Upon what basis did the Druitt family suspect Montague?

[Robert]

Hi Bridewell

Well, maybe one of them was for legal work? At some point he was involved in purchasing a piece of land for the school but I cannot remember precisely when.

I feel sure the cheques were to Druitt and that he never got round to paying them in.

[curious]

Hi, Curious,

The 5.30(ish) time of death is based on the assumption that Mrs Long saw Chapman on the street with her killer. If Long was right, there was no ambush, surely?

Regards, Bridewell.

Hi, Bridewell,
No. The statement was that prostitution was the only possible explanation for Chapman to have been in the backyard -- at any time.

I can see another possible explanation.

[Cogidubnus]

I'm sure you can Velma...but I'm equally sure that so can Colin (Bridewell)...When all is said and done though, I don't think you're actually very far from each other!

Every good wish

Dave

[curious]

I'm sure you can Velma...but I'm equally sure that so can Colin (Bridewell)...When all is said and done though, I don't think you're actually very far from each other!

Every good wish

Dave

Morning, Dave,
If I recall correctly, Bridewell and I are on the same page about the timing. of Annie Chapman's death. From his note, I thought he simply misunderstood what I was saying in that one particular post. . . or perhaps I was misreading something by skimming over it.

[Robert]

In a slightly poignant incident, Valentine's oldest niece, Florence Emily, was knocked down and killed by a car almost 40 years to the day since Monty was dragged from the Thames.

[Mayerling]

Hi again Jeff

The info I gave about 1881 is wrong. The inestimable Chris Scott gives the full picture :

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=13739

Hi Robert and all,

I was reading the research of Valentine's establishment that Chris Scott gave. Fascinating about Algernon Boyle, future Fourth Sea Lord.

It is obvious that Valentine kept close ties to his brother's family. There was a nephew living with him. And subsequently he lived with the widow of his brother and his nieces. So there is (at least) some room for speculation along what I suggested.

On the score of Valentine and Druitt having a homosexual relationship - somehow that would have guaranteed Monty living to a ripe old age as partner to Valentine. How would Valentine be able to rid the school of Druitt if he was the predator or main factor of the relationship and not Monty? Monty would have been in a great position to blackmail Valentine. Of course this is predecated on the notions that (a) such a type of relationship developed, and (b) Monty had a nasty blackmailing streak - something that there is even less evidence of than of his cutting up Mary Kelly a month earlier.

On can consider that the matter of the two checks is a moot one. If Monty was more venal and greedy he would have seen that he had enough to start over again elsewhere - not commit suicide. He could have done what Lionel did and gone to Australia or New Zealand. Of he could have gone to Canada or the U.S. for that matter. His problem would have been more interesting though - there seems no evidence that he got a character reference from Valentine! Unless you are in service today, the closest we come is when some employers ask for the candidate for the job to get several letters of recommendation from fellow workers, employers, or religious counselors. This is true in some civil service posts I had to take tests for. In 1888 it was even harsher - any teacher (short of a head master or known academician) would have needed such a letter. Monty had none on him, and I don't recall William testifying he found one along with the suicide note. Which means, probably, Valentine refused to give him one. It may also explain that second check (Valentine making it up for not giving the character reference - but then, if the reason was he could not trust in Monty's character at all, why give him conscience money for not giving him the letter?).

Jeff

[Bridewell]

I feel sure the cheques were to Druitt and that he never got round to paying them in.

Hi Robert,

I think it far more likely than the alternative certainly.

Regards. Bridewell.

[RivkahChaya]

Doesn't the "homosexual" assumption hinge on what "sexually insane" meant to Victorians? Do we have another context where it clearly meant "homosexual"? I think everyone in the later 20th and 21st century makes that assumption, but I'm not sure we really know that. For all we know, Druitt could have been impotent, which may have been the the supposed result of some kind of emotional trauma, or even the supposed result of excessive masturbation in adolescence. Or he may have been having symptom that were thought to be the onset of tertiary syphilis. If he had syphilis, and then had any psychiatric or movement disorder symptoms at all, a doctor might likely make that leap, since tertiary syphilis was much more common than other kinds of degenerative disorders, back in the 1880s.

I wouldn't think that just getting to 31 without marrying was a red flag for being gay, for Victorians. Being able to support a wife was considered a prerequisite for marrying, wasn't it? if a man was still getting his professional life together, and couldn't afford a place suitable for a married couple, being 31 wasn't all that suspicious. That's still pretty young. I know that life-expectancy was lower then, but that's because infant mortality was so high. Middle class people who married between 30 and 35 could still expect to have children and see them grow up.

[Robert]

Hi all

Just on the question of the job reference : if the inquest report is correct, William said that Monty had been dismissed. If William did say that, then it seems that he could not have had a reference from Valentine, for if Valentine wanted to give Monty a reference - because, say, Monty's leaving was no fault of Monty's - then he would surely have let him resign. "Dismissed" does sound bad.

Riv, Victorian courtship was a very tiresome and time-consuming business and we must remember that Monty had his legal and teaching work, and of course his sporting interests, especially cricket.

[lynn cates]

Help Wanted

Hello All. Here are some "Help Wanted Ads" pertaining to Valentine's School. One may compare the salaries to those checks found on Monty.

Cheers.
LC

[Robert]

Lynn, what was the date of the bottom left (vacant in January)?

[Wickerman]

Hi and Merry Christmas to all (and Happy New Year too)

1) I don't think that Monty was guilty - he strikes me as a peculiarly tragic figure in his own right. However...

Seasons greetings to you too.
We have to resign ourselves to never 'knowing' why Druitt was suspected by Macnaghten, but us not knowing does not remove him.

2) Although Stephen suggests it is "silly beyone words" for "a classically educated English gentleman, a barrister, and a schoolmaster who knew Greek and Latin" to carve up prostitutes,....

We do read in the 19th century press of this aloof opinion that the Whitechapel murders could not possibly have been committed by a fine upstanding Englishman.
It has to be a foreigner, or some low life..


That type of class distinction should have died out with the Victorians.
There has always been a small selection of the 'refined-class' who think they can get away with murder, both literally and metaphorically.

[Bridewell]

It looks as though the larger of the two cheques (if it was from Valentine's school) represented 4 - 6 months salary.

I still favour some kind of mental breakdown ahead of any sexual impropriety as a reason for his dismissal. I think the note he left is more suggestive of that interpretation also.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Cogidubnus]

£50 per term for a master...sounds like one cheque just might be a term's salary as has been suggested elsewhere...no stronger than "might" though...

All the best

Dave

[lynn cates]

1886

Hello Robert. Thanks

Bottom left is 17 November, 1886. (From "The Guardian.")

Cheers.
LC