Topping Hutchinson - looking at his son's account

[DVV]

Mike, I thought Lechmere was of opinion that Toppy had probably learnt his trade from his father.

As for your trip, you could make your choice according to the weather.

It will rain hard in Ethiopia, and Sicily will be hot as hell.

Hope it helps.

[Rubyretro]

and Sicily will be hot as hell.

Mike should feel at home then..

[The Good Michael]

Mike, I thought Lechmere was of opinion that Toppy had probably learnt his trade from his father.

It was an opinion, yes, but he clearly stated that in 1888 it was obvious that he wasn't a plumber. That's all I was saying. I thought you may have misread that and I wanted to clear it up. I have no idea what Lechmere really thinks, however, except that we agree on many things. Maybe Faroes then. I was thinking Faroes and then a ship to Shetland as well. Never been and the weather will be dryer there, but still cool. I like cool.

Cheers,

Mike

[DVV]

Well, his father being a plumber, I have serious doubts about him having learnt his trade after 1888.

As boring as rain can be, there is a splendid and special atmosphere in Ethiopia during the kremt.

[Ben]

If anyone has stated that it's "obvious" that Toppy wasn't a plumber in 1888, they're just wrong, because it's anything but.

More likely, Toppy became a plumber at the earliest opportunity (i.e. certainly by his twenties) after taking advantage of his father's plumbing connections.

The real George Hutchinson on the other hand....

[The Good Michael]

Well, his father being a plumber, I have serious doubts about him having learnt his trade after 1888.

As boring as rain can be, there is a splendid and special atmosphere in Ethiopia during the kremt.

I think Topping was maybe in the military for a few years and could have been grooming an officer's horse. many Englishmen went in the army for a time. In the 19th century folks thought about seeking their fortunes through such things. May have been where the military appearance came from as well. He may even have learned to use a blade very well... oops. Didn't mean to go there. I think the plumbing thing came later. And no surprise really, and nothing odd about it. My father was supposed to take up the construction trade but went in the military. When he got out, he took odd jobs in California and after a few years, guess what? He was running a construction business. No formal training, just OJT.

Ethiopia... maybe. The ladies there..

Mike

[DVV]

Hmmmm.....this so-called military appearance comes from the press....If Toppy was Hutch and was VISIBLY fresh from the army, we would have known it.
Seems you're about to change Toppy's life into a fanciful novel.

[Lechmere]

Actually Mr Ben I have previously listed a whole series of things I find unconvincing about Hutchinson’s story – not just the 3 year thing with Kelly.
You also can’t shake that apprentice infatuation can you?
“If he had been apprenticed as a plumber before 1888, as you are suggesting, that would make him a plumber by trade or a plumbing trainee by trade, not a groom by trade now working as a labourer...”
Not if he didn’t in 1888 intend to return to plumbing and had been a groom/labourer.

“The idea that Toppy could have emerged from the East End life of a labourer or groom to become chummy again with his dad, re-learn the entire plumbing trade more or less overnight and march straight into the examination room is very obviously incorrect.”
Incorrect? We have no idea whether it’s incorrect. And it would not be overnight - it would be a couple of years. That is not overnight - well it might be on a planet in the far outer reaches of the solar system.

DVV
“I'm even of opinion that a man who would have been apprenticed as a plumber would have been a bit proud of it”
You may be right, but as there were very few apprentice plumbers it is exceptionally unlikely that this would apply to Toppy wherever he lived.
This apprentice infatuation is spreading.
If he hadn’t passed the much more basic plumbers test by 1888 and at that moment did not intend to go back to plumbing (which he probably had started to engage in with his father at a younger age) then why would he define himself as a plumber?

To clarify...
If Toppy is the Kelly Hutchinson...
1. He probably worked with his father as a plumber for a few years.
2. He moved to the East End for whatever reason, by 1888, and took whatever work he could get (groom and labourer) as he was not sufficiently proficient as a plumber to work in that profession on his own account
3. Then he resumed working as a plumber, probably with his father again and possibly passed the Worshipful Company of Plumbers test (or possibly not) and was an independent plumber by 1891.
I see nothing remarkable about this as a hypothesis, but there is no proof for the second stage.

