The Strange Death Of Montague John Druitt

[spyglass]

Hi all,
A return ticket suggests he planned to return, that's of course he was thinking straight.
If he did plan to commit suicide by drowning, then the river Thames is just a walk away from Blackheath.

I've never been able to obtain whether he was found with his shoes on, because if he didnt then suicide is likely.
I remember hearing this from a river policemen based on the Thames some years back.

Regards.

[Bridewell]

Hi all,
A return ticket suggests he planned to return, that's of course he was thinking straight.
If he did plan to commit suicide by drowning, then the river Thames is just a walk away from Blackheath.

I've never been able to obtain whether he was found with his shoes on, because if he didnt then suicide is likely.
I remember hearing this from a river policemen based on the Thames some years back.

Regards.

I think I read on this forum, some years ago, that a return ticket was sometimes cheaper than a single so he didn't necessarily plan to return if that's the case (although why a man intent on suicide would be taking that cost saving into consideration I'm not sure).

[Herlock Sholmes]

If your suggestion that he might have feared being incarcerated in an asylum is true, it seems unlikely that he would voluntarily visit one.

Fair point Joshua.

As a suggestion though. If he saw the Tukes as friends or as being ‘on his side’ he might have seen their place as a kind of sanctuary as opposed to a forced incarceration in somewhere less salubrious?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Why did he have those two cheques in his pocket if he was intending suicide?

[Joshua Rogan]

Fair point Joshua.

As a suggestion though. If he saw the Tukes as friends or as being ‘on his side’ he might have seen their place as a kind of sanctuary as opposed to a forced incarceration in somewhere less salubrious?

Mmm, maybe. But if so, it didn't go too well for him!

[Herlock Sholmes]

Mmm, maybe. But if so, it didn't go too well for him!

It could have worked out better Joshua

[Wickerman]

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

If the true reason for this was that 'private information' was the source, we may never have anything more official than what Jonathan H. has unearthed.
Some say it was only due to him committing suicide, but lots of people died, including suicides, in the months directly following the murder of Kelly, so why this one?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Good point Wick. This one is one that I’ve raised before (yes I know, yawn, yawn)

Why did Mac add Monty to his list?

He wasn’t a criminal.

He was of Mac’s own class in a society when this was so important.

He was related by marriage to one of his best friends.

Its usually said that it was because Monty conveniently died just after Kelly but... Munro, who Mac admired greatly, believed that Mackenzie was a victim , so why didn’t Mac select someone that died after Mackenzie?

Why choose someone like Monty who (as opposed to someone like Kosminski) might easily have had an alibi somewhere (court, school, cricket, social gathering?)

Why didn’t Mac just select some dead criminal or hopelessly insane lunatic. Or why didn’t he just leave it at Kosminski and Ostrog?

....

Why name Druitt unless he genuinely felt that he had reason to do so?

[Ozzy]

I think I read on this forum, some years ago, that a return ticket was sometimes cheaper than a single

My first thought was how strange.

But looking further I found some websites explaining why this might happen.

So the fact the Druitt had a return really doesn't mean anything.

[Herlock Sholmes]

If that’s the case it might not mean anything. Would Monty have needed to penny-pinch though?

[caz]

Monty may have been on automatic pilot, and just bought a return ticket from habit.

It may also have been psychological, hanging on to a semblance of normality until the very last moment, when he finally had to decide between carrying on somehow or committing himself to his watery grave. There was always the option of using that return ticket - unless of course he never intended to take his own life, despite whatever trouble he was in, and he was bumped off. If so, he made it convenient for his murderer by being close to the Thames as well as having a plausible reason - his mother and her mental state - for wanting to end it all.

I wonder if he'd have become a suspect in MacNaghten's book anyway, if he had lived. In that case, any private information coming to the attention of the police - the sexual insanity business for example - would have had to be shared and investigated, not destroyed or covered up to protect the family's good name.

Love,

Caz
X

[GUT]

Monty may have been on automatic pilot, and just bought a return ticket from habit.

