Druitt - A Link to the East End: The People's Palace

[Stewart P Evans]

Bachert Letter

That the Bachert story above was a pure invention is pretty obvious when we see a letter (found by Nick Connell) he wrote, in July 1889, which was indeed just after the McKenzie murder and not in 1891.



I wonder what happened to the letters received by Bachert relating to the murders? If not thrown away, perhaps they are with some descendant of his.

[aspallek]

Hello Stewart,

Far be it from me to argue with the Master and I do think the Bachert story is and invention but I am not quite following your logic.

Could it not be that McCormick/Bachert confused the dates of the two murders rather than the names? If so, Bachert was saying he kept silent until July 1889, not 1891, and there is not a conflict with your letter. At any rate, your letter indicates that after the MacKenzie murder Bachert did not believe the Ripper to be dead. That really says nothing about what he might have been told months earlier. Also, the letter does not contradict McCormick/Bachert's statement that he kept silent about the statement that the Ripper was dead until 1891, if we do choose to take it that way.

Furthermore, whether Bachert kept silent or not is beside the point. Whether he believed what he was told or not is also beside the point. The germane point is the question of whether a senior police official made this statement to Bachert in early 1889. If there was such a statement, then who might have made it? It it too early for Macnaghten. But could it have come from Macnaghten's source?

I know all about McCormick's reputation and I agree that it seems to be a fabrication. I'm just still not ready to say it must be.

[Ben]

The Bachert story was indeed another McCormick invention

Thought so, Stewart, and my appreciative thanks for providing that extract.

[Stewart P Evans]

Argue

Hello Stewart,
Far be it from me to argue with the Master and I do think the Bachert story is and invention but I am not quite following your logic.
Could it not be that McCormick/Bachert confused the dates of the two murders rather than the names? If so, Bachert was saying he kept silent until July 1889, not 1891, and there is not a conflict with your letter. At any rate, your letter indicates that after the MacKenzie murder Bachert did not believe the Ripper to be dead. That really says nothing about what he might have been told months earlier. Also, the letter does not contradict McCormick/Bachert's statement that he kept silent about the statement that the Ripper was dead until 1891, if we do choose to take it that way.
Furthermore, whether Bachert kept silent or not is beside the point. Whether he believed what he was told or not is also beside the point. The germane point is the question of whether a senior police official made this statement to Bachert in early 1889. If there was such a statement, then who might have made it? It it too early for Macnaghten. But could it have come from Macnaghten's source?
I know all about McCormick's reputation and I agree that it seems to be a fabrication. I'm just still not ready to say it must be.

Andy, I just knew that you would raise this objection. First, I am the 'Master' of nothing and, secondly, to argue is fine if that's your bag.

All sorts of things 'could be' if you wish to challenge the obvious. But let's look at McCormick's piece in its true context. McCormick is 'quoting' 'Backert', i.e. "...said Mr. Albert Backert." But where from? There is no known press report and absolutely no known reference to this story prior to McCormick's book. There was no known 'Thames suicide rumour' as early as March 1889 - and certainly a total absence of any such mention in the official police and Home Office records of the time. And if such information had been communicated to Bachert, after being 'sworn to secrecy' by the police around March 1889 you are not going to tell me that there would have been no other mention of it. Remember, when McCormick invented this tale no official records had been released.

McCormick's story was 'tailored' to fit the 'drowned in the Thames' story that McCormick lifted from Griffiths's 1898 account in Mysteries of Police and Crime -



The subject of this account was, of course, Druitt and, no mystery here, the source was Griffith's friend Macnaghten, although the the name of the suspect was not given. This Griffiths material was liberally used by McCormick in his book. Another giveway is McCormick's extended use of first person speech in these fictional accounts - when we all know that there is no way such conversations could have been, or were, recorded verbatim. So you argue 'could be' as many times as you like Andy, I don't think that you will be convincing anyone.

[aspallek]

Hello Stewart,

I don't have any hope of convincing you to see it my way but I do have some things to say as I continue this discussion:

1. You are indeed a "master" when it comes to this subject matter. I know you are a very humble person but you are one of the most knowledgeable people in the world concerning JtR. That doesn't make you superhuman and I think a lot of your humility comes from the "fear" of being seen as a "superhuman" when it comes to JtR, a role you do not seek. You are also one of the most kind and gracious of the professionals in our community.

2. I base absolutely nothing upon the Bachert tale. I realize there are major problems with establishing its veracity and that renders it unreliable as a basis for any theory.