I don’t think Toppy could have been in the Army – the minimum period of enlistment in the infantry was four years and eight years in the cavalry and artillery.

[DVV]

Hi Lechmere

If he hadn’t passed the much more basic plumbers test by 1888 and at that moment did not intend to go back to plumbing (which he probably had started to engage in with his father at a younger age) then why would he define himself as a plumber?

Well, had he passed the basic grooms test ?

I see nothing remarkable about this as a hypothesis

I see nothing substantiated either.

[Lechmere]

DVV
I would suggest that being a groom requires a lot less skill and experience than being a plumber.
But yes I suspect it will never be substantiated that Toppy was or wasn't in the East End in 1888.
In my opinion the bits and pieces of evidence and filling in of blanks for Toppy being Kelly's Hutchinson add up to a whole lot more than the bits and pieces of evidence and filling in of blanks that make Hutchinson the Ripper.

Books are written trying to provide a factual basis for King Arthur (for example), based on multiple sources, bits and pieces of evidence and filling in of blanks. I would suggest that if the Toppy stuff was put together in the Arthurian context, then it would be accepted that history had found its man (Kelly's Hutchinson).
(For the literalists out there, I used Arthur as an example of a historical figure of unsure provenance.)

[DVV]

In my opinion the bits and pieces of evidence and filling in of blanks for Toppy being Kelly's Hutchinson add up to a whole lot more than the bits and pieces of evidence and filling in of blanks that make Hutchinson the Ripper.

Is that a splendid sophism or a sheer absurdity ?
Let me think about....

[Lechmere]

In that case I will simplify it for you...
There is a better case for Kelly's Hutchinson being Toppy, than there is for Kelly's Hutchinson being the Ripper.

However having said that I think there is no realistic likelihood that Kelly's Hutchinson was the Ripper.

[DVV]

That's it. A nonsense. Since nobody will ever prove who was the ripper.

[Garry Wroe]

The Worshipful Company of Plumbers introduced a test that they wished to encourage plumbers to undertake and to encourage potential employers to insist upon their plumbers being suitably qualified. The test clearly did not require anything like seven years training.

You may be right, but as there were very few apprentice plumbers it is exceptionally unlikely that this would apply to Toppy wherever he lived.

If he hadn’t passed the much more basic plumbers test by 1888 and at that moment did not intend to go back to plumbing (which he probably had started to engage in with his father at a younger age) then why would he define himself as a plumber?

To begin with, Lechmere, the Worshipful Company of Plumbers was not some all powerful governmental body armed with legislative clout. It was nothing more than a lowly trade association. And the ‘test’ to which you have referred was not a substitute for a formal apprenticeship, it was merely a process which ensured that all members met a minimum standard of competency.

Astonishingly, you also seem to believe that the formal apprenticeship rolled over and died at some point in the mid-1880s. Sorry, but such a notion is a million miles away from reality. The irrefutable truth of the matter is that the apprenticeship scheme was still thriving in the mid-1970s when I was indentured.

But tell me, Lechmere: if any old Tom, Dick or Toppy could wake up one morning and become a tradesman on a whim, why would anyone have bothered to undergo the years of hardship that an apprenticeship entailed? What would have been the point? Are you aware, for example, that the Victorian apprentice worked unpaid? He or she was fed, clothed and provided with shelter. Beyond that, the only reward was the acquisition of skills and knowledge. So again, why would anyone have subjected themselves to seven years of such deprivation had it been possible to attain tradesman status merely by the acquisition of a set of second-hand tools?

Am I suggesting that there were no bodgers in the 1880s? Not in the least. There were blaggers aplenty then as now. But there were regulations and those regulations were enforced. Had this not been the case, the Fenians would have had no need of bombs. They would simply have set themselves up as gas fitters and blown London off the face of The Earth courtesy of 'faulty' workmanship.

[DVV]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPgYiwlGrog

"I'm the plumber-ber-ber-ber-ber...."