I mean't, obviously, that the stout LOITERER might have had 'military bearing' -an understandable lapsus..
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Did Hutchinson get the night wrong?
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
-
Hi Lechmere,
With respect, that sketch tells us nothing about Hutchinson’s likely appearance. I could be wrong, but I get the distinct impression that the bellboy-lookalike image was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, and not to be confused with a responsible reporter’s genuine impression of what a man with a “military appearance” might look like. Again, we have a sketch of Hutchinson that clearly depicts him as both “not tall” and stout and also features him wearing a “wideawake”. I know there’s another one of Hutchinson with his hands on his hips, but this is clearly the less accurate of the two, since it also features other people staring out of windows and what looks like a small child smearing chocolate all over her face. So I’ll go with the other one. I can’t off-hand recall the original source (I’ll check), but it has been reproduced in Garry Wroe’s “Person or Persons Unknown” and Stewart Evans’ “Letters from Hell”.
And yes, this sketch also depicts Hutchinson as having been older than Toppy would have been.
“The fact that Reg came forward suggests that Reg believed his dad had a Ripper connection, and as we know his dad was called George Hutchinson.”
“I know you find it hard to avoid hyperbole and have a tendency to misconstrue what other people say and then through back their re-worked arguments. You have even done it to Reg Hutchinson.”
“Until you told me that about Abberline's diaries and that he named Churchill, I thought my father was merely saying that in his opinion the murderer was someone high up, like Churchill. Now I can see that he knew all along that the man he saw actually was Churchill, but he didn't want to come straight out with it.”
- Reginald Hutchinson (from “The Ripper and the Royals” by Melvyn Fairclough)
But this really isn’t a Toppy thread, so…
“I could throw at you that ‘most Ripperologists, researchers and students of the subject reject Hutchinson as a culprit.’
“Although she wasn’t at the inquest she seems to have been questioned later by Abberline.”
“Have you ever been in a crowd? Have you ever been outside Shoreditch Town Hall? If a witness who had seen him at a previous crime scene was there, then it is obvious they could have spotted him”
“Do you think that the moment he presented himself there that he was whisked off to be interviewed and then immediately taken to be interrogated by Abberline?”
“In any case it is one thing to take risks in the carrying out the crime, which is the primary purpose of the criminal. It is quite another to take extra risks."
“I would maintain that this story would have been checked (or at the very least Hutchinson would have presumed it would have been checked).”
“Why do you keep going on about limited transport options?”
“Ben on lodging house deputies being watchful, we have the example from Cooney’s I gave you. He clearly was watchful."
I don’t agree with your assertion that Jack London didn’t stay in the Victoria Home. The description of it - including the fact that it was one of the larger doss houses that catered for men only, the location of the kitchen below street level, and the fact that it was near Middlesex Street – make the Victoria Home an extremely viable candidate. The only other possibility is that he was describing the Middlesex Street Shelter, although this now seems unlikely since this establishment was actually ON Middlesex Street, and Jack London was quite specific that his establishment was only “not far from” it.
“The ‘point’ is that it was a pass to allow people who had already purchased their bed ticket to have late entry. They discouraged late entry as they did not want drunks coming in at all hours.”
Your version of the guidelines would not have been anything like a deterrent to drunks trying to get in after curfew, because all they had to do was gain a “special pass” (as you understand it), get poo-faced and flash the pass to enable entry.
Clearly, tickets and passes were effectively the same thing – proof of purchase. There was no need to discourage drunkenness because they had already determined from the outset that this would not be tolerated.
Best regards,
BenLast edited by Ben; 01-31-2011, 04:01 PM.
Comment
-
I believe Hutchinson was said to have had a military appearance. We (I) have interpreted that to mean 'military bearing'. But it may have just been a neatly shaved face and mustache and perhaps some kind of clothing that looked like a uniform; a coat with some kind of officer's collar or something.
Lewis didn't say the man was short. She said he was not tall, and stout. Stout (we've had this argument before) means overweight, fat. President Taft was called stout and weighed well over 300 lbs. It really does indicate that Lewis saw more of a well-fed gentleman than a young, unemployed groom. Another angle is Lewis may have suggested he looked not tall, but stout as in a brave fellow, and the police and the inquest examiner took the meaning in the 'fat' way.
