Druitt and Monro

[mklhawley]

To Darryl

But Macnaghten WAS upholding the law - the law of due process. You can't name a person as a murderer when they can never have a trial.
.
And no, Druitt - Winchester, Oxford, cricket - did not fit a preconceived idea of Macnaghten's as to the killer's identity. You are being misled by Mac again.

[mklhawley]

Macnaghten was handed Druitt on a platter, but what to do about it was the challenge

He had a close friend who could be seriously and publicly hurt by the solution.

Your negative perception of Macnaghten is not the one people had at the time. He was known to be generous, deferential and amiable, and free of snobbery, and so compassionate there were even ex-crims who admired him, e.g. for looking out for them as human beings after they were released

[GBinOz]

Had that been the case wouldn't we expect William to have known of Druitt's plans to go abroad on holiday, and what about the Kingston Park Cricket Club, wouldn't his friends have known he had plans to go away on holiday while the school is closed for the term?
It seems strange that the people you might normally discuss any potential vacation with, friends & relatives, had no idea of any such plans.
Have you ever gone abroad on holiday but not mentioned it to anyone at all?

Hi Jon,

Didn't the cricket club relieve him of his job as treasurer because he told them he was going abroad, and might not he have told William the same thing? That would explain why William wasn't initially concerned about him not having been seen at his chambers for over a week in early December. Perhaps it was only when he failed to turn up for the new school term that William became concerned.

Cheers, George

[mklhawley]

Based on newly found primary sources, the Hainsworths in their much unread book make a strong circumstantial case that it was William and cousin Charles who had escorted Montague abroad, specifically to a private, French asylum - a desperate and expensive plan which instantly backfired.

If Jon's and Chris' interpretation is correct then so was Macnaghten, e.g. when he wrote that Druitt had "disappeared" after the Kelly atrocity.

[Fiver]

Druitt was not "undetected" in his mental illness if he was placed in an asylum - it is claimed twice.

So the Hansworths are claiming that Druitt was placed in two different asylums?

Lets look at the Jan 13, 1889 Philadelphia Times.

* The report was made 24 December, 1888.
* About 10 days before that, Scotland yard was informed by the French Detective Department, so roughly 14 December, 1888.
* French Detective Department had been contacted by an attendant from an asylum a few days before, so roughly 11 December.
* Three weeks previous to that, a man had been brought to the asylum, so roughly 20 November.

Which means the man, if he ever existed, was not Montague Druitt, who appeared in court at the Royal Courts of Justice on 27 November, 1888.

* About a month before the man was brought to the asylum, the asylum director received a letter asking to transfer him there, so roughly 20 October.
* One of the Scotland Yard detectives visited the asylum, which would somewhere between 14 December and 24 December and gave the ploice the names of "at least half a dozen real or fancied confederates".
* There were no clues as to the man's identity - "not even the linen is initialed".

Yet this man, supposed to be Druitt, has to escape from the asylum, under the noses of both Scotland Yard and the French police, make it back to London, sneak into his quarters undetected to grab two checks and a second half return for Hammersmith to Charing Cross, dated 1 December, which is rather a trick since he would have been in the French asylum at the time it was issued, and then drown himself.

If this man ever existed, he cannot be Montague Druitt.

[Fiver]

Druitt was not accused of sexual misconduct. Not a single extant sources even hints at such an event.

Almost everyone on the thread has said Druitt might have been dismissed for sexual misconduct.

You yourself said "For example, it proved our long-standing contetiuon that Jack Littlechild initiated the correspndence with Sims about Tumblety, because of being perplexed by a column by the famous writer claiming a certain rich, reclusive gentile who committed suicide is the solution; that clearly Sims, along with Macnaghten, were the originators of the plot of "The Lodger"; that Sims and Mac knew Druitt was a lodger in Blackheath; that Druitt had been young, handsome, with sketchy medical credentials and had left the school under a cloud due to his HETEROsexual attentions to a woman."

Yet when I say Druitt "possibly engaged in sexual misconduct", you call me a troll.

[mklhawley]

To other readers...

In their book, the Hainsworths themselves say the Jan 13 1889 article may not be about Druitt; it may in fact be entirely made up They also point out that the raving patient seems to be still in this French asylum long after Druitt was deceased.

Yet the authors are judicious - unlike certain posters here - at examining sources from one angle and then from another.

If you dip into their book and their chapter on this ,"The English Patient", you will find it is a tour de force of historical analysis. In meticulous detail they measure this tantalizing source against a range of other primary sources (wrongly called "period sources" by Fiver?) which does not mean you have to agree with their provisional conclusion - nor is this aspect of the case pivotal to Druitt's guilt, or lack thereof.

[mklhawley]

I let Jonathan message me this one:

Fiver, you are a troll. You are the very definition of a troll.

This is because you only reply where you feel you have found the soft underbelly of our interpretation, whilst you steer well clear where you feel that our flanks to be too strong, hard and impenetrable.

See what I did there?

Its called being ironic, as I was doing with the heterosexual jibe against the Whitechapel Orthodox who have for decades propagated the notion that Druitt was gay and/or a child molester and being caught as one or the other led to his suicide. Not a single source backs such speculation.

