Was Sir Henry Wellcome the Ripper?

[AnotherNewSuspect]

I am new to the case and as such would like to know why Sir Henry Wellcome does not appear to have been proposed by anyone as a possible suspect?

He was born in 1853, experienced a very traumatic experience aged nine (aided his surgeon uncle Jacob in attending to people savaged by Indians), collected artefacts relating to the history of medicine (including very many surgical implements), went through the most stressful period of his life in 1888 (legal battle that might have resulted in his losing his partnership in Burroughs Wellcome and Co) and had his pride hurt very badly early in July 1889 (was shunned at the opening of the companies new factory) and his company's offices and warehouse were based in London's EC district.

My theory being that he appears to have been very interested in surgery and in response to highly stressful situations reverted to murder. Even his biographers imply that being made an honorary fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons in March 1932 may have trumped the Knighthood he received in the same year!

I have read a lot about the other suspects and none appear anymore likely than Sir Henry to have been Jack.

Sir Henry's hat being thrown into the ring could add to the excitement of the 125th anniversary.

[lynn cates]

violent

Hello ANS. Welcome to the boards.

I was wondering if Sir Henry had any history of violent behaviour? That could be an excellent indicator.

Cheers.
LC

[AnotherNewSuspect]

History of Violence

Hello LC

Thank you for your welcome and for replying.

As is the case with influential people, there is no actual proof of Sir Henry having a history of violent behaviour. However, comments made by close friends of his ex wife (Syrie Barnardo) accuse him of beating her and having sadistic sexual tendencies. Also a disgruntled sacked employee accused him of savage personal beatings of camp guards caught sleeping at his archaeological dig site in the Sudan; this accusation was taken-up by MP Horatio Bottomley in his publication John Bull and lead to questions being raised in the House of Commons about Sir Henry’s treatment of the staff at the site. However, a formal inquiry followed and Sir Henry was completely exonerated.

So, I am afraid that sadly no proof exists, but the rumours about him indicate that there is more to Sir Henry than first meets the eye and that he warrants further investigation.

Thanks ANS.

[curious]

Hello LC

Thank you for your welcome and for replying.

As is the case with influential people, there is no actual proof of Sir Henry having a history of violent behaviour. However, comments made by close friends of his ex wife (Syrie Barnardo) accuse him of beating her and having sadistic sexual tendencies. Also a disgruntled sacked employee accused him of savage personal beatings of camp guards caught sleeping at his archaeological dig site in the Sudan; this accusation was taken-up by MP Horatio Bottomley in his publication John Bull and lead to questions being raised in the House of Commons about Sir Henry’s treatment of the staff at the site. However, a formal inquiry followed and Sir Henry was completely exonerated.

So, I am afraid that sadly no proof exists, but the rumours about him indicate that there is more to Sir Henry than first meets the eye and that he warrants further investigation.

Thanks ANS.

Good Morning, ANS,
I second Lynn's welcome. Hope you enjoy your time here.

While Sir Henry sounds like an interesting fella, your first post did not give actual dates he was known to be in the area. Since he appears to have been an archaeologist, it is necessary to know that he was actually in the area at the time of the murders. I realize his offices were nearby -- exactly where, by the way?

And since he was an archaeologist how do we know he was not off on a dig somewhere during the crucial.

I can see that if he got into a bad argument at the office, he may have walked around the area in a murderous mood and he appears to have been capable of violence.

But, are there any details about his exact locations during the actual time of the murders?

Good start, but lots more research is needed. You may find proof that he was somewhere else on the days the Ripper's victims died.

Good luck to you.

curious

[lynn cates]

O Lord!

Hello ANS. Thanks.

I recall one lord whom bit his wife's cheek in a fit of pique. She is said to have bled profusely. Later he had HER committed to an asylum--falsely.

Yes, the peerage can be dicey at times.

Good luck with research.

Cheers.
LC

[AnotherNewSuspect]

Further Analysis

Dear Curious and LC

Thank you for your comments.

