Druitt's personality

[Graham]

All evidence, so called, that Druitt was the Ripper is at best circumstantial; at worst, scurrilous. I have recently read a book about murders in London through the last 700 years in which the reliability of Sir Melville Macnaughten is actually questioned, and this has absolutely nothing to do with Jack The Ripper. It would seem that Sir Melville, bless his astrakhan collars, was a pretty decent copper but really, deep down, a good ole boy who liked nothing more than to chew the fat, and wasn't all that concerned with absolute accuracy.

The other thing that I've always been concerned about is the fact that Druitt's corpse was weighed down with stones in his pockets, which apparently kept him submerged for a month. How long would he have stayed down had there been no stones in his pockets? Why should his body suddenly float to the surface of the Thames on or about 31st December 1888, stones or no stones?

And, finally, was he being blackmailed?

Graham

[pinkmoon]

All evidence, so called, that Druitt was the Ripper is at best circumstantial; at worst, scurrilous. I have recently read a book about murders in London through the last 700 years in which the reliability of Sir Melville Macnaughten is actually questioned, and this has absolutely nothing to do with Jack The Ripper. It would seem that Sir Melville, bless his astrakhan collars, was a pretty decent copper but really, deep down, a good ole boy who liked nothing more than to chew the fat, and wasn't all that concerned with absolute accuracy.

The other thing that I've always been concerned about is the fact that Druitt's corpse was weighed down with stones in his pockets, which apparently kept him submerged for a month. How long would he have stayed down had there been no stones in his pockets? Why should his body suddenly float to the surface of the Thames on or about 31st December 1888, stones or no stones?

And, finally, was he being blackmailed?

Graham

Good points graham.A theory that I have about druitt is that when this rumour,gossip call it what you want came to the attention of the police they did make some discreet enquires about druitts movements and found out he could have been available to commit every murder.Would this on its own turn him into a workable theory.

[Wickerman]

The other thing that I've always been concerned about is the fact that Druitt's corpse was weighed down with stones in his pockets, which apparently kept him submerged for a month. How long would he have stayed down had there been no stones in his pockets? Why should his body suddenly float to the surface of the Thames on or about 31st December 1888, stones or no stones?

Putrefaction will fill the body with gas therefore, possibly, raising the body up, but how long this takes, and at what temperatures can only be guessed at.

And, finally, was he being blackmailed?

Graham

Ahh, about what, and by whom?

[Wickerman]

Good points graham.A theory that I have about druitt is that when this rumour,gossip call it what you want came to the attention of the police they did make some discreet enquires about druitts movements and found out he could have been available to commit every murder.Would this on its own turn him into a workable theory.

I doubt very much that Macnaghten's theory is entirely false. What we have here ranks in an altogether different category than those recollections we typically discuss written 10-15 years after the fact, and during retirement.
Macnaghten was still on the job when he wrote this Memorandum, the files still at his fingertips, less reason to suggest a fallible memory.

Even after the efforts of Jonathan, gawd bless 'im, I still can't be sure what to make of it, except that this Memorandum cannot be lumped in with the recollections of Anderson, Smith, and the like.

[pinkmoon]

I doubt very much that Macnaghten's theory is entirely false. What we have here ranks in an altogether different category than those recollections we typically discuss written 10-15 years after the fact, and during retirement.
Macnaghten was still on the job when he wrote this Memorandum, the files still at his fingertips, less reason to suggest a fallible memory.

Even after the efforts of Jonathan, gawd bless 'im, I still can't be sure what to make of it, except that this Memorandum cannot be lumped in with the recollections of Anderson, Smith, and the like.

Would you agree with me that if this story of the killer drowning himself soon after Kelly's murder was doing the rounds and it came to police attention then they would make some basic enquires

[Wickerman]

... I have recently read a book about murders in London through the last 700 years in which the reliability of Sir Melville Macnaughten is actually questioned, and this has absolutely nothing to do with Jack The Ripper.

I only ask because you didn't elaborate, but are these writings by Macnaghten (suggested to be suspect) from his time in office, or from his memoirs?

I would treat them altogether differently.

[Graham]

From what I can make out, bodies were being fished out of the Thames fairly frequently - cf: Our Mutual Friend by Charles Dickens. What if - pure supposition - a corpse had been fished out the night before or the night after that of Montague Druitt's? Would these poor buggers, had they existed, of course, also have been cast as a possible Jack The Ripper?

Of course, suicide ran in Druitt's family, so it seems reasonable to suppose that he himself had inherited this unfortunate trait. It would seem that he also left a suicide note in his room at Valentine's school. I rather think that poor Monty had come to the end of the line, perhaps courtesy of some indiscretion about which we know nothing and never will know, and decided that it was time to take his bow. As far as blackmail is concerned, again pure speculation, but not beyond the realms of possibility that someone, either a colleague at the school or someone he knew elsewhere, had got wind that poor Monty was up to something naughty. He was quite well off, even by the standards of the day, but given his family history, could it be he thought, "Oh, sod it!" and flopped down into the murky waters of the Thames rather than get involved in defending himself financially against some serious dirt? Who knows? I'm sure I don't.

G

[Wickerman]

Would you agree with me that if this story of the killer drowning himself soon after Kelly's murder was doing the rounds and it came to police attention then they would make some basic enquires

An enquiry would be directed to the Thames Division, they should be able to confirm the truth of any suicide in the Thames.

[Paddy]

Becoming like Mother !