It may also have been psychological, hanging on to a semblance of normality until the very last moment, when he finally had to decide between carrying on somehow or committing himself to his watery grave. There was always the option of using that return ticket - unless of course he never intended to take his own life, despite whatever trouble he was in, and he was bumped off. If so, he made it convenient for his murderer by being close to the Thames as well as having a plausible reason - his mother and her mental state - for wanting to end it all.

I wonder if he'd have become a suspect in MacNaghten's book anyway, if he had lived. In that case, any private information coming to the attention of the police - the sexual insanity business for example - would have had to be shared and investigated, not destroyed or covered up to protect the family's good name.

Love,

Caz
X

I expect you are right. He always bought a return so he bought a return.

[David Andersen]

During the late 19^th Century there were two distinct and separate families named Tuke. To confuse matters even further both Tuke families were engaged in the same profession namely the humane treatment of the insane. The two families were friends and often collaborated in their endeavours to promote new treatments and methods of non-restraint.
Thomas Harrington Tuke ran the asylum at the Manor House in Chiswick. He was married to Sophia Connoly the daughter of John Connoly a pioneer in non-restaint methods and who ran a similar establishment in nearby Hanwell. Connoly had died in 1866 and in 1875 he was eventually succeeded by Daniel Hack-Tuke of the Quaker family who had first introduced non restraint into their own establishment in York. Daniel Hack-Tuke had one son Henry Scott Tuke who became a painter of some repute specialising in paintings of young naked boys
Thomas Harrington Tuke died in the summer of 1888 and passed control of the Chiswick asylum to his eldest son Thomas Seymour Tuke. It was Thomas Tuke who nursed Ann Druitt during her final days which were spent st the Chiswick asylum. He also failed to mention, in Ann Druitts case notes that her own son had committed suicide just eighteen months earlier virtually on the doorstep of his asylum whereas he did see fit to mention other instances of suicide, and attempted suicide within Anns own family as pertinent facts.
Montague Druitt and Thomas Tuke had both attended Oxford University at the same time and both shared a keen interest in Cricket with Montague playing for the University team.
Druitts death is dated the 4^th December just 5 days after purchasing a return ticket to nearby Hammersmith a short walk from the Chiswick asylum.
During those last days Montague would have ‘resided’ somewhere. Given Williams later decision to send Ann into the care of the Tukes asylum, close to the very spot where her own Son had apparently taken his life strongly suggests that there was a connection between the two families.
This would also explain how Montagues badly decomposed corpse was identified so quickly. It should be remembered that the policeman who searched the body told the inquest that there were no papers or letters of any kind found on the body.The place where he had resided was not Valentines school at all. It was where he had resided for the last few days of his life almost certainly the Manor House Asylum. These may well have been the friends who according later to MacNaghten had entertained grave doubts as to Druitts sanity. There is some evidence which suggests that this possibility is very real.
The Red House museum of local history in Christchurch Dorset boast among its exhibits a painting by Henry Scott Tuke son of Daniel Hack Tuke and a friend and contemporary of Thomas Seymour Tuke. Interestingly the Red House museum, a former workhouse built in the 18^th Century was gifted to the borough of Christchurch by no less than the Druitt family.But just recently yet another fascinating piece of information surfaced.
In issue 165 of ‘Ripperologist’ writer David Barrat presented an article about the many letters which had been received by Scotland Yard at the time of the Ripper murders. None of the letters have survived but luckily a list of those who had sent information in to Scotland Yard had been made before the letters were routinely destroyed, the list comprises of 227 entries. As I went through the list one name jumped off the page. Letter 131 on the list was sent to Scotland Yard on the 24^th November 1888. All we do know about this letter is that it offered suggestions re: the Whitechapel murder. The writer of the letter was Henry Scott Tuke. Less than one week after this letter was received George Sims wrote in his newspaper column published on the 2^nd December, two days before Montagues death that Commissioner Monro was on to someone.
Was Henry Scott Tuke the man who denounced Druitt?

[David Andersen]

I expect you are right. He always bought a return so he bought a return.