I can clarify that Sir Henry Wellcome was not primarily an archaeologist; his day job was as co-owner of the pharmaceutical firm Burroughs Wellcome and Company. His great wealth allowed him to travel the world and get involved in other pursuits, such as archaeology.

Wellcome came to England in 1880 and was living in London between 1887 and 1890. His main home was close to Regents Park, but Burroughs Wellcome and Company had their offices in Snow Hill, in London's EC post district, with a basement warehouse located around the corner in **** Lane.

My theory is that Wellcome could have used his office and/or the warehouse as a base to travel to/from Whitechapel to commit the murders. My understanding is that he was in London for all five canonical murders and for the murders of Martha Tabram and Alice McKenzie. Unfortunately, he was not in the country when Frances Coles was murdered in February 1891.

The murder of Alice McKenzie, taking place so long after Mary Kelly's can be explained by Wellcome going into fury following an event that occurred early in July. Wellcome appears to have been a megalomaniac and on 6 July 1889 Burroughs Wellcome and Co opened a new factory in Dartford. He was marginalised at this all day event by his business partner, Silas Burroughs, his name being hardly given a mention. Burroughs based the whole event around a leading American socialist and advocate of land reform, Henry George. This snub and injury to his pride and status would have infuriated Wellcome and not being able to lash out at Burroughs, I propose that he vented his anger by committing one further murder.

I can appreciate that committing a murder is a very extreme response to someone suffering a personal indignity, but Wellcome never before or after allowed anyone to belittle him in such a fashion. He went on to be married and did not even allow his new wife organise their child's christening party, the event being based around himself.

I hope that the above shows that I had endeavoured to check that Wellcome was in London at the time of all the murders. Please accept my apologies for not clarifying this at the outset.

Many thanks
ANS

[Bridewell]

Link

Hello ANS,

I add my welcome to that of the others. I don't know anything about Sir Henry Wellcome. From what you say, he doesn't seem to have been a very likable individual but, beyond that and the fact that he lived in London (with business premises in the EC area) is there anything which can be said to actually link him to the murders? I accept that he lived in the general area and wasn't particularly nice, but more is needed to include him within a realistic suspect list. (He's a far better bet than Toulouse Lautrec or Vincent Van Gogh though).

[Errata]

I think you have done a good job with establishing that based on preliminary information, this guy could have been a violent man. I suppose anyone could be a violent man, but Wellcome had rumors about him, and had what can be considered a triggering event.

In order to put him in the running for Jack The Ripper, you need means, motive, opportunity, and an explanation for the victimology. Means - was he capable of committing these crimes? Assuming he was physically sound and had the ability to use a knife with a bare minimum of skill, yes. Motive - that's a little shaky. A guy with a temper, an abusive SOB, even a "sexual deviant" doesn't do what Jack did without something else going on. Why did he do exactly what he did exactly when he did it? Why not go beat up a hooker instead of killing her and eviscerating her? Opportunity - unclear, but presumably verifiable. Explanation of the victimology - you're not there yet. Why prostitutes? Why take the uterus? Why these women, and what did he want from them?

Clarify these points and you may have a candidate.

[Phil H]

And why did he stop?

Also, if Wellcome travelled, are there any instances of similar murders elsewhere, where and when he had been somewhere?

Phil

[moonbegger]

Greetings ANS ,

Wellcome came to England in 1880 and was living in London between 1887 and 1890. His main home was close to Regents Park,

Regents Park !!! Ahh the plot thickens Allow me to open up the first tin of circumstantial evidence ..

The attention of Police constable 457 D was called on Sunday night to a brown paper parcel lying behind some railings at the corner of Devonshire street and Great Portland street. On pulling open one corner, he noticed it contained some underclothing with apparently blood stains upon it. He therefore conveyed it to the Tottenham Court road Police station, where it was opened by the inspector on duty, who found the contents to consist of a drab flannel shirt, a pair of men's drab pants, a pair of cuffs, and a collar. The two first named articles were completely saturated with blood, but the collar and cuffs were only slightly splashed. The divisional surgeon was sent for and gave it as his opinion that the blood was human. Information was at once forwarded to the chief office, Scotland yard, and the discovery was circulated through all the divisions of police in the metropolis for elucidation. dailynews 25th sept 1888

Best of Luck ANS

moonbegger .

