Proof of identity

[pearlyanna]

Richard

It seems the BBC are planning to put all their archived TV and Radio programs online (downloadable), so you may yet have a chance to find your program.

I for one would be interested to hear it.

Anna

[richardnunweek]

Hi Guys,
At last this thread is not being so negative, which it should never be if common logic applies.
We know that a gentleman by the name of Reg hutchinson was the son of George William Topping Hutchinson born 1/10/1886, We can therefore state that at the time of Kellys murder, he was approx 22 years old, only a couple of years junior to Mjk,
That in itself suggests that a possibility of a friendship of some-sorts may have existed between them,
If we can accept the points made, then it is entirely possible that GWTH, taking into account that is actual son Reg ,always maintained that his father had a accurate memory, and a eye for detail, could have relayed to H division the exact truth, and that being the case, could have been classed as a very inportant witness , and if he assisted the police in a productive way, may well have warranted police funds being handed out.
Remember Regs Radio broadcast [ sorry folks] his taped message ended with the following, 'It was my fathers greatest regret that dispite his efforts , nothing came of it.
I do not know how Reg was approached by BBC radio in the early seventies, neither do i know how Fairclough approached him, but I do know how Ivor Edwards found him, that being by the use of a telephone and a bit of effort,
I am sad that the programme appears to have dissapeared, also that Reg has left us, however I can only hope that we someday indentify Gh, and I hope I am right.
Regards Richard.

[David Knott]

I see that Toppy's parents were married in the Shoreditch district, and subsequently lived in the Romford area.

Struggling to see why he is such a bad bet for being the witness.

Has anybody found his sister in the 1891 census yet?

[Sam Flynn]

These are general points, but I thank Ben for prompting me to make them.

It was acknowledged as gossip, and given the additional rumours that Barnett was furiously drunk and living with a notorious Whitechapel denizen, it's a hugely safe bet that the "gossip" was nonsense.

It's evident that the article in the Wheeling Register is a brief compendium of the latest news from London, but the possibility that elements of it are arguably tittle-tattle doesn't mean that every part of the article should be dismissed.

Equally, the probability that Toppy's story and its homologue in the Wheeling Register had a common origin doesn't preclude the possibility that Toppy was himself the originator of the gossip - if gossip it was.

[richardnunweek]

Hello Ben,
I just read the thread on Forums, it is certainly sparking debate, as this thread also.
The fact is I can see all the points against my case, and I appreciate them all, I can understand that rumours can fuel newspaper accounts, and it is possible [ although unlikely ]that a actual sum was mentioned regarding a payment to a man called George Hutchinson, it also appears unlikely that Barnett was drunk during the inquest, although considering the ordeal that he had encountered the past days not impossible, it is also not impossible that he was being comforted by a woman of ill means, even though he was still at his sisters.
The fact is we have no idea what happened in 1888, and we have no idea about the actual people who are casted in this murder mystery.
My aim in this thread is to suggest that GWTH was infact the man known as Gh, and although I was not the finder of that American arcticle, and therefore take no credit, I suggest that as the sum of money mentioned is relevant to the sum of money mentioned on Radio, and in Faircloughs publication, it does give credence to my opinion.
I am not even giving an opinion as to the honesty of the sighting, purely mentioning there appears to be a snippit of truth in there, although others disagree.
The handwritng case is not a proven science as we all know, just as Rigor mortis, which is another thread.
Regards Richard.

[jmenges]

Hi David,

You may come across one George Hutchinson who is from Canada and living with his wife and family in London. This is the illustrator George Hutchinson. He worked with Conan Doyle on the first illustrations for the Sherlock Holmes stories.

JM

[Ben]

Lars is over on Forums-

So he is, Suzi, and he says:

Iys a remarkable coincidence that Nunners tale and an obscure paper report both mention the same figure give or take a shilling.

But of course. If two zero-provenance sources - one gossip from America, the other a 1992 claim from a man saying his dad saw Churchill the Ripper - agree with eachother, of course that makes it correct. Sorry Lars, two wrongs don't make a right, and two nil provenance sources certainly don't equate to good provenance. It's gossip. It was acknowledged as gossip, and given the additional rumours that Barnett was furiously drunk and living with a notorious Whitechapel denizen, it's a hugely safe bet that the "gossip" was nonsense.

But gossip, however nonsensical, has a reputation for spreading through the populace, just as gladstone bags and "leather apron" did. Doesn't make it true or accurate, but it does increase the likelihood of it being bandied around and surviving a few generations. Of course, when we actually consider the likelihood of the police "paying off" a witness to the tune of £5 in 1888, the house of cards collapses further. If the police adopted that strategy, they'd be bombarded with false witnesses all waiting to get paid off.

