Why did Abberline believe Hutch ?

[bolo]

Hi all,

there is an interesting piece of info in the transcript of the Eddowes inquest where the deputy of the Flower & Dean-street lodginghouse Frederick William Wilkinson was interviewed. During his second testimony, the following was mentioned by a juryman (taken from Sourcebook, p. 246):

"It was usual for the place to be open at 2 o'clock in the morning. They generally closed at 2:30 or 3."

To me, this seems like the Victoria Home was not the only lodginghouse that closed down for the night.

Maybe they all did (or at least pretended to do so) in light of laws that prohibited to keep a common lodginghouse open 24/7?

Best wishes,

Boris

[Fisherman]

Ben: It does support "my" theory, and this presumably is one of the reasons why the overwhelmingly vast majority agree that Hutchinson "usually" slept at the Victoria Home. Yes, there is "ample" evidence that this was the case - there was no other lodging house mentioned in connection with Hutchinson, Badham recorded him as being "of" the Victoria Home, and it would have been an act of extraordinary incompetence of the part of police and press to have failed to record the name of Hutchinson's residence on the night of his alleged experience, if different form the Victoria Home.

So the Badham report is the only active evidence then, just as I thought? That is not ample evidence at all, Ben. The fact that we have no other lodging mentioned visavi Hutchinson is of little weight. We donīt have Abberlines interrogation of him on record either, and it is anything but fancyful to expect the information to have been there.

Yes, but if your previous address played a pivotal role in your eyewitness account, you would expect to divulge the location of that address...

That is where the interrogation material comes in.

If, as you now controversially and unpopularly suggest, Hutchinson’s “new” lodgings were at the Victoria Home, the police would have made damnably sure to find out where his "old" ones were if he intended to sleep at them on the night of his experience.

Yes, they would. And they would have known where that address was.

Nowhere else do we find an example of such dereliction of obvious duty.

We cannot possibly begin to howl "derelection of duty" until we have the full material, can we?
We know that his story was dismissed, but we donīt know why. Is that derelction of duty too? Or was it once available in the police reports and interrogation material?
There are hundreds and thousands of details that have gone lost to us, that were painstakingly collected in 1888. Please letīs not accuse the responsible ones of any dereliction of duty because their efforts were lost over the past 126 years.

Every other witnesses of note had their address recorded for the night on which their sightings occurred, i.e. on the murder nights, and it is quite ludicrous to expect Hutchinson to have been any different.

Yes it is. And nobody expects it. It would have been there, I fully agree. But I donīt agree that it must be available to us today to have been there back then.

Why do you keep going on about the Daily News, incidentally? Central News conducted the interview with Hutchinson, which was then circulated to several daily papers.

The Daily News being among them and being the source available to us on these boards.

There were no other lodging houses in the district that closed early, and which denied entry even to those with money to pay...

But we donīt KNOW where the place where he used to sleep was situated, do we? And I feel pretty certain that you donīt know about all the opening hours of each establishment, lodging houses, pubs, etcetera, in the rather vast area we may be looking at. Or?

Garry raises an extremely important point on the other thread; if Hutchinson was heading initially to his “usual” place, the only lodgings that make sense in terms of his chosen route – Whitechapel High Street then Commercial Street – were the Victoria Home (the only doss house on Commercial Street), and the houses of horror that branched off that thoroughfare, such as those situated on Flower and Dean Street. In other words, his lodging house was almost certainly located bang in the heart of the murder district, regardless which building you want it to have been.

There it is again: "almost certainly". Let me remind you that Hutchinson came in from Romford, and as far as I can tell he could have found out that the place where he usually slept was closed long before he arrived in Commercial Road for all we know. He could also have KNOWN that the establishment was closed beforehand, and skipped going there due to this knowledge. It therefore applies that his route on the night need not have had much to do with his regular place anyway. Let me further point out that it need not even have been a lodging house. In which case Garrys point would be anything but "extremely important".

Like it or not, Ben, that lodging could have been just about anywhere.

The problem for you is that none of the dodgy places off Commercial Street make sense of Hutchinson’s claim that the lodgings were closed, which only the Victoria Home does; and moreover, that no sane person would ever prefer the former hell-holes to the latter.

The possibilitites extend far beyond the lodging houses, and equally far beyond Commercial Street. So I have no problem at all. You, on the other hand ...!

The irony here is that even if the Victoria Home had never been mentioned in Badham’s report, a clever person would deduce from the available clues that it must have been the building in question.

Maybe we define "clever" in our own separate ways, Ben.