If Druitts mother was Bi-polar, It could be that Druitt inherited this and had been manic and commited a terrible faux-pas while high. Afterwards mortified by his behaviour he could have hit a dive into depression and became suicidal. Is there anything written about his mums illness?

Also, to Curious....
When I was about 9 years old my cockney nan used to tell me all about Jack the Ripper (she was born in 1870s) She never said who she thought he was, but enjoyed telling me exactly what he done to the women, in great detail. She would always end it "and they've never found him" Then she would send me home very scared !
Since Friday I feel I am becoming like grandmother !

Pat.......................

[Jonathan H]

Montie vs. Monty

In a primary document a female cousin of Druitt's refers to him as 'Montie' (it's in Leighton's book) and that is how it is spelt.

Even this is resisted at all costs by Orthodox Buffery, as in we're right, you;re wrong, no matter what (eg. the 'JonathanH Virus', such fun).

On the other hand, since Druitt is reinvented here by posters as somebody he was not in the meager and limited primary sources, then why not call this Druitt, Monty.

Macnaghten and Sims fictionalized Druitt as a 'Dr Jekyll' in the 1900's, so why not all over again?

As Wickerman has pointed out Macnaghten, rightly or wrongly, thought that Druitt was likely a heterosexual turned on by violence against women.

He also makes an insightful point about the note not reading like a mind in decline, and is therefore rather unconvincing. Other sources--the 'West of England' MP articles; Sims' various pieces; Mac's memoirs--are compelling that belief in Montie's guilt originated with his own family.

That William Druitt therefore perjured himself at the inquiry by not revealing that he believed his brother had taken his own life because he was, or thought he was the Whitechapel assassin.

The 1889 regional newspaper sources on Montie's death do not link his dismissal from the school to his suicide, nor is said dismissal treated as scandalous (it is only mentioned in one source). Instead they are unanimous that his death is appalling and inexplicable.

The leak out of Dorset in 1891 and the rebooting of the tale, as a libel-proofed mixture of fact and fiction, by a police chief confirms the seriousness of this belief in Montie's culpability.

There is no primary source evidence that Druitt was a police suspect for the Ripper murders at the time of his death, nor for years afterwards. There were no London rumours of a suicide in the Thames ending the reign of terror.

This is a semi-fictional story beginning only in 1898.

The exception in the primary record is Abberline but only from 1903, and everything he says to a reporter about the -un-named Druitt is wrong, except the drowning aspect and therefore the limitations of this source arguably nullify it's values.

[curious]

Also, to Curious....
When I was about 9 years old my cockney nan used to tell me all about Jack the Ripper (she was born in 1870s) She never said who she thought he was, but enjoyed telling me exactly what he done to the women, in great detail. She would always end it "and they've never found him" Then she would send me home very scared !
Since Friday I feel I am becoming like grandmother !

Pat.......................

Thanks, Pat.

Bless yer nan's heart!

So glad you didn't die of fright on what I take to be a walk home -- after dark was it?

curious

[Wickerman]

That William Druitt therefore perjured himself at the inquiry by not revealing that he believed his brother had taken his own life because he was, or thought he was the Whitechapel assassin.

The 1889 regional newspaper sources on Montie's death do not link his dismissal from the school to his suicide, nor is said dismissal treated as scandalous (it is only mentioned in one source). Instead they are unanimous that his death is appalling and inexplicable.

Hi Jonathan.

I would expect a Coroner investigating a case of suicide to enquire of his brother Michael if, there had been any early warning signs, any indications that Monty/Montie was in any way overtly concerned about his mother's illness.
The very fact we have one quote in the press on this subject suggests to me that this concern was in fact raised:
"— Witness, continuing, said deceased had never made any attempt on his life before."

Had William been aware of any decline in his brothers mental ability then he had the opportunity to voice this concern in support of the suicide note.
And yet, this does not appear to be the case.

[Ausgirl]

What I am getting at is, that Montie visited his brother in late October, and Montie still had communications with the family, yet we read of no hints or expectations from anyone about a slow decline of Montie's mental ability or frequent bouts of depression, or anything to indicate mental troubles.
The letter comes across as if Montie, one day, just decided to throw himself in the Thames.
What we are missing is the slow decline, or the long build-up to such drastic measures.

Schizophrenia is quite often sudden-onset. But the -dread- of it can carry on for decades. Perhaps there was not a slow decline in mental health at all, but a long term and profound fear coupled with sudden proof of illness. It's not at all unfeasible. And I'd not be surprised if he never wished to speak of it.

Was it actually thought he preferred not only women but -violence- against women, for a reason? Or was this a presumption based on the fact he was a suspect in some gruesome murders?

[Jonathan H]

To Ausgirl

Sir Melville Macnagten wrote for the official Scotland Yard file, in 1894, that there was some doubt as to whether Druitt was a doctor (he wasn't) but none that he was a sexual maniac. The evidence for this is that he was Jack the Ripper.

It is a weirdly circular argument: his family believed he was Jack the Ripper because he erotically enjoyed ultra-violence. They knew he enjoyed ulta-violence because he was Jack the Ripper.

In the 1891 leak from Dorset, the un-named Druitt is described as 'suffering' from homicidal mania.

George Sims called it a 'peculiar' mania that led to bursts of raving and shrieking.

The 1899 'North Country Vicar' claims the murderer suffered from 'epileptic mania' whose manifestations include raving, shrieking, homicide and suicide.

To Wickerman

I have a potential source on Druitt's actual personality, if you are interested?

[Ausgirl]

Thank you, Jonathon.