3. By the same token, I do know something about literary criticism as that discipline is very much a part of my profession and was included in my professional education. I know that it is not valid to approach a document with one's own prejudices and say, "Oh, he just tailored this account to fit his theory..." without evidence to this effect. People want to do this, for example, with the Gospels. It is not a valid approach. The only real evidence against the veracity of the account is lack of mention in the official records. However, the records as we have them are not complete. The belief of a single senior police office in a drown-doctor suspect as early as 1889 may simply not have been preserved in the record.

What we do have that calls the account into serious question is McCormick's reputation. I have to admit that I don't know much about McCormick at all but I do trust you, Stewart, when you say he is unreliable. However, not everything written by an unreliable author is false. Take, Leighton, for example. He gives no citation for most of the information he presents regarding Druitt. Does that mean we throw it all out as "unreliable?" Certainly not. I happen to know that a lot of the information he gives is correct even though he does not cite references and even though many of the details are given to construct a desired image of Druitt. Personally, I cite references copiously in my articles. Not every author does. If the author doesn't, he suffers the penalty of having his work questioned.

Once again, the germane question is not whether Bachert believed what he had been told, or when Bachert broke silence about it, or even whether the police as an entity believed it. Most opponents of the story get bogged down with these irrelevant questions. The germane question is "Could a senior police official have made this statement to Bachert in March 1889?" Of course, it is possible. We have an author saying it happened. The author gives no evidence and had a shaky reputation with regard to veracity. That makes it doubtful. In itself, that does not make it false.

I know I won't convince you Stewart. I am only saying this to try to get others to look at it with an open mind. Yes, it seems like a fabrication. But it also just might contain a kernel of truth. It is not to be relied on but neither should it be merely tossed out altogether.

[Natalie Severn]

I seem to have stirred up a hornets nest here,mentioning Bachert.He was a bit of a barm pot actually and as such I doubt the police did tell him anything like this.However,in the Canon Barnett book of his life and work,it definitely states that in 1885 a vigilante group was set up at St Jude"s Commercial Street, mostly by the Oxford volunteers from Toynbee Hall,who patrolled the streets around the Commercial Street area.These patrol men,if they consisted of the volunteers ,as the case is stated, would have included the very active pair ,Arthur Dyke Acland and ET Cook,Druitt"s school /college mates.At some point during the Ripper scare,and for some time afterwards, it appears the Whitechapel Vigilante Ctte and the St Jude"s Vigilante Ctte, "patrolled the streets together" .What ever the case maybe, isnt it possible that there
may have been some gossip already circulating about their old pal University pal Druitt,and that Bachert got wind of bits of it and began pestering the police to confirm the rumour?

[Johnr]

It would be interesting to learn if and when these Vigilance Committees wound down their activities. Are there any clear indications?
And, SPE, thanks for posting thaty Bachert article. Is there a date for that?
JOHN RUFFELS.

[Natalie Severn]

John,
I dont have the book where I am in Wales but will be back in London towards the end of the week and will look it up.Its a library book so I dont have it for that long. I seem to remember the patrols continued for some time but for how long exactly I dont know.There is a section given over to Jack the Ripper in the books.Barnett"s wife talks about the horror of it all and of being right next to the George Yard murder and in the heart of it all.The Toynbee people helped as best they could,joining forces with the police and others-such as above, to hunt the Ripper down.There is no indication anyone knew who it was,but then I doubt Mrs Barnett would have allowed herself to listen to or divulge "idle gossip" about Jack the Ripper!


Yes,a big thankyou to Stewart for posting that on Bachert.

Best Wishes

Norma

[Johnr]

Thanks Natalie,
I was re-reading some of Farson's book yesterday, in which he quotes George Bernard Shaw's angry young firebrand letter to the Star about the murders.
You may be interested . He talks of the effects of the Dock Strike of two years before:
"The riots of 1886 brought in 78,000 pounds and a People's Palace..."
( And then follows his marvellous lines:
" Indeed, if the habits of a duchess only admitted of their being decoyed into Whitechapel backyards, a single experiment in slaughterhouse anatomy on an aristocratic vitim might fetch in a round half million and save the necessity of sacrificing four four women of the people..." ).

JOHN RUFFELS.

[Stewart P Evans]

And, SPE, thanks for posting thaty Bachert article. Is there a date for that?
JOHN RUFFELS.

The Bachert letter appeared in the Eastern Post of August 3, 1889.

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks Stewart and John for the 3 Aug info and the Farson link-respectively.
I am going to follow both up as I think we may be onto something here.