MikeLast edited by The Good Michael; 01-31-2011, 04:05 PM.huh?
Comment
-
Thanks for the heads-up. I've made the necessary edit - sketch, not photograph.
“Now I hope I have made myself clear”
“I stood outside the archway for 45 minutes.”
If we really want to encroach onto “nothing new” territory, than look no further than the done-do-death discussion of what Hutchinson could have realistically heard, noticed, memorized and – heaven forefend – lied about. It’s so 2005. Just to be brief on this, I’m not suggesting that Hutchinson could not have heard any sound whatsoever. I’m saying that it’s very unlikely that individual words should have been distinguished and red hankies spotted from that distance in those conditions (again, this is based a dismissal of your different-day hypothesis which I find implausible for other reasons discussed already).
The streets of London’s East End in 1888 would not have been “empty” let alone “silent”.
“But that is nothing new. And I would much prefer to see something new instead of some sort of meta-discussion”
Best wishes,
BenLast edited by Ben; 01-31-2011, 04:18 PM.
Comment
-
Funny you should mention President Taft, Mike.
I've done quite a bit of research into his military aide-de-camp, Major Archibald Willingham Butt, who died in the Titanic disaster. While nobody would claim for a moment that his appearance was anything other than "military", it would be fair to say that at one stage he could be described as stout, or thick-set at the very least.
There is absolutely no mutual exclusivity between a stout-looking person and one with a military appearance.
Best regards,
Ben
Comment
-
Originally posted by The Good Michael View PostI believe Hutchinson was said to have had a military appearance. We (I) have interpreted that to mean 'military bearing'. But it may have just been a neatly shaved face and mustache and perhaps some kind of clothing that looked like a uniform; a coat with some kind of officer's collar or something.
Lewis didn't say the man was short. She said he was not tall, and stout. Stout (we've had this argument before) means overweight, fat. President Taft was called stout and weighed well over 300 lbs. It really does indicate that Lewis saw more of a well-fed gentleman than a young, unemployed groom. Another angle is Lewis may have suggested he looked not tall, but stout as in a brave fellow, and the police and the inquest examiner took the meaning in the 'fat' way.
I don't know much about soldiers at the time, but I repeat that I have learn't that soldiers or ex-soldiers were 'unwelcome' in many establishments of the era because of their uncouth behaviour -so alarm bells should sound when
making assumptions about what the image of 'military' appearance might conjour up to us and people in 1888.
I absolutely refute that 'stout' means fat. If you want proof, then Mary Kelly was also described as 'stout', yet if you look at pictures of what's left of her (legs and arms, contours of her face), you can see that she could not have been 'fat'.
Stout probably could be applied to people who were better nourished, bigger boned, had more muscle -not necessarily 'fat'.Last edited by Rubyretro; 01-31-2011, 04:30 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rubyretro View Post
I absolutely refute that 'stout' means fat. If you want proof then Mary Kelly was also described as 'stout', yet if you look at pictures of what's left of her (legsn arms, contours of her face), you can see that she could not have been 'fat'.
MJK was fat, in my opinion, but she isn't in question here.
Mikehuh?
Comment
-
Originally posted by The Good Michael View PostRefute away and then look in your dictionary to see that it means, fat, overweight, corpulent, thick, heavy-set and having a heavy build. Fat is fat.
MJK was fat, in my opinion, but she isn't in question here.
Mike
Fat implies 'flabby' and 'stout' doesn't.
Comment
-
[You're just not right. Argue just to argue. That's insane
Is this seriously your reasoned reply in this debate ?
Comment
-
O.K. Mike
-do you think that when THAT sort of beer was named 'Stout', it was mean't to convey to it's drinker's 'Fat, Overweight', etc or 'Powerful, Strong etc' ?
Comment
-
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Good Michael View PostStout is lower in alcohol than other beer. I think it meant bold of flavor and brave. In fact, I'm sure it did. It's about the character of the beer and not the appearance. And what does it matter. If Lewis meant the loiterer was overly large? It means nothing.
Mike
Comment
Comment