Sexual insanity does not refer to being gay, but rather to erotically enjoying violent acts or watching said acts (that's how Macnaghten clearly defines it in his memoirs).

If you would actually read the source in question, Fiver, e.g. Sims' column from 1913, you would discover that the "medical student" - young, handsome, with dubious credentials, who previously lived with a physician and who has access to a lot of readies - has been told to leave his Blackheath lodgings because of his amorous attentions to the young female who resides there. That isn't a charge of sexual misconduct; he is just flirting, maybe courting, but whatever the landlord doesn't trust this oddball and wants such attentions terminated.

[Trevor Marriott]

I let Jonathan message me this one:

Fiver, you are a troll. You are the very definition of a troll.

This is because you only reply where you feel you have found the soft underbelly of our interpretation, whilst you steer well clear where you feel that our flanks to be too strong, hard and impenetrable.

See what I did there?

Its called being ironic, as I was doing with the heterosexual jibe against the Whitechapel Orthodox who have for decades propagated the notion that Druitt was gay and/or a child molester and being caught as one or the other led to his suicide. Not a single source backs such speculation.

Sexual insanity does not refer to being gay, but rather to erotically enjoying violent acts or watching said acts (that's how Macnaghten clearly defines it in his memoirs).

If you would actually read the source in question, Fiver, e.g. Sims' column from 1913, you would discover that the "medical student" - young, handsome, with dubious credentials, who previously lived with a physician and who has access to a lot of readies - has been told to leave his Blackheath lodgings because of his amorous attentions to the young female who resides there. That isn't a charge of sexual misconduct; he is just flirting, maybe courting, but whatever the landlord doesn't trust this oddball and wants such attentions terminated.

The catalyst for Druitts suspect status appears to be The Magnaghten Memo, which has more holes in it than a cullender

The memorandum does not stand up to close scrutiny in any event. With regards to Druitt, I found many discrepancies in Macnaghten’s notes regarding Druitt. He stated that Druitt lived with his family, but records show that he lived alone at 9, Elliot Place. He stated that Druitt had committed suicide around the 10th of November, three weeks before he committed suicide. Although this is not confirmed, when the body was examined only an approximate time of the suicide was given due to the effects of decomposition as it had been in the water for a long period of time. He also stated that Druitt was about 41 at the time of his death, when in fact he was only 31. Finally, he mentions Druitt as being a doctor when he was a barrister and schoolmaster.

This leads me to believe that perhaps Macnaghten was basing his claims on simply hearsay and rumour, rather than actual private information he received. After all, he was not appointed until 1889. Perhaps more evidence or documents will be found in the future, which may shed some light on Macnaghten suggesting Montague Druitt as being Jack the Ripper. After all, Macnaghten had stated that he had been in possession of other documentation regarding the murders and Druitt’s involvement, which, for reasons only known to him, he had destroyed

Martin Howells and Keith Skinner, in their book, The Ripper Legacy, suggest that Druitt came to Chiswick to visit ‘Wilson’s chummery’, a sort of informal club for homosexuals at The Osiers, Chiswick Mall, and the home of one Henry Wilson from 1887 until 1895.

Henry Wilson was a barrister, a close friend of the Duke of Clarence and a leading member of the Apostles, an exclusive, esoteric and secretive homosexual group. Homosexuality was, of course, illegal and the need for secrecy was particularly necessary in the 1880s and 1890s.
Druitt’s body was found in the River Thames at Chiswick that in itself begs a question “Did he jump, or was he pushed”?
His suicide and the fact that the police closed the enquiry in early January make him a convenient scapegoat. However, I do not believe him to have been the killer of all, or any of the women

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[mklhawley]

I have nothing but respect for you as one of the few genuine sleuths attached to this subject; your impeccable and accomplished record as a police detective speaks for itself.

It gives me no pleasure to respond that you are demonstrably wrong about nearly everything you think you know about Druitt. Not only mistaken but decades out of date.

I can only advise that you ask your local library to order in a copy of "The Escape of Jack the Ripper" (Regnery, 2021) and you will be properly briefed. I am just suggesting you will be persuaded by their thesis - I'm not - but you will I think agree that all the old paradigm about Druitt being a gay innocent posthumously shanghaied into the case by some untrained, incompetent and incurious police chief is utterly untenable - even ludicrous

[Trevor Marriott]

I have nothing but respect for you as one of the few genuine sleuths attached to this subject; your impeccable and accomplished record as a police detective speaks for itself.

It gives me no pleasure to respond that you are demonstrably wrong about nearly everything you think you know about Druitt. Not only mistaken but decades out of date.

I can only advise that you ask your local library to order in a copy of "The Escape of Jack the Ripper" (Regnery, 2021) and you will be properly briefed. I am just suggesting you will be persuaded by their thesis - I'm not - but you will I think agree that all the old paradigm about Druitt being a gay innocent posthumously shanghaied into the case by some untrained, incompetent and incurious police chief is utterly untenable - even ludicrous

Michael
Please point out the facts that you dont agree with and any evidence that proves those facts wrong

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[rjpalmer]

Whatever his source, Macnaghten got a great deal wrong. As you note, he gets Druitt's age and occupation wrong

Has it ever dawned on you--even for a fleeting second--that your interpretations and commentary might be a tad bit 'shallow'? That you are unknowingly hamstringing yourself with too easily purchased truisms and cynicisms? Clearly not, because when your errors are pointed out, you continue to lunge. You continue to take the easy path, the low road.

I'm being a bit hard on you, Fiver, but I'm merely inviting you to up your game.

I've done a couple of things that you clearly haven't done, and which most commentators on this thread here haven't done. I've actually read Macanaghten's autobiographies and have studied his police career. As such, I know that the common perceptions about him by 'Ripperologists' are wrong. He wasn't incompetent. His memory was pretty damned good. He was certainly more reliable than, say, Sir Robert Anderson. He was also far more worldly. He is not the man that you and "Rookie" and others think he was.

As such, I am cynical of the cynics. It's clear to me that they can be of no help to me and I'll have to keep on thinking for myself with no assistance from the naysayers.

For instance, you do the typical eyeroll and jeer when you notice that 'Macnaghten got Druitt's age wrong.'

But that's just a cheap and easy observation, isn't it, worthy of a grammar school student?

No offense, but why sell yourself short? Go a little deeper. Think a little harder. Don't settle for being the naysayer in the back of the room.

First off, it is only in the Aberconway draft that he states Druitt's age is 41. I, for one, am not going to judge a man on the rough draft. He appears to have noticed his error because he leaves it out of the 'official version' where Druitt's age is not given. So this 'error' that concerns you so deeply does not actually appear in the final draft. You're going out of your way to pick at the scabs and point out the blemishes. That exposes an unhealthy mind set for a would-be detective.

More to the point, it's an odd error. He states that Druitt age is something-and-one. (41) He was something--and--one. (31).

That's odd to me. It interests me. I'm not going to stop thinking and throw a fit because of this error.

Instead, ask yourself how this error may have occurred and whether it really allows you to dismiss Macnaghten as an uniformed blowhard. Because that's what you are insinuating, isn't it? But had you actually read his autobiography and compared it against other sources, you'd already know that he was a generally reliable man so something else might be in play.

Although this is an error, how might it have occurred? Should we really blame Macnaghten for it? He's an administrator, dependent on the work of those beneath him.

I think it is highly unlikely that the Metropolitan Police would track down someone's birth records to determine their exact age. The '41' error must be coming from a police document. It's almost as if it is a math error--he's off by exactly ten---but that isn't plausible either.

I suspect it was an error of hearing. Somewhere, someone--not Macnaghten--misheard '31' as '41.'

Where was Druitt's age given?

At the inquest. William Druitt said that his brother was 31 on his last birthday.

We know PC Moulson was at that inquest. The acoustics might have not been great, because there are other errors in the reporting.

I'm pretty well convinced this was not Macnaghten's error. You're blaming the wrong guy. I suspect Moulson misheard Druitt's age as 41--the body was badly decomposed and he wouldn't have known Druitt's age by looking at it---and Macnaghten initially repeated this error because he was working from Moulson's report. In other words, a report of this drowning was made by Moulson (or more likely some superior with the Hammersmith Police) and it was forwarded to Scotland Yard.

Which, if true--and I think it almost certainly is---is interesting as hell.

Far more interesting that the ho-hum fact that he was 31 instead of 41 which doesn't tell me jack-all about his guilt or innocence.

As for Druitt's occupation, you again take the easy road. You again rely on the rough draft where Druitt is referred to as a doctor.

In the final version, Macnaghten only writes 'said to be a doctor.' Which indicates there was some doubt about the matter.

That might be the most interesting word in the whole memo. Who ''said" he was a doctor?

No, no. There's more going on here than meets the eye. Of that I am certain. The cynics can be of no help. Of that I am also certain.

RP

[rjpalmer]

but that is not all.

"who disappeared at the time of the Miller's Court murder" - Macnaghten, 1891.

Druitt continued teaching school, attending court, and meeting his cricket club for weeks after the Kelly murder.

Show me the evidence where Druitt taught so much as one minute of school after the murder in Miller's Court.

I'll wait.

He attended court and met with the cricket club on November 19th--which is ten days after Miller's Court and "not weeks."

But where is the evidence that he 'continued to teach school.' In your eagerness to give Macnaghten a black-eye aren't you again jumping to conclusions?

In fact, the next we hear of Druitt's association with Valentine he's gotten the boot.

How do you know--for a fact--that he didn't disappear after Miller's Court only to reappear a few days later and get the sack?

Maybe that's what Macnaghten is remembering.

RP

[rjpalmer]

Back then, 'gone abroad' typically meant that the person's current whereabouts were unknown.

Can you give any examples of this contemporary usage?

I’ve seen this interpretation made before when Druitt is being discussed, but no one ever gives any source for this interpretation, while, by contrast, I’ve seen hundreds of examples of Victorians using the phrase “gone abroad” to mean “left the country.”

Thanks.