What GB Shaw said about these murders and his comment on the People"s Palace as well as the one about JtR being a genius whose "work" transformed
the East End,I remembered the comment of Rev Barnett"s wife as being similar viz the Ripper by his actions advertised the abject poverty of the East End.
But its this fairly large group of ,mainly Oxford, undergraduates,who formed the first "University Settlement" movement at 28 Commercial Street, Whitechapel in 1884 ,that interests me.I keep being reminded about ET Cook,who gave of his time so generously,well beyond his days commuting there from Blackheath,that suggests to me that he and/or were the source of all the rumours about Druitt.ET Cook had known him since childhood,had known him in the debating rooms of Winchester and then as an undergraduate at Oxford where he studied at the same "New College".He even seems to have dined with him at the Palmerston Club-though that may have been another Druitt.And ofcourse E T Cook then went on to become a journalist at the Pall Mall Gazette where there would have been the usual journalist "insider gossip"--- a plenty--- about who the Ripper was or was not.Add to that the possibility of a rumour emanating from the Temple, where Arnold Toynbee gathered up more recruits for the Settlement and where more of the Dyke Aclands had chambers very close to Druitt"s and you cant help seeing a "network" of potential rumour forming.
But ofcourse,they may still have been wrong.Druitt,like Kosminski,may have been behaving in a bizarre ,erratic,perhaps quite uncharacteristic manner,but it didnt make him the Ripper.
On the other hand if blood stained clothing was found at his chambers by any one of these chaps or others searching his chambers-------well that would be a very different ball game.So far we dont know of anything like that ever having happened.
Best
Norma

[aspallek]

There seems to be a bit of a triangle emerging here that may be coincidence or maybe not. Norma, you said that Cook knew Druitt from childhood. Do we know that for certain or is that an assumption? You suggestion that Cook may have been the source of information on Druitt is interesting.

Here is the triangle:

Druitt born 1857 at Wimborne, Dorset, attends Winchester and Oxford, settles in Blackheath. Seems to have had at least passing interest in East End social reform.

Cook born 1857 at Brighton, attends Winchester and Oxford at the same time as Druitt, lives in Blackheath at the same time as Druitt, a short distance from Druitt's residence. Has great interest in East End social reform.

HR Farquharson born 1857 at Brighton, attends Eton and Cambridge, settles in Dorset, ten miles from Wimborne. As MP for Dorset West, identifies JtR in 1891 as 'the son of a surgeon' who committed suicide after the last murder. Had planned to run for Parliament from Bethnal Green but his unexpected death in 1895 prevented this.

[aspallek]

I seem to recall that we did establish that there was no close links between Thomas Druitt and Monty's Druitts. Maybe a distant relationship. But I think it probable on the basis of the information we are finding that Montague did know the East End and was not just familiar with the green turf of playing fields, classrooms, and chill judicial chambers.

Chris

I seem to have had a brain cramp. Jabez's father was named Thomas Druitt. However, by the 1880's he probably would have been dead.

[Johnr]

Thank you Stewart for that newspaper reference.Very important.
Iforgot too, to add my praise to the useful discovery by Chris of Montague Druitt's donation to the People's Palace fund.
This too, will add to a tiny but growing store of interesting facts linking MJD to the murders. JOHN RUFFELS.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Andy,
Yes Cook knew Druitt from his days at Winchester.In England children began public school at preparatory age as a rule-they still do at such private institutions as Winchester.Preparatory age begins at eight years.However I seem to remember Druitt got a scholarship to Winchester.He probably got it from Winchester"s Preparatory school but he may have come from another Preparatory school in which case he would have started at Winchester at eleven years.Either way he was a child of exactly the same age and year group as Cook ,when they first met at Winchester.They then went to New College Oxford at the same time and got their degrees in the same month,and year .
I found their similar subject interests regarding the debates held at Winchester and Oxford,quite interesting too.And Cook"s very strong link with both Blackheath and Commercial Street in the East End as well as the Inner Temple meetings held in the early eighties with Arnold Toynbee seem to provide the potential network for Oxford and Cambridge graduates to gossip and probably speculate about Druitt"s suicide .
I hadnt realised Andy,that Farquharson was the same age as Druitt----well in the same year group at University.So if he went to Cambridge he was a contemporary of Arthur Dyke Acland, The Duke of Clarence and a few others whose names have been linked for various reasons to the Druitt story.Both Arthur Dyke Acland and the Duke of Clarence gave support to Toynbee Hall"s first Annual Meeting in 1885,speaking about the previous years achievements since 1884 when it was opened.I didnt see Farquharson"s name among them but that neednt mean anything.There were large numbers of students who visited Toynbee at the time and Farquharson could have been among them.
Best
Norma