[AnotherNewSuspect]

Thanks and a final post

Just to say thank you all for taking my theory on board and giving it some serious consideration; this is far better than I could have ever hoped for. Also thanks for your comments and questions, these will be very useful to me in the years ahead!

I have to admit that I have not provided much for anyone to go on, as I have not one shred of evidence that Sir Henry ever attacked anyone or even spent any of his nights in Whitechapel. My theory is based around his response to the attack by Sioux Indians on the residents of Garden City in 1862 and for his obsession with collecting medical artefacts (including a good number of surgical implements). The thing that caught my attention and started me on my quest is that Wellcome owned ‘The Tooth Drawer’ painting, by the artist Luciano Nezzo. So I have no proof at all then, but the way I see it, you’ve got to start somewhere. So the painting was as good a place as any for me.

My theory is based upon Wellcome somehow becoming fixated with performing surgery as a young boy and fed his fantasies through the collection of surgical implements. He became a murderer following a prolonged period of stress (the battle over the ownership of Burroughs Wellcome and Co). He then was then somehow able to contain his thirst for murder after murdering Mary Kelly, as it would have been obvious to him that to continue killing in London would resulted in his capture. However, the humiliation of the Dartford factory grand opening on 6 July 1889 tipped him back over the edge, so he took out his frustration by murdering Alice McKenzie. The dispute with the ownership of company finally resolved and financial status assured removed a lot of the pressure from his life, so he would have been less inclined to kill. However, the urge would have still been there, so I propose that he did continue to murder women of the lowest class, but did so in other countries where he reasoned that he would have less chance of being caught. His great wealth likely to have an influence on the reporting of murder and the legal process in the less developed countries that he liked to visit.

However, I personally don’t know of any such deaths; which unfortunately for me destroys my theory. So I can offer nothing more unless I can prove that other murders took place outside of the UK.

As a bit more background: Wellcome got married in 1901 and as I understand it, had his wife accompany him on all his overseas travels - even when she was heavily pregnant. My guess is that he did this as he could not trust himself not to kill again if the chance were to present itself to him; so he endeavoured to keep temptation at arms length via his wife.

However, at the end of 1909, Wellcome separated from his wife, who he accused of committing adultery. He was in South America at the time and spent a number of months inspecting the work of the Panama Canal. Now if any of the above is remotely correct, Wellcome should have been in a massive rage at the end of 1909 and would have had an extremely hard time from controlling his urges to commit further murders.

So I’m hoping that there are some Ripper style murders in and around Panama from approx December 1909 to May 1910 when he returned to England. Thereafter, the Ripper would have been back in business and would then have tried his luck in taken advantage of the poor indefensible women when his was travelling to his archaeological dig site in the Sudan, Jebel Moya.

So having presented a case with many more holes than a sieve, I intend to spend some of my time over the next few months/years investigating possible Ripper style murders in the countries listed below:

Date Destination
1878 Central and South America (Ecuador and Peru).
1880 (May to July) European tour of Germany Austria and France.
1883/84 (Dec to Jan) Spain.
1884 (Sep to Oct) USA.
1886/87 (Aug to May) USA.
1890 Egypt and Sudan (Khartoum).

Break from killing due to marriage.

Date Destination
1909/10 (Nov to May) Ecuador (Quito), Panama.
1910/11 (Dec to Mar) Egypt and the Sudan
1911/12 (Dec to Mar) Sudan (Jebel Moya)
1912/13 (Dec to Mar) Sudan (Jebel Moya)

No further killings, due to old age.

Grateful for any posts, if anyone is aware of any unsolved murders that committed in the locations listed above.

I have to admit, that apart from having an overactive imagination, I am unable to add any more to my theory, so will not make any further posts unless I actually find some evidence!

All the best
ANS