The Strange Death Of Montague John Druitt

[GUT]

Hi GUT,

The 3rd December is possibly the day that Monty was last seen. The unnamed friend said that Monty hadn’t been seen for over a week (from 11th Dec) I’m working from memory but I don’t think we have definitive evidence that Monty was sacked on the 30th? But when it was said that William arrived in London on 30th December it’s unlikely that he’d have taken 19 days when his brother was missing. This is more likely to have meant the date that Monty was sacked 30th November instead of December. Also 30 November was a Friday which accords with his note “since Friday...”

I can’t think of a reason why your suggestion couldn’t be a possibility though GUT?

The December 30 was the evidence at the inquest.

[GUT]

Turnham Green Gazette of January 5, 1889:

"William H. Druitt said he lived at Bournemouth, and that he was a solicitor. The deceased was his brother, who was 31 last birthday. He was a barrister-at-law, and an assistant master in a school at Blackheath. He had stayed with witness at Bournemouth for a night towards the end of October. Witness heard from a friend on the 11th of December that deceased had not been heard of at his chambers for more than a week. Witness then went to London to make inquiries, and at Blackheath he found that deceased had got into serious trouble at the school, and had been dismissed. That was on the 30th of December. Witness had deceased's things searched where he resided, and found a paper addressed to him (produced). The Coroner read the letter, which was to this effect: - "Since Friday I felt I was going to be like mother, and the best thing for me was to die." Witness, continuing, said deceased had never made any attempt on his life before. His mother became insane in July last. He had no other relative.

[GUT]

Of course it is ambiguous was he sacked on the 30th, or was that when William found out.

[GUT]

Also note the friend said Montie hadn’t been seen at chambers for more than a week, but we have no idea how often he normally attended chambers. Be nothing unusual at all for a Barrister not to be seen in our chambers for a few weeks, either on circuit, or doing advice work from some other location, and none of us hold down full time teaching jobs as well. It us another thing that puzzles me, and may well explain William’s delay. Especially if it was William who briefed him in the appeal late November.

he must also have had some arrangement with the school to have time off for his legal work.

if he was missing in action from Early Dec to the 11th, why didn’t the school, where it is presumed he lived, do anything. So much just doesn’t add up to me.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’ve often wondered about Monty’s arrangement with the school in regard to his legal work which would have come his way at irregular intervals? I think that I’ve heard this suggested before but might his main role at the school have been as night time master. To be on-site through the night combined with a few day time duties perhaps sports? I honestly don’t know how these things worked though.

***

Wouldn’t the fact that the school didn’t do anything about Monty being missing have been because they knew that he’d been sacked?

****

I wish that we knew for certain where they meant by ‘Witness had deceased things searched where he resided.’ We know that he’d lived at the school but obviously by the time that William got there he’d been sacked around 2 weeks previously so why would his things have still been there? If he’d moved to Kings Bench Walk this raises a question. Surely his friends/colleagues at KBW would have known that Monty lived and worked at the school and they would have noticed him moving into KBW and wondered why? So if someone contacted William on the 11th why didn’t they contact the school for info first? It would have been the obvious thing to have done and might have made it unnecessary to contact William.

[Abby Normal]

I’ve often wondered about Monty’s arrangement with the school in regard to his legal work which would have come his way at irregular intervals? I think that I’ve heard this suggested before but might his main role at the school have been as night time master. To be on-site through the night combined with a few day time duties perhaps sports? I honestly don’t know how these things worked though.

***

Wouldn’t the fact that the school didn’t do anything about Monty being missing have been because they knew that he’d been sacked?

****

I wish that we knew for certain where they meant by ‘Witness had deceased things searched where he resided.’ We know that he’d lived at the school but obviously by the time that William got there he’d been sacked around 2 weeks previously so why would his things have still been there? If he’d moved to Kings Bench Walk this raises a question. Surely his friends/colleagues at KBW would have known that Monty lived and worked at the school and they would have noticed him moving into KBW and wondered why? So if someone contacted William on the 11th why didn’t they contact the school for info first? It would have been the obvious thing to have done and might have made it unnecessary to contact William.

perhaps they gave him a couple of weeks to move out?

