Hutch in the 1911 Census?

[Debra A]

I might pop up to the church itself...

All the best,
Ben

And they can't refuse you having a look either from what I can gather!

According to free bmd, Toppy's marriage was registered in Mile End Old Town (Mile End) and there's a note saying the registers for that district are now in Tower Hamlets. With the ticker nicker George, the originals were still kept at the district office where the marriage was registered.

[Sam Flynn]

Just one query, is the certificate a photocopy or photograph of the original entry or did you just send away for a copy from the Reigister Office?

The original, Debs. Thanks for asking.

Edit: obviously not THE original, but a scan/photocopy of same ordered from the National Archive!

[richardnunweek]

Hi Everyone.
What a frustrating thread this is, we are still none the wiser, although much appreciated research has been carried out.
It is with regret that JD Hutchinson, who appeared as a one time poster,has apparently took leave of Casebook, that dispite sincere correspondence from yours truely, but that is part and parcel of this game, and one could hardly blame her from refraining,the Hutchinson thread is hardly honourable to her husbands grandfather.
So it appears the case of 'Is he'? Isnt he?, will continue, and eventually fade into obscurity.
Regards Richard.

[Debra A]

The original, Debs. Thanks for asking.

Well i thought it was a very valid and crucial question to ask Sam, given that David Knott also viewed the marriage signature and saw a similarity between it and the 1911 census signature, but the one you found shows no similarity as far as i can see, plus the fact that the entry you showed was obviously all filled out in the same hand, which is unusual. it was certainly not any critisism of your research, just a straight forward honest question.

[Sam Flynn]

It was certainly not any critisism of your research.

I didn't take it as such, Debs, and my thanks were sincere. It WAS a valid question, and one I was more than happy to address.

Incidentally, is it possible that David K and/or Bob H saw a different version than the one the NA sent me? In other words, might different copies have been sent off to the Archives, whilst the original original (if that makes sense) remains with the Parish? That might explain any discrepancies between what those fine gents saw and what I've posted. If so, then I'd be grateful if they'd post up some scans for comparison.

I'm not out to prove an agenda (I'm satisfied that the police statement and 1911 Census sigs are by one and the same person anyway - so it's already "proven" as far as I'm concerned) but I am keen that we establish the truth.

[Debra A]

I didn't take it as such, Debs, and my thanks were sincere. It WAS a valid question, and one I was more than happy to address.

Incidentally, is it possible that David K and/or Bob H saw a different version than the one the NA sent me? In other words, might different copies have been sent off to the Archives, whilst the original original (if that makes sense) remains with the Parish? That might explain any discrepancies between what those fine gents saw and what I've posted. If so, then I'd be grateful if they'd post up some scans for comparison.

I'm not out to prove an agenda (I'm satisfied that the police statement and 1911 Census sigs are by one and the same person anyway - so it's already "proven" as far as I'm concerned) but I am keen that we establish the truth.

I can't answer that one Sam, I don't know how the national archives ordering works, with the Cottage grove Hutch I wrote to the Fullham register office as that's where the original registers were still kept. The registers are not normally open for public viewing or copying except by request. The one you posted looks like a copy from microfiche? Maybe from the family records centre at NA?
I know my marraige certificate doesn't have my original signature as it's an ordered copy after I lost the original....and I got married in Huddersflied apparently!
I too think the 1911 census signature and the police statement signature are similar enough that we need to know for certain if this marriage cert one of yours is toppy's signature or not.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Debs,

I too think the 1911 census signature and the police statement signature are similar enough that we need to know for certain if this marriage cert one of yours is toppy's signature or not.

I know that "my" marriage cert's signature isn't Toppy's (or at least I'm 99.9% certain), so what we really need is a scan of the copy Bob/David have seen. If "mine" is the only copy that exists, however, then it's little wonder that Sue Iremonger found no match! I'd have said the same

[Debra A]

Ben's idea of a trip to the church may be a good one at this point!

[Ben]

I think I might just do that, Debs!

I'm prepared to swear on everything I hold dear in this world that the signature Gareth kindly provided today is not the one that Sue Iremonger used as a comparison study for the witness signatures, and I'm very confident indeed that it isn't the one David believed to have been "very similar" to the 1911 signature.

