O to W Vote

[John Wheat]

To Mike

No need for apologies. I take your point about the McKenzie murder. Still don't think Tumblety was the Ripper though.

Cheers John

[mklhawley]

To Mike

No need for apologies. I take your point about the McKenzie murder. Still don't think Tumblety was the Ripper though.

Cheers John

No problem, at all, but I'll tell ya, he's fun to research. His public side is easy to research, but his private side is the challange, such as his failed investments in the coal industry, almost dying of a sickness in a hospital in a certain US city. Hall Caine spoke of him leaving Liverpool for extended periods of time and not telling him where he went. Some of that is coming to light. Much to discover.

Sincerely,

Mike

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby Normal, if Tumblety was JTR, you might have something here.

Sincerely,
Mike

" You can tell a slug from its trail."
And this guy left a pretty nasty track wherever he went. I would not be shocked in the least if it ever turned out he had something to do with it.

[mklhawley]

Hi Abby Normal,

Here's a snail trail from 1875 in Liverpool, reported in the Liverpool Leader, January 9, 1875,

There comes to us a tale of a decent woman from the Isle of Man who sought his advice respecting a bad leg. He told her it was due to the immorality of her parents, but would cure it for 3 pounds. This she declined, whereon he ordered her to get out legs and all or else he would kick her out! Other women young an unmarried, have fled in alarm from his premises, and say his language and conduct suggested danger.

I can see a reporter trying to make a point of promoting a story of the Ripper suspect Tumblety by embellishing his danger to females, but this story was published thirteen years earlier.

Now, this is far from proof that he was JTR, but like you, I wouldn't be shocked.

Sincerely,
Mike

[c.d.]

I wonder if there would have been less sense of danger had she paid the three pounds.

c.d.

[mklhawley]

I wonder if there would have been less sense of danger had she paid the three pounds.

c.d.

Only if she would have tried to hug him.

[Wickerman]

I'm not ignoring you Jon. Can this wait until my article gets published in August? You'll see why.

Mike

Certainly Mike.
I was just airing where my doubts begin.

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

...the evidence supports that he did indeed have an anatomical collection, which included uterus specimens.

Just curious, but what evidence would that be Mike?

Wolf.

[mklhawley]

Just curious, but what evidence would that be Mike?

Wolf.

Hi Wolf,

Long time no hear. New stuff since you last wrote about this subject in 2004. You asked for evidence, but I’ll give you more. The primary piece of evidence is a type of evidence admitted in the court of law and can be so powerful that it’s convicted people even of murder, eyewitness testimony. You are familiar with it, but others might not be:

Colonel C. A. Dunham, a well-known lawyer who lives near Fairview, N.J., was intimately acquainted with Twomblety for many years, and, in his own mind, had long connected him with the Whitechapel horrors. "The man's real name," said the lawyer, "is Tumblety, with Francis for a Christian name. I have here a book published by him a number of years ago, describing some of his strange adventures and wonderful cures, all lies, of course, in which the name Francis Tumblety, M.D., appears. When, to my knowledge of the man's history, his idiosyncrasies, his revolting practices, his antipathy to women, and especially to fallen women, his anatomical museum, containing many specimens like those carved from the Whitechapel victims”…

I first made the fellow's acquaintance a few days after the battle of Bull Run. Although a very young man at the time I held a colonel's commission in the army, and was at the capital on official business. The city was full of strangers, 90 per cent of them military men…

Go where you would, to any of the hotels, to the war department or the navy yard, you were sure to find the 'doctor.' He had no business in either place, but he went there to impress the officers whom he would meet. He professed to have an extensive experience in European hospitals and armies, and claimed to have diplomas from the foremost medical colleges of the Old World and New. He had, he declared, after much persuasion accepted the commission of brigade surgeon at a great sacrifice pecuniarily; but, with great complacency, he always added that, fortunately for his private patients, his official duties would not, for a considerable time, take him away from the city…

"Then he invited us into his office where he illustrated his lecture, so to speak. One side of this room was entirely occupied with cases, outwardly resembling wardrobes. When the doors were opened quite a museum was revealed--tiers of shelves with glass jars and cases, some round and others square, filled with all sorts of anatomical specimens. The 'doctor' placed on a table a dozen or more jars containing, as he said, the matrices of every class of women. Nearly a half of one of these cases was occupied exclusively with these specimens.”


The intriguing point about this eyewitness account is that showing military officers his anatomical specimens is exactly what Tumblety would have done. Why? In the nineteenth century, evidence for being a credible surgeon occurred in two ways; showing a diploma and showing anatomical specimens. According to Michael Sappol, curator-historian at the National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland:

“In the nineteenth century, any medical college worth its salt had an anatomical museum and pathological cabinet. There was a pedagogical circle of life: medical students and colleagues were expected to study specimens and also to produce them. Membership in the profession was consolidated by a common culture of collectorship. In formal medical discourse the specimen was accounted as an educational aid or as a record of a typical or unusual anatomical feature or pathological condition . . . The professional anatomical museum was a repository of medical souvenirs. In other works: stuff in jars skeletons, dried preparations, casts and models in wax, plaster, papier mâché, and wood.”

