considered important enough to warrant a commission to investigate (though evidently they could not have concluded that this solved the case), perhaps there may still be some legal papers to this effect, or results of the judges findings?

though its doubtful, there is a chance this could provide a new prospective on the evidence.

joel

[aspallek]

Thanks Chris for this find also! I recall reading something quite like this before but not this very article. My gut feeling, however, is that it is unrelated to the previous story (from 1899) that you posted. I think it is a coincidence, though it is impossible to be sure. To me the phrase "brother clergyman" in the 1899 article implies an Anglican clergyman rather than a Catholic priest. I think there were probably a lot of such "confessional" rumors circulating at the time.

But this article is interesting on a number of counts. First of all, what of the "royal commission" mentioned? Was something like this actually considered? The mention of the murders as "now almost forgotten" is strange in light of the Coles murder less than a year previous. Clearly, they were very much remembered in 1892. What of the packet left for Bradford? Did such a thing ever exist? The interesting missing detail is when this alleged confession was said to have taken place. Would it have been early enough to include Druitt? My opinion is that these details are largely fabricated, perhaps based on a rumor of such a "confession."

[Chris Scott]

Hi Joel
Thanks for the feedback - if I find any more on this story I'll post it here
Chris

[joelhall]

this is starting to become much more interesting now.

its strange though how there doesnt seem to be knowledge of the contents of this. ive had a quick look through 'letters from hell' since the last postings, but nothings taken my attention. unless ive missed something of course

it would seem this is either missing or was rejected early on. if of course there was a royal commission established though, then it must have been taken seriously at least by the recipient.

id love to learn more about this now

[Chris Scott]

This tale gets, as the saying goes, curiouser and curiouser!
The article below dates from 1892, seven years before the article which started this thread off. And also it comes from a US paper.
What relevance, if any, it has to the article we have been discussing, I do not know. The main point of difference here is that the priest in possession of the information "under seal of the confessional" is specifically described as a catholic priest
Again, guys, make of this what you will!
Chris

Rocky Mountain News
17 January 1892

WHITECHAPEL CRIME
Possible Discovery of the Identity of Jack the Ripper - Curious Legacy of a Priest

London, Jan. 2.
A royal commission is to investigate the now almost forgotten Whitechapel murders. It is understood that the death of a Catholic priest in the East End of London has placed some important revelations in the hands of the police. There can be no doubt that the priest, under the seal of confession, died possessed of information that might have led to the arrest of the murderer or murderers of the wretched women known as "Jack the Ripper's" victims. That the priest had qualms of conscience regarding the sanctity of confession, even in connection with such atrocities, is evinced by the sealed packet he left behind him addressed to Sir Edward Bradford, chief of London's police department. On the package was inscribed, in the dead priest's handwriting, "This is to be opened after my death - my lips must never reveal it."
Beyond the above, carelessly mentioned by a garrulous official who has since been severely reprimanded for his indiscretion, no further information can be obtained from the police. Whether it will lead to the detection of the Whitechapel fiend is a problem difficult to solve. Certain it is, however, that the number of undiscovered and unsuspected murderers who walk amongst us red handed is enought to appal the timid and law abiding. Sometimes the innocent suffer for the guilty, for the clearest judgment may be misled by defected or perjured evidence; but such miscarriages of justice, frequent enough in olden days, are, happily, of rare occurrence today.

[aspallek]

Hello Chris Andy and Deb etc,
Thanks for the Western Mail version Chris.More enlightening.
Is the Daily Mail one different from the original (Illustrated London News" (?)).
And delayed thanks to Andy for throwing light on the less formal confessional process in the Anglican church.
I wonder if vicars who think it O.K. to publish fictive versions of true confessions after tens years of sanitisation, and second-hand as hear-say,
feel it important to reveal the true facts to the London Metropolitan Police?
JOHN RUFFELS.

Just to clarify, as a Lutheran Pastor I'm not in the Anglican Communion so I can't shed any direct light on those practices. However, I doubt they are very different to what I am used to.

Personally, I would not consider it a breech of the confessional to do the things this vicar allegedly did with his information as long as the identity of the penitent is withheld, especially since he was deceased. However, I also would not go around make such revelations lightly, i.e. there must be a compelling reason to do so and not merely whimsy. But that's not to say another pastor wouldn't make such revelations on a whimsy.

Interestingly, having both received and administered the rite several times, our ordination rite (taken largely from the Anglican BCP) which is repeated at each subsequent installation expressly includes a pledge "never to divulge sins confessed to you."

[Chris Scott]

Hi Robert
Many thanks for that link - looks interesting reading
Chris

[Robert]

A link to an early Victorian view of "epileptic mania" :

http://www.mdx.ac.uk/WWW/STUDY/xMad1844.htm

[joelhall]

im curious though...

this killer supposedly helped the poor women of the east end & was a surgeon. he also suffered 'epileptic mania' (?) & died shortly after the dorset street killing. this doesnt quite fit with druitt, nor another suspect i could name.

perhaps this suspect was an abortionist or surgeon engaged at a workhouse or the like?
this is assuming of course that the story itself is true to begin with.