No he didnt. He had season tickets.

[Herlock Sholmes]

During the late 19^th Century there were two distinct and separate families named Tuke. To confuse matters even further both Tuke families were engaged in the same profession namely the humane treatment of the insane. The two families were friends and often collaborated in their endeavours to promote new treatments and methods of non-restraint.
Thomas Harrington Tuke ran the asylum at the Manor House in Chiswick. He was married to Sophia Connoly the daughter of John Connoly a pioneer in non-restaint methods and who ran a similar establishment in nearby Hanwell. Connoly had died in 1866 and in 1875 he was eventually succeeded by Daniel Hack-Tuke of the Quaker family who had first introduced non restraint into their own establishment in York. Daniel Hack-Tuke had one son Henry Scott Tuke who became a painter of some repute specialising in paintings of young naked boys
Thomas Harrington Tuke died in the summer of 1888 and passed control of the Chiswick asylum to his eldest son Thomas Seymour Tuke. It was Thomas Tuke who nursed Ann Druitt during her final days which were spent st the Chiswick asylum. He also failed to mention, in Ann Druitts case notes that her own son had committed suicide just eighteen months earlier virtually on the doorstep of his asylum whereas he did see fit to mention other instances of suicide, and attempted suicide within Anns own family as pertinent facts.
Montague Druitt and Thomas Tuke had both attended Oxford University at the same time and both shared a keen interest in Cricket with Montague playing for the University team.
Druitts death is dated the 4^th December just 5 days after purchasing a return ticket to nearby Hammersmith a short walk from the Chiswick asylum.
During those last days Montague would have ‘resided’ somewhere. Given Williams later decision to send Ann into the care of the Tukes asylum, close to the very spot where her own Son had apparently taken his life strongly suggests that there was a connection between the two families.
This would also explain how Montagues badly decomposed corpse was identified so quickly. It should be remembered that the policeman who searched the body told the inquest that there were no papers or letters of any kind found on the body.The place where he had resided was not Valentines school at all. It was where he had resided for the last few days of his life almost certainly the Manor House Asylum. These may well have been the friends who according later to MacNaghten had entertained grave doubts as to Druitts sanity. There is some evidence which suggests that this possibility is very real.
The Red House museum of local history in Christchurch Dorset boast among its exhibits a painting by Henry Scott Tuke son of Daniel Hack Tuke and a friend and contemporary of Thomas Seymour Tuke. Interestingly the Red House museum, a former workhouse built in the 18^th Century was gifted to the borough of Christchurch by no less than the Druitt family.But just recently yet another fascinating piece of information surfaced.
In issue 165 of ‘Ripperologist’ writer David Barrat presented an article about the many letters which had been received by Scotland Yard at the time of the Ripper murders. None of the letters have survived but luckily a list of those who had sent information in to Scotland Yard had been made before the letters were routinely destroyed, the list comprises of 227 entries. As I went through the list one name jumped off the page. Letter 131 on the list was sent to Scotland Yard on the 24^th November 1888. All we do know about this letter is that it offered suggestions re: the Whitechapel murder. The writer of the letter was Henry Scott Tuke. Less than one week after this letter was received George Sims wrote in his newspaper column published on the 2^nd December, two days before Montagues death that Commissioner Monro was on to someone.
Was Henry Scott Tuke the man who denounced Druitt?

Hello David,

I have to say that yours is one of my favourite books on the case. Until recently I only had the Kindle version but I was very pleased to be able to buy a hard copy a couple of months ago.

What a pity that Henry Scott Tuke's letter hasn't survived. The link between the Druitt's and the Tuke's is certainly a suggestive one for me and your suggestion that Monty may have been staying with them immediately prior to his suicide is entirely plausible.

Do you think that William knew where Monty was and that he only came to London, after being contacted by the anonymous friend, because he wouldn't have wanted to tell them where Monty actually was? He also might have wanted to ensure that only he searchex Monty's belongings? Wouldn't the Tuke's have contacted William to let him know where his brother was?