Doctor A.W. Bates, PhD, MD, at the Department of Histopathology in the Royal Free Hospital, London, England, affirms this point and explains it was the same in mid-Victorian England. He states,

“Anatomy teachers assembled their own collections or ‘museums’ of material with which to illustrate lectures . . . Ownership of a museum indicated that a teacher was likely to be financially solvent and, in the 1820s, possession of a museum worth more than 500 pounds was suggested as a prerequisite for an anatomy teacher to be recognized by the College of Surgeons.”

Sappol then states,

“Doctors were known to keep a few specimens or a cabinet of material on display in their offices as trophies and, more broadly, as objects that advertised a medical vocation (as did diplomas, weighty medical tomes, medicines, and instruments). The specimens served as a credential, proof that the doctor had dissected and had special knowledge of the interior of the body.”

In his autobiography, Tumblety states: “When General McClellan was appointed Commander of the Army of the Potomac, I partially made up [my] mind to tender my professional services as a surgeon in one of the regiments, and I had the assurance . . .”

But of course, we know he had a different agenda; to make money. Tumblety wanted to convince General McClellan, the man in control, that he was a credible surgeon, which would allow him to mingle with the military men and wives and ply his trade. Because he was not allowed an audience with the General, he did the next best thing, meet and mingle with military officers; the General’s eyes and ears. Showing them his anatomical museum ‘illustrating his lecture’, as Colonel Dunham explained, is exactly what Dunham needed to do, since he didn’t have an authentic diploma.

Yes, this was 30 years earlier than the Ripper murders, but there is evidence that he maintained at least some of his anatomical arrangements:

DR. TUMBLETY. A Naval Officer Tells Some More About Him While in Washington.
In speaking this morning of the recent arrest of ‘Dr. Tumblety’ in London on suspicion of being ‘Jack, the Ripper,’ a naval officer said to a STAR reporter: ‘I met that man in 1861 in this city. I was standing in front of a toy store looking at a mechanical toy in the window, when this man, who stood beside me, began to talk about it. He afterward invited me to his room to see an arrangement of his to show the circulation of the blood. I then thought that either he was a fool or regarded me as a fool, but after listening to him for some time came to the conclusion that he was a decided crank on the subject of medicine. He pretended to be practical, but I soon saw that he knew almost nothing about anatomy. Among other things he had a patent preparation for skin diseases, which seemed to have some merit. He rode a magnificent horse, a bay with white spots, and used to dash up the avenue. At certain points boys would run out from the curb with notes for him, thus giving folks the impression that he was doing a driving business. He did not last very long here, and in '69 I met him again in San Francisco, where he was doing very poorly .

So, was Colonel Dunham a credible witness? That fact that what he reported is exactly what Tumblety would have done to make money, certainly supports his memory, but there’s more. A quick scan of contemporary newspaper articles can point to Dunham’s reptile journalism, lies, and scamming, but this only happened during times he was baiting someone, especially during the Civil War and the murder of President Lincoln. Foremost expert on Dunham states this, Carman Cumming, author of Devil’s Game: The Civil War Intrigues of Charles A. Dunham,

“The most significant [evidence] indicate that Dunham, for an extended period of the war, systematically and ingeniously faked stories damaging Confederates and Northern Peace Democrats. Circumstantial evidence suggests as well that in many of these projects, and in his intrigues in the South and in Canada, he may have worked in collusion with someone at Washington.”

Dunham was a double agent for the North, and his job was to be the best liar (or he’d die). Pathological liars have no agenda other than to lie. He was far from being a pathological liar; he was a patriot. Keep in mind, during all of his adventures around the Civil War, he was having kids with his wife and building a family.

Sincerely,

Mike

[mklhawley]

It won't allow me to correct, but I need to:

But of course, we know he had a different agenda; to make money. Tumblety wanted to convince General McClellan, the man in control, that he was a credible surgeon, which would allow him to mingle with the military men and wives and ply his trade. Because he was not allowed an audience with the General, he did the next best thing, meet and mingle with military officers; the General’s eyes and ears. Showing them his anatomical museum ‘illustrating his lecture’, as Colonel Dunham explained, is exactly what Dunham needed to do, since he didn’t have an authentic diploma.

Should say:

But of course, we know he had a different agenda; to make money. Tumblety wanted to convince General McClellan, the man in control, that he was a credible surgeon, which would allow him to mingle with the military men and wives and ply his trade. Because he was not allowed an audience with the General, he did the next best thing, meet and mingle with military officers; the General’s eyes and ears. Showing them his anatomical museum ‘illustrating his lecture’, as Colonel Dunham explained, is exactly what Tumblety needed to do, since he didn’t have an authentic diploma.

[Lechmere]

Good old Tumblety – vital to the Ripper industry to keep those Yankee dollars flowing eastward across the wide blue back of the Atlantic.
I have no doubt he makes for an entertaining research topic.
But a serious suspect?

It would indeed be unlikely for an America with no known connection to the East End, a tall bear of a man, a flamboyant self-publicist homosexual C-list celebrity, to engage in a series of murders in unfamiliar territory and get away with it – while concurrently committing four acts of gross indecency with force of arms on young men – one on the same day as Mary Nichols was murdered.
It stretches credulity to breaking point without even looking at the detail.

The rings – set with stones when left as part of his estate, yet plane brass rings when the taken from Chapman. The same items? Nonsense.

Dropped as a suspect due to the Mackenzie murder in July 1889?
Then why no further action taken after Inspector Andrews’s visit to Canada in December 1888?
(And the claim that Inspector Andrews’ visit had anything to do with Tumblety is shaky, not to say threadbare, to say the least).
Claiming that the Mackenzie murder cleared Tumblety in the eyes of Scotland Yard makes them incredibly negligent for seven months.

An extreme woman hater?
For every account of his bad behaviour – with disgruntled customers for example, or the intemperate language he used with young male associates that he wanted to steer away from heterosexual activities - there are accounts of his fawning over women. He was that type of guy.

The anatomical collection?
It dates to the Civil War period when he was trying to pass himself off as a proper doctor for reason of financial gain. One way of determining a proper doctor was via an anatomical collection, supposedly of specimens personally extracted by the owner. But such collections could be bought. He was a con man – it was part of his con.

Littlechild would know about Tumblety because of his known Irish sympathies?
Tumblety expressed no such sympathies prior to 1888 – beyond a single hackneyed line in his self published memoirs about poor Ireland’s suffering. Those same memoirs are full of praise for Britain and
Littlechild thought Tumblety died in 19888 so I doubt anything Tumblety said after that could have influenced him.
Tumblety did indeed express anti British and pro Irish republican sympathies after 1888 for a period – when his temper was no doubt up following his arrest for gross indecency and his enforced flight from his favourite holiday destination.
Prior to 1888 his only political foray was as an abortive Conservative pro British Imperialist candidate in a Canadian election – not the work of a Fenian!
When Tumblety visited Ireland he boasted that he hung out with a member of the Anglo-Irish Ascendency – the landowning class! The alleged oppressors of the old Oirish. Not the work of a Fenian.
It is fairly obvious that Littlechild would not have had a file on Tumblety and his information was very second hand.

We are left with Anderson contacting the US police force – twice I believe.

Once after Tumblety was bailed from a minor Magistrates court on charges of gross indecency. The US press found out about this but did not focus on the socially destructive gross indecency charges but on the allegation that these charges were trumped up as a cover for real suspicion that Tumblety was Jack the Ripper. How on earth did the US press find out?
I would suggest that the only person to benefit from the spin put on these stories was Tumblety. That he was the source of the leak. That he invented the Jack the Ripper connection.
Anderson’s enquiries followed the publication of stories in the US press about Tumblety being a Jack the Ripper suspect. It is fairly obvious that Anderson was responding to the US press stories that had themselves been sewn by Tumblety – a practiced self publicist.

The police let Tumblety out on bail – supposedly – so he could kill Mary Kelly.
They got him back in custody then released him on bail again (with a financial penalty this time). Now Tumblety absconded – so clearly he cannot have been under observation.
Tumblety travelled incognito via France to New York.
But guess what?
The US press had been told to expect him!
Who – one wonders – tipped the US press off about his impending incognito arrival?
And this leads to the second Anderson telegram about Tumblety – again almost certainly in response to Tumblety leaking about his own flight to get himself in the US press as a falsely accused Jack the Ripper suspect – followed by Scotland Yard hearing about this and making their own brief enquiries.

And when the dust had settled and everyone had forgotten about the gross indecency charges – Tumblety gave interviews denouncing the Jack the Ripper allegations.
That is the story of Tumblety as a suspect.

[mklhawley]

Eric, Eric,

Your post is filled with conjecture and denial, but little facts. If anyone knows Eric, we know what his real agenda is. It's too bad it's not truth.

You're still being vindictive, eh?

Mike

[mklhawley]

Oh, and you're going to love my next article. It's too bad your agenda is not truth

[mklhawley]

So remember, you believe it was Tumblety as the source of the story. Keep that in mind

[Lechmere]

It's so refreshing to see an intelligent response.