It may be worth reinforcing at the point that I don't believe for a moment that the witness signatures and Toppy's effort were penned by the same individual either!

All the best,
Ben

[Sam Flynn]

I'm prepared to swear on everything I hold dear in this world that the signature Gareth kindly provided today is not the one that Sue Iremonger used as a comparison study

To nobody in particular: if you've got a scan of the "Iremonger" Topping signature, it'd help immensely if you'd upload it here... (a) to put us all out of our misery, and (b) to help keep the roof over Ben's head.

[Fisherman]

Sam writes:

"is it possible that David K and/or Bob H saw a different version than the one the NA sent me? In other words, might different copies have been sent off to the Archives, whilst the original original (if that makes sense) remains with the Parish? That might explain any discrepancies between what those fine gents saw and what I've posted."

This is getting VERY confusing. I think it´s time that I check if I got things right.
The document that Sam received a photocopy of, is the original document, taken down at the occasion of George Topping Hutchinsons wedding.
For some reason, it seems that all the text on it, signatures and all, was written by one person only. Therefore, there is no need to accept that Hutch´s signature on the document was written by himself.
There may exist other copies of this document, and in other handwriting. If so, it would seem that at least one such document exists, and that this document carries a Hutchinson signature that is very similar to the one from the 1911 census, according to David Knott.
That, though, carries no true relevance to the question about Hutchs signature on the ORIGINAL wedding document - since it was never Hutchs real signature in the first place.

Have I got it right so far?

And, if so: Was it customary for people who got married back then not to provide their own signatures to a marriage certificate? Do we know of parallel cases where this applies?

Finally, as I have stated before, I am in total agreement with Sam (and Debra) that the signature on the census records and the signature on the police statement were written by the same man. To my layman´s eyes, given the circumstances involving a gap of 23 years, the likeness is nothing short of astonishing. These two signatures are of course the ones that should have been compared by the experts, and I have little doubt about the outcome of such a comparison.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Debra A]

Hi fisherman....corr, it all sounds so complicated when put like that!

In my opinion what sam probably has in his possession is consistent with a copy, filled in by a registrar after the event , containing details from the original marriage register.
I'm with Ben in that i cannot believe that a proffessional document examiner or researchers like David Knott and Bob Hinton did not seek out the original register, containing Toppy's signature and base their conclusions on that one. I am sure this would have been done.

And just for the record, I believe the witness signature and Toppy's 1911 signature to be very similar, enough to want to see this investigated further. I wouldn't go as far as saying they were definitely written by the same man.

[Fisherman]

Thanks for that, Debra!

So, to your mind, there would be a more original original, so to speak - with Hutchs signature?

As for the two signatures and how certain we can be that they belong to the same man, I have already stated that I am no expert in the field whatsoever.
But I feel confident in saying that it will take a lot to change my mind on this one - it´s not as if the East end was crammed with George Hutchinson´s in 1888. And that police report was signed by one of the few who could lay claim to that name - or an imposter, if Ben is right.
Either way, it would be strange in the extreme if the man who signed that report happen to - by pure chance and coincidence - write it in a fashion that is so very similar to the signature Topping provided the census papers with 23 years down the road.
I am not saying (or, for that matter, hoping) that everybody will draw the same conclusions, and I am not ruling out the possibility that expert opinions on the topic may urge me to reconsider. But as it stands, I really do believe that Hutch has been given an identity.

It may be added, of course, that even if we accept that Topping was the real deal, it does not mean that he is in the clear for the Kelly killing. Or any other killing, for that matter.
But it of course retracts somewhat from the plausibility of such suggestions, at least to my mind.

Regards,
Fisherman

[Debra A]

So, to your mind, there would be a more original original, so to speak - with Hutchs signature?

Definitely, Fisherman! Toppy could read and write so he would have signed the register at his marriage, likewise his bride (nowadays posing for a cheesy photo as she does!) and the witnesses to the marriage and any officials. If any of them couldn't write their signature they would have placed an x there instead.

As for the rest of your post I totally agree.

[Fisherman]

Okay, Debra, and once again thanks! What you say sounds very reasonable. So let´s just sit tight til the church-goers come home, shall we...?

The best,
Fisherman