Then Lars says that Sue Iremonger's comparison doesn't count because the three signatures were different anyway, forgetting of course that she examined all of them and none of them matched Toppy.

Don't make me come over there, Lars...

[David Knott]

Hi Ben,

I was looking at the 1841 census - George Snr was only 15 at the time.

David

[Ben]

Hi David,

Whenever I come across George Snr in the census records, he is listed as a plumber rather than a labourer, and Toppy himself was recorded as such in the 1891 census when he was living in Warren Street. This would mesh up well with Reg's recollection that his father was rarely, if ever, out of plumbing work, but remains heavily at odds with the image of a labouring former groom living in the East End.

Best of luck with your research endeavours!

Cheers,
Ben

[Suzi]

Lars is over on Forums-
But for sheer lunacy have a look at this lot..

http://www.suttonhousesociety.org.uk/Archive/Newsletter200204.htm#Midsommer

[http://www.theirvingsociety.org.uk/r...the_lyceum.htm

[David Knott]

Hi Ben,

All fair points, although Toppy's own father was a 'labourer' for a while before becoming a plumber.

I'm not going overboard about Reg's story, far from it, but I think it would still have to count as positive evidence, however slight.

No doubt lots of others have played about on Ancestry before me, so I don't expect to find anything new, but I'll keep looking!

David

[Ben]

Hi David,

You've highlighted one of the chief stumbling blocks for anyone seeking to identify the "real" George Hutchinson. None of them fit the bill very well at all. It's entirely possible that the witness known to the police as "George Hutchinson" gave a false name when signing his account. However, even if we were to restrict our search to "George Hutchinsons", there are others who fit the bill a good deal better than Toppy. For example, there are at least three who can be placed in the East End at more of less the relevent time; one a butcher living in Shadwell, another a glass-cutter living in the same area (as I recall) and another by the name of George Thomas Hutchison who lived in Mile End, was arrested for theft, and was known to frequent Aldgate. At least one document examiner believed the signatures matched. Then there's Bob Hinton's early candidate, born in Shadwell. His signature didn't match either, but he's still a better bet than Toppy, who can't be pinned to the East End until he met his future wife in 1895.

He could easily have got work as a groom or a labourer after leaving home, before taking up the family trade of plumbing.

Unfortunately not. Plumbers were apprenticed at a very young age in those days, and indeed, Reg referred to his father as having worked as a plumber all his life, and that he was "rarely, if ever, out of work". If, at eighteen, he decided to embark upon three "wilderness years" in the East End, during which he established acquaintanceships with East End prostitutes whilst living in a doss house in one of the worst grot-spots in London and doing a bit of grooming and labouring whenever "in work", there's no way he could establish himself as a self-employed plumber thereafter. He would have missed the boat.

I'd respectfully beg to differ when you argue that Reg's story counts in favour of his candidacy. The whole "My dad saw Churchill" episode hinders Toppy's eligibility for the Hutchinson mantle more than it bolsters it.

Best regards,
Ben

P.S. Tom, I'll try unconcealed psychosis next time. Perhaps that'll bring Lars back.

[Suzi]

GWTH?? Has anyone told Nunners that that doesn't exist as a Christian name?.....Joke!!!!....:/.....Just checking the old Fairclough /Joseph S meeting thing here...MUST be after 1991

[Tom_Wescott]

it's a shame he's placed me on ignore on the grounds of my "barely concealed psychosis",

No worries, Ben. Most of us find your barely concealed psychosis to be an integral part of your charm. Keep it up!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[David Knott]

On statistical grounds alone, I don't think that G W T can be entirely dismissed.

A quick play on the Ancestry website reveals only 17 George Hutchinsons living in London in 1891 aged 20 to 40 in 1888. (OK - there is nothing to say that he was still living in London in 1891, nor that he was aged 20 to 40 in 1888, but it gives us an idea of the sort of numbers we are dealing with)

Of these 17, six were still living with their parents in 1891, and most of the others are unlikely due to their marital status and the age and birth locations of their children.

In fact, G W T would rank as one of the better bets. Granted, his occupation is wrong, but I can't find any whose occupation is right. He could easily have got work as a groom or a labourer after leaving home, before taking up the family trade of plumbing.

I suspect that no-one has done more than Bob to trace the witness GH, and he certainly argues his case more coherently than Richard, but I think the Toppster is worthy of further investigation.

Certainly the discrepancy in signatures would have to be a big minus, but then Reg's story would have to be a plus (even accepting Bob's point about fathers making up stories)

My concern would be that anyone trying to trace GH would have found GWTH by a process of elimination, and the scenario suggested by Ben a couple of posts ago may have resulted.