Hutch in the 1911 Census?

[Ben]

Ben, but that IS a connection, and an important one. It helps to put him, along with Reg's recollections which cannot be summarily dismissed, and signatures, and age, and social class, at the very fore of Hutchinson possibilities. There really is no one else. Surely, even with all the refutations you make, you have to admit this.

Mike, I really don't know how you can say there is "no one else". Of course that isn't the case. There are other George Hutchinson's with stronger, pre-1895 connections to the East End, who were also in their 20s and early 30s, and who were also of the right social class. The only advantage they had over Toppy - and yes, I can only see it as an advantage - is that they didn't have a dodgy Royal Conspiracy hampering their by-proxy claim to witness fame. Yes, Toppy is one of only a handful of George Hutchinsons from the period with later connections to the East End, but that may mean very little if the witness in question used a false name.

Hi Fish,

Interesting points, but caution is urged on two grounds here:

1) We have to be careful not to infantilize 22-year-old Toppy. I'd observe that the average voyage of personal discovery and the attendent moulding of one's personality happens at an earlier age. Teens, most likely.

2) As Crystal observes, we want to steer clear of graphology, as a rule; the discipline wherein the writer's personality is assessed based on his/her handwriting. Melvin Harris made the interesting observation about the various "experts" called in to assess the diary: "(Feldman) tells us about the judgements made by Reed Hayes, Anna Koren and Sue Iremonger. The only authentic Questioned Document Examiner of the three is Sue Iremonger; the other two are disciples of the psuedo-science known as Graphology. (It claims to be able to predict and unveil the personality behind the writing. Palmistry claims the same for the hand.)"

When applied to Toppy, I can't see how it would be applicable: "Gone are those uncertain wilderness years of my youth, encapsulated by the open "G" loop in my name. I'm a family man now! With a job! Goodbye open-looped G's! A confident older Toppy is damned well going to close his G-loops. And heck, the sky's the limit now, so that's how I'm going to tail off my signature - skywards!

What that light-hearted monologue is intended to illustrate is that uncertainty and indecision is unlikely to manifest itself in different handwriting quirks, not that we have any reason to suspect that Toppy was remotely lost, delicate or unsettled in 1888. If anything, you're more likely to be care-free in that period in life.

The only things we KNOW is that signatures do change over time, and that these changes will vary from individual to individual.

But in this case, we have evidence that Toppy's signature hardly changed at all over a whopping 13-year period!

All the best,
Ben

[DVV]

Refutation

Ben, even with all the refutations you make, you have to admit this. If you can't, I'm afraid you are too far submerged in your own theories to have a discussion that isn't just refutation. That makes discussion involving anything Hutchinson-related, just a lot of nay-saying, and nearly impossible.

Hi Mike,
I must point out (friendly as ever) that I find this a bit rich.
When you use pejoratively the term "refutation" in such a context, it looks as if your position has to be unquestionably the doxa.
I'm at ease to tell you so, for I've never denied that the handwritings match somehow. Being not a graphologist, I can't say whether this "somehow" is enough to shout out: "We've got Hutch." The same is true for the mismatching letters. It doesn't allow me to shout out: "That's not Hutch."
In any event, the relative similarity of the witness and Lambeth George's handwritings should make us a bit more cautious.
As well as Reg's story.

Amitiés,
David

[The Good Michael]

David,

I use the term 'refutation' because that is all that has been going on from the other side. There isn't any acknowledgement of a strong possibility of Toppy and Hutch being the same guy. This is what I can't understand. I am not about to say that he is 100% our guy, but only that he is the closest match that we have. I don't even hear that from the other camp. C'mon now. At least it has to be said that Toppy is the closest we have come to Hutch to date.

As far as your not being a graphologist; I think you're confusing your English just a bit. A graphologist reads personalities based upon handwriting. It is akin to phrenology. I think you are looking for 'document analyst' as the term, no?

Cheers,

Mike

[Crystal]

More for my friend The Fisherman.

Fisherman!

You see you prove my point, which is that you will argue with whatever I say! Let's just simplify things, shall we?

Based on handwriting comparison, if Toppy is the witness, then I'm a Monkey's Uncle - possibly to an Alpha Baboon..

I have seen so much subjective, highly biased argument on this thread that I am honestly amazed. I, rather innocently, it turns out, presumed that people would strive to be as free from personal bias as possible - well, that showed me, didn't it?

Look, if I had the time (I don't) to locate a page full of signatures, all by George Hutchinsons who were contemporaries of Toppy, and post them on this thread, you would see that they all bore a common resemblance to each other. If I was clever enough to locate them all from the same social strata, then that resemblance would be all the more noticeable.

What your, or my signatures did or didn't do in our lifetimes has no bearing on that at all. We are living in the 21st Century, not the 19th. It would be just as inappropriate to compare a hand of, say, the 16th Century with the 19th Century and say that the same rules applied.

When I say that this is complicated, academic stuff, I am really not trying to obscure the truth with fancy words or learning - I am stating the fact - and that is why I can't be bothered to get into it here. It is the stuff of an in depth conversation, not a public barney.

Whatever, I see commonplace likenesses between the signatures that I can find quite easily elsewhere, I see marked differences, on the other hand, that are not so easily dismissed. You do not see that, because you lack the experience and knowledge - I know, much as it galls you not to be considered an expert after a couple of weeks on the Google Train - nonetheless, the fact of the matter.

I am very pleased that the other contributors to this thread are interested enough to want to open this up for discussion and debate - but at the end of the day we are all looking at a very small sample here, Sam Flynn's posting efforts notwithstanding. When you have seen thousands of the wretched things, then you can tell me that I'm wrong.

Best Regards, Friend Fisherman.

[Ben]

I am not about to say that he is 100% our guy, but only that he is the closest match that we have.

But with every sincerety, Mike, I don't believe he is the closest match so far, for reasons I outline above. That's not refutation for the sake of it. That's responsible and honest disagreement.

[Crystal]

Ben's right, as usual. See above...

Watch this space, Ben, another game of 'Spot The Difference' coming soon!

[The Good Michael]

Crystal,

For you to say Ben's right, you must have another Hutchinson in mind. Who would that be?

Cheers,

Mike

[Malcolm X]

But with every sincerety, Mike, I don't believe he is the closest match so far, for reasons I outline above. That's not refutation for the sake of it. That's responsible and honest disagreement.

you have to laugh; you've said that a million times mate!

[Malcolm X]

`` Yes, Toppy is one of only a handful of George Hutchinsons from the period with later connections to the East End, but that may mean very little if the witness in question used a false name.``

be very careful of this indeed........VERY VERY CAREFUL .........no false name, this guy was called G.Hutchinson but which one we dont know, he would not have lied to the police about his name; because this is a very stupid thing to do, especially if he's going for ``Walkies`` with them the next day, plus they probably checked his home address too, a false name feels totally and utterly wrong to me.

the Ripper is trying to appear an honest upstanding caring citizen, the last thing he'd ever do is lie about his name, becaue this is way too easy for the police to discover ( that is if H is our man), because if HUTCH was caught lieing like this, he'd be in serious trouble........the police are ok to deal with if you keep them at range, but they're like bloodhounds if they sense you're lieing, especially over your identity; they'll rip you apart, they'll go into every detail of your life.

[DVV]

As far as your not being a graphologist; I think you're confusing your English just a bit. A graphologist reads personalities based upon handwriting. It is akin to phrenology. I think you are looking for 'document analyst' as the term, no?
Mike

Mike,
I think I've read some posts, and at least one post signed "The Good Michael", in which Sue Iremonger was dismissed as incompetent, since her field was "document analysis", and our problem being not "about forgery", etc...
I therefore suppose that you've changed your mind and and now accept her expert opinion...???
And simply, Mike, we are comparing handwritings, not to "read personalities", of course.
I don't know if it is closer to "graphology" or to "document examination". I bet, though, that the needed knowledge and methodology might be very close to that of graphology in some respects.

Amitiés,
David

[DVV]

...and here it is :

This isn't really the work for document examiners, I believe. They may have a trained eye for things, but this isn't forgery.
Cheers,
Mike

[Crystal]

Er..No. Not really. Graphology is untenable nonsense. Document analysis isn't. See? Easy.

[DVV]

Graphology is a pseudo-science for fun. For example, when one is depressed, he tends to write a line which, at the end, will go downwards.
But since we are comparing handwritings, we are observing the shape of the letters, and that's also what a graphologist would do, no?
We are not comparing and dating the papers on which Toppy and Hutch have written, are we?
We are not working on an "internal critics" of the texts, are we?
As you wisely put it in a previous post, Crystal, I repeat: we are comparing handwritings.
It would be very pompous to call it: "document analysis".

Amitiés,
David

[The Good Michael]

...and here it is :

David,

I never said she was incompetent. I said that we can compare signatures as well.

Cheers,

Mike

[Fisherman]

Ben writes:

"We have to be careful not to infantilize 22-year-old Toppy. I'd observe that the average voyage of personal discovery and the attendent moulding of one's personality happens at an earlier age. Teens, most likely."

Well, Ben, maybe I should take care not to infantilize myself? For I know that I was not a finished product when I was 22.
This aside, what we DO agree on is that the moulding ages boelong to the early years. And no matter how we choose to look upon it, Toppy was at his closest to them years in 1888, and not in 1898 and 1911. So I think it is a point that may carry lots of relevance.

"we want to steer clear of graphology"

...and that we do, Ben. For I am not in any sense connecting the suggestion that he may have changed his stylistic elements to any other things than
a/ the fact that we know that everybody does it at some stage in life (nobody is born with a finished signature)
and
b/ the fact that we know that Toppy was still a young man when he alledgedly wrote the signatures on the police report. And from my own experience (and let´s face it, we all know that it applies to millions of people), I know that the younger years are the ones where the signature is shaped to it´s more rigid and final form. And not all individuals will "find" their signatures at an age of sixteen years, two months and eleven days - it will vary, and there will be those who have finished the process at sixteen years of age, whereas others will be eighteen, twentyone, twentythree or twentyseven. That, I would say, amounts to no rocket science.

In conclusion, this has nothing to do with the part of graphology that tries to draw conclusions about a persons psychology from his signature and handstyle, and I would be a lot more happy if you did not bring the suggestion into the discussion. Instead, the two details I am referring to are things that I think none of us would even consider trying to quibble with. Would you, Ben?

The best,
Fisherman