I never claimed that Hutchinson did not have a “useful” (you do like that adjective) command of English. I simply observed that he used it reductively, in common with many with little formal education. The alternative is that he used “here” in the literal sense to mean somewhere else, i.e. the pub where the interview may have taken place. In which case, we can take Hutchinson at his word; “I told a fellow lodger (from the place where I usually sleep – the Victoria Home) about it here (at the pub).”

Yes, absolutely. I think you can even come up with how he dictated the American constitution in retrospect to the reporter, if you only make a little changes here (and there).
Like I said, it opens up brand new alleys of research once we adapt this thinking. I canīt wait to see how much it will improve on the Lechmere suggestion!

Or maybe I can, come to think of it.

Oh, I think you’re better off just doing what you’re doing over on those Crossmere threads which, sad to say, have pretty much died a death - claim that you like Lechmere’s arguments so much that you completely reject them and argue something completely different, and anxiously distance yourself from them whenever I erroneously conclude that you’re in sync on the subject.

This is the type of garbage I really couldnīt be arsed to comment on. Shape up, man, and try to get SOME sort of decent act together! Youīve already taken the bold step to admit that the wording Hutchinson used clearly implies that something is amiss, just like Gary has started to shift people into the bar of the Princess Alice in recognition of the same fact.

Thatīs not a bad start. Donīt ruin it by trying to get personal.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

Hi Lechmere,

I can assure you that more people agree with my ideas, which aren't even my ideas. I just appropriated them from a distressed gentlefellow

I know you did, and I can't imagine Michael Connor's too happy about it either.

Believe me I can keep this sort of thing up for post after post, then brag at how many posts there are - do you want to try it?
Come on, so-called Fisherman, I've nothing better to do with my life than regurgitate my own vomit.

You have my sympathy for that, but what I advised on the Crossmere threads was that continued tag-team multi-posting and vomit regurgitation might not be the most sensible strategy if you have a book in the pipeline.

[Observer]

In reality "Carry on up the Carman" was a rather silly selection wasn't it?

You really should have chosen "Carry on Carman". That would have made a lot more sense.

[Ben]

if it does not support your theory, make the assumption that what goes against that theory, is in fact just an expression on behalf of the source of a low level of command of the British language.

It does support "my" theory, and this presumably is one of the reasons why the overwhelmingly vast majority agree that Hutchinson "usually" slept at the Victoria Home. Yes, there is "ample" evidence that this was the case - there was no other lodging house mentioned in connection with Hutchinson, Badham recorded him as being "of" the Victoria Home, and it would have been an act of extraordinary incompetence of the part of police and press to have failed to record the name of Hutchinson's residence on the night of his alleged experience, if different form the Victoria Home.

“If you live for fifty years in Oxford Street, but move to Regent Street the day before you speak to the police, then you will be Mr X of Regent Street in the report written.”

Yes, but if your previous address played a pivotal role in your eyewitness account, you would expect to divulge the location of that address, or failing that, have it extracted from you. If, as you now controversially and unpopularly suggest, Hutchinson’s “new” lodgings were at the Victoria Home, the police would have made damnably sure to find out where his "old" ones were if he intended to sleep at them on the night of his experience. Nowhere else do we find an example of such dereliction of obvious duty. Every other witnesses of note had their address recorded for the night on which their sightings occurred, i.e. on the murder nights, and it is quite ludicrous to expect Hutchinson to have been any different.

Why do you keep going on about the Daily News, incidentally? Central News conducted the interview with Hutchinson, which was then circulated to several daily papers.

There were no other lodging houses in the district that closed early, and which denied entry even to those with money to pay, so unless you wish to wheel in yet another one of those extraordinary “coincidences”, the detail that the lodgings had closed points unquestionably to the Victoria Home – the only lodging house mentioned in connection with Hutchinson. Garry raises an extremely important point on the other thread; if Hutchinson was heading initially to his “usual” place, the only lodgings that make sense in terms of his chosen route – Whitechapel High Street then Commercial Street – were the Victoria Home (the only doss house on Commercial Street), and the houses of horror that branched off that thoroughfare, such as those situated on Flower and Dean Street. In other words, his lodging house was almost certainly located bang in the heart of the murder district, regardless which building you want it to have been. The problem for you is that none of the dodgy places off Commercial Street make sense of Hutchinson’s claim that the lodgings were closed, which only the Victoria Home does; and moreover, that no sane person would ever prefer the former hell-holes to the latter.

The irony here is that even if the Victoria Home had never been mentioned in Badham’s report, a clever person would deduce from the available clues that it must have been the building in question.

I never claimed that Hutchinson did not have a “useful” (you do like that adjective) command of English. I simply observed that he used it reductively, in common with many with little formal education. The alternative is that he used “here” