Macnaghten and Druitt: Way Too Many Questions

[c.d.]

I was thinking about the Macnaghten Memoranda and its reference to Druitt and I started to realize just how many questions it brings up. Although it does not mention the name of Macnaghten's informant, it does imply that the informant's information came from the family. Macnaghten clearly gives the impression that the information he received is substantial and that it makes a strong case for Druitt being the Ripper. I suppose it is possible that the information came from a family servant or from some other seconhand source but would that source have information of a kind that would leave such a strong impression with Macnaghten as to Druitt's guilt? It seems more likely that it came from someone close to the family. If so, I have to wonder why a family member would share the belief that Druitt was the Ripper with someone outside the family. Did that family member inadvertently blurt it out to the guests assembled at a dinner party? Did they have one glass of wine too many and start dropping some not so subtle hints? Is it more likely they took a close family friend into their confidence? But what would be the purpose of doing so? Would they have asked advice on how to act on their suspicions? If so, would the informant have advised that the family go to the police out of a moral responsibility or perhaps counseled that it would be better to have Monty put quietly put away in an institution before the Druitt name got dragged through the mud? Would not the family member have asked for a pledge of confidence first? Was that pledge broken by speaking to Macnaghten? Also, if the police then made inquiries with the Druitt family would not the close family friend be immediately suspect as the one who leaked the information?

I am also troubled by why the informant would speak to Macnaghten if Monty was already dead at the time. What purpose would it have served? Would the informant have asked for a pledge of confidentiality first before telling their story? Could Macnaghten have given it knowing that it was still an open case?

Would Macnaghten have shared what he was told with his superiors? Would his pledge of confidentiality to his informant be respected by his superiors or merely anger them?

Sorry for so many questions but I really saw this in a whole new light that I had not seen before. Can anyone help clear these oh so murky waters?

c.d.

[aspallek]

Indeed, c.d., you have placed your finger on the crux of the matter. Clearly there was sufficient reason in Macnaghten's mind to favor Druitt as the most likely suspect. What was that reason and where did it come from? Those are the questions I seek to answer.

Many people seem to think my goal is to prove Druitt guilty. Not at all. My goal is to show why Macnaghten considered him to be so strong a suspect. We may eventually be able to prove Druitt innocent if that elusive alibi is ever found (which has not yet been found in spite of my diligent searching) but we shall never be able to prove him guilty.

With regard to the source of Macnaghten's information concerning the Druitt family's suspicion, I do not believe there is any indication that it came from a family member, although there is also no indication in the memorandum that it didn't. The source then is speculative, but I believe the two strongest possibilities are (in no particular order):

1. Henry Richard Farquharson, MP from Dorset West, the Druitt family's home district. In February of 1891 (barely two years after the murders and three years before the memorandum) Farquharson was blabbing about a "son of a surgeon" who committed suicide right after the last murder as being Jack the Ripper. This is clearly a reference to Druitt. Farquharson lived within 10 miles of the Druitt family home at Wimborne Minster. Press reports indicate that the police, and hence Macnaghten, had been contacted concerning this suspicion. Farquharson was a fellow Etonian to Macnaghten and John Henry Lonsdale (see below) and was in the tea business as was Macnaghten.

2. Rev. John Henry Lonsdale, curate at Wimborne Minster in Autumn 1888 and friend of the Druitt family. The ties are too numerous to go into here and they have been dealt with elsewhere but suffice it to say that there is ample evidence that Lonsdale and Montague Druitt were well acquainted from Lonsdale's days as a barrister (neighbors at Blackheath and also neighboring chambers at King's Bench Walk). I have also now clearly shown that Lonsdale was well acquainted with Montague's cousin, Rev. Charles Druitt. As the Druitt family's curate, it is possible that Lonsdale may have been told something in confidence or even that he heard Montague's confession. Lonsdale and Macnaghten were classmates at Eton.

[c.d.]

Hi Andy,

Are you saying that you believe the informant was not a family member or that the information itself did not come from a family member? Unless Macnaghten was a liar (which I dont' believe) or that he somehow misunderstood what he had been told or blew it all out of proportion, it would appear that his source was privy to first hand information. That leads me to suspect Druitt's family since he then goes on to mention the family's belief. Of course, the informant could have been under the impression that the family suspected Druitt and passed that belief on to Macnaghten.

All very, very bizarre.

c.d.

[aspallek]

Thanks for the opportunity to clarify. I am saying that I see no indication Macnaghten's informant was a Druitt family member. It certainly could have been but there is no indication to that effect. In fact there is, I believe, slight indication that it was not a family member who informed Macnaghten of the Druitt family's suspicion. Furthermore, I believe the two strongest possibilities for the informant based on our available knowledge are not family members (Farquharson and Lonsdale).