[Herlock Sholmes]

perhaps they gave him a couple of weeks to move out?

That's probably the case Abby.

[Herlock Sholmes]

perhaps they gave him a couple of weeks to move out?

That’s probably the case Abby.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Double post - weird.

[GUT]

perhaps they gave him a couple of weeks to move out?

Not if it was for kiddy fiddling like many would have you believe.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Perhaps they made him move out but let him leave some of his belongings there until he’d found somewhere permanent?

[etenguy]

I'm not sure what is true in relation to Druitt's candidacy for JTR. The reasons I have come across for considering him to be JTR include:
a He confessed to being the ripper to family members (who told police officials)
b He confessed to being the ripper when in hospital/asylum (reported to the police)
c He had been arrested in Whitechapel covered in blood on the night of the double event, but let go
d He committed suicide (was murdered?) a few weeks after Mary Jane Kelly was murdered, bringing the spree to an end.

Are all of the above true? If c is true, surely he would be a leading candidate.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I'm not sure what is true in relation to Druitt's candidacy for JTR. The reasons I have come across for considering him to be JTR include:
a He confessed to being the ripper to family members (who told police officials)
b He confessed to being the ripper when in hospital/asylum (reported to the police)
c He had been arrested in Whitechapel covered in blood on the night of the double event, but let go
d He committed suicide (was murdered?) a few weeks after Mary Jane Kelly was murdered, bringing the spree to an end.

Are all of the above true? If c is true, surely he would be a leading candidate.

Hi Eten,

Your points are all relating to Jon Hainsworth’s latest book.

a) After a newspaper article reported that a priest had heard the rippers confession JH suggests that this might have been Monty’s cousin The Reverend Charles Druitt. As it was claimed in the article that the vicar was from the north JH suggests that Druitt told his friend The Reverend Arthur Du Boulay-Hill (CD married his sister) who was the article writer. The article was called The Whitechurch murders and Whitechurch was the alternative name for CD’s parish.

b) This was from a newspaper article discovered by Roger Palmer about an Englishman being confined in a French Asylum. He was taken there by 2 people. A lawyer and a doctor who JH suggests might have been William Druitt and one of the Tukes.

c) This is the PC Spicer story. JH suspects that this was Monty.

d) He was pulled from the Thames around a month after Kelly’s Murder and it was believed that he’d been in the Thames for a month or so. Just after he’d been sacked for getting into serious trouble at the Blackheath School.

These are very brief responses of course Eten. Only d) can be called a fact a, b and c are suggested explanations.

[etenguy]

These are very brief responses of course Eten. Only d) can be called a fact a, b and c are suggested explanations.

Thanks Herlock.

Given the above, I am left wondering why Druitt was put in the frame at all - other than two facts

a the date of his death
b MacNaghten's talk of him being a strong candidate for the Ripper based on 'private information'

Those other (a, b and c) events, are speculated to be relating to Druitt but only due to his name already being in the ring. Why did MacNaghten favour him? If there was information relating to Druitt and the crimes, of which MacNaghten was aware, why was this not explored/investigated? Do we need to insert a conspiracy of silence to explain this?

Apologies for all the questions, but I am struggling to understand why contemporary investigators thought Druitt a possible suspect.

[Bridewell]

In the 5th January newspaper report it states that the note was found when his things were found “..where he resided.” Leighton takes this to have meant the school. If this was the case then we would have to ask why Monty’s possessions were still at the school around a fortnight after he’d been dismissed? It’s possible of course that after being sacked he was staying elsewhere. KBW for example?

Why would his possessions not still be at the school? If he had died then obviously he couldn't collect them and no relatives had yet been contacted. The key question is surely the reason for his dismissal. The note he left suggests he may have thought he was going mad but what caused him to think that?