The records from Stone Asylum for Joseph Fleming - transcription

[Debra A]

Thanks again, Debs. The plot certainly appears to be thickening here.

When taken in conjunction with the infirmary record from 1889, it would seem that the Victoria Home was most likely to have been a permanent base for Fleming from 1888 until his incarceration in 1892.

All the best,
Ben

Thanks, Ben, you wouldn't happen to have the 1889 Infirmary details to hand, or a link to them would you? I'm having trouble finding them again. Thanks.

[Ben]

Here you go, Debs:

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=73032&postcount=67

Courtesy of Chris Scott.

[Abby Normal]

A Longshoreman's hook maybe? An essential tool for dock labourers according to Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longsho...E2%80%99s_hook

Maybe something smaller-a fish hook (as in what you put the worm on)perhaps?

[Debra A]

Here you go, Debs:

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=73032&postcount=67

Courtesy of Chris Scott.

Thanks Ben, it's odd that he has settlement of 14 months in Whitechapel in that record, yet in the orders of removal record they didn't mention Whitechapel but refered back to his birthplace to establish settlement.
I wish someone would explain how these things worked!

Abby, it could be any kind of hook to be honest, I just thought, like Fisherman, that he might have carried the tool of his trade about with him.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Debs,

Thank you and well done indeed!
Pssst.. don't stay too long in the asylum... ;-)

best wishes

Phil

[tji]

Hi Debs

Thanks Tracy, I seem to be living in Stone asylum lately!
I will email you tonight...I haven't forgotten you, honest!

Lol - bet it is still more sane than my house!!


Tj

[The Good Michael]

Not that it matters, but I think the leather strap and hook went together for binding things together, much like a bungee cord, or moving straps work.

Mike

[richardnunweek]

Hi ,
Great thread, and excellent work from Debs.
It would be great if we could verify that this Fleming was Marys Ex, it looks very much like it, but of course it could be another ''Joe'' that she[ kelly] refered to as being''fond of''?
Hutchinson claimed to have known Mjk for three years.
Fleming would have known her approx the same.
Dan Barnett at least 18 months.
All living in one building at the time of the murders. whilst one must appreciate that premises was full of boarders, whats the betting that they were aware of each other?.
Regards Richard.

[Ben]

It’s certainly possible, Richard.

I should clarify that at this stage we don’t have proof positive that Fleming lived at the Victoria Home at the time of the murders, but given the fact that he was admitted from this residence in both 1889 and 1892, it seems probable that he used this residence for the duration of his stay in Whitechapel, which commenced in late 1888. It must be considered a strong indication at the very least.

Best regards,
Ben

[DVV]

Hi Ben

We do possess evidence that JF was living in the VH at the time of the murders, and we do have no evidence that he was living elsewhere.

Cheers my dear
David

[Ben]

Exactly, David.

I think the latter point is crucial too.

Hi Debs,

Could Lower Thames Street have been where Fleming was found wandering? Or possibly a work address, it being very close to Billingsgate and the docks?

All the best,
Ben

[Debra A]

Exactly, David.

I think the latter point is crucial too.

Hi Debs,

Could Lower Thames Street have been where Fleming was found wandering? Or possibly a work address, it being very close to Billingsgate and the docks?

All the best,
Ben

Hi Ben,

The address in Lower Thames Street could certainly be where Fleming was picked up from. The address is contained in a letter of inquiry about Fleming's settlement issue and there are no further details of what it relates to.

I have to agree with Colin about Flemming's residence in 1888. All we know is that in the 89 infirmary records Flemming was admitted from 41 commercial St. (The Victoria Home) and in 1892 he was admitted to The City of London Infirmary, Bow Rd and an address given of 'Victoria House.'

On the JTR forums thread I have been trying to determine if a record posted by Chris Scott for a Joseph Flemming admitted to Bethnal Green workhouse in Oct 88 and discharged Jan 89, relates to the same James Evans/Joseph Flemming as Chris first thought that it did when he started the thread, although I am unsure as to what Chris thinks now.
Personally I think it is the record of a different Joseph flemming, born the same time and the same place as the JF we are interested in...but it's all on the thread.
I am surprised Chris's find hasn't been mentioned at all here, because if it does relate to James Evans/Joseph Flemming then discussions about whether JF lived in the Victoria Home during the time of the murders is pointless...he would have been in the Bethnal Green workhouse!

[Ben]

Hi Debs,

From the description you've given of the record Chris found, I'd agree with your conclusion that it probably relates to a different Joseph Fleming, presumably the one who is listed invariably in the census records as a boot maker or "French finisher/polisher" (or something along those lines). If memory serves, he is more commonly listed as Flemming.

I would have to say it's a near certainty, in my view, that the Victoria Home (39-41 Commercial Street) and the "Victoria House" referred to the same establishment. It isn't set in stone, but given that he was admitted, or admitted himself, from the same residence in both 1889 and 1892, it seems likely that it was his permanent base for the duration of his stay in the district. Everyone's mileage may very, of course!

All the best,
Ben

[Lechmere]

Mr Ben – take a look at the original document that Debra posted (post 148 page 15).
I am certain the 1892 address is Victoria Home, not Victoria House.

I fairly certain that the strict rule was that 1 year’s residence had to be shown to establish settlement, although very often I suspect that it would be based on trust. In the absence of this it went to were you were born.

Does this imply that Evans/Fleming hadn’t been in the Victoria Home for long before he was picked up in 1892? Just because he was there in 1889 doesn’t mean that he had been there continuously.
As I pointed out in another thread, most residents in the Victoria Home were transitory – coming and going. Some stayed for extended periods but they would have been the exception, not the rule.
I also pointed out that it was by no means certain that he was in the Victoria Home from September 1888 onwards – only that he was in Whitechapel. I also made the point that he may have made that date up to get settlement.

Of course a case can be made that he was in the Victoria Home from September 1888 onwards. But there are many loose ends.
Such as the declaration that he had never had a proper job – ‘the said lunatic has never done any work whereby to obtain a settlement in his own right’.
Presumably his mother provided this information. Was he incapable of providing sensible information about himself? Was his mother somehow unaware of where he had been living or what he had been doing for work?
Did she deliberately lie in order to get him settlement from Bethnal Green? Maybe because she didn’t want to complicate the issue by having to provide proof of residence or work from Whitechapel?

It is a bit of a mystery.
I actually don’t think this is the Fleming who went out with Kelly anyway – not least because he was 6’ 7” tall which would have been remarkable.

[Ben]

Hi Lechmere,

Yes, you could well be right about the document citing “Home” rather than “House”.

“As I pointed out in another thread, most residents in the Victoria Home were transitory – coming and going. Some stayed for extended periods but they would have been the exception, not the rule”

I’m afraid I haven’t seen any compelling evidence to suggest that this is the case, but it's rather a moot point as far as Fleming is concerned because we know he was admitted from the Victoria Home in 1889 and 1892. That’s the best part of a three-year period, and yet he cited the same residence on both occasions. This suggests very strongly indeed that he used the home as a long-term base rather than hopping around from one doss house to another “in transit”, so to speak. It also increases the likelihood that he was there for the duration of his time in Whitechapel, i.e. from September of 1888. Previously, in the absence of the 1892 document, it could be argued slightly more convincingly that he could have moved around within Whitechapel over those 14 months, but now I would have to say that this argument is drastically reduced in value.

It is almost certain that the Joseph Fleming in question was Kelly’s former beau. The chances of there being two Joseph Fleming’s from Bethnal Green both working as mason plasterers are obviously rather slim. As far as his height is concerned, there is no evidence that any of the inquest witnesses who mentioned him had ever met him or even seen him in the flesh. In addition, there remain serious question marks over the accuracy of that height reference. I have serious trouble accepting that he was 6’7”, 11 stone in weight and in “good” health, for example, as discussed extensively on other threads.

You’re quite right, however, to point out that there are very few absolute certainties here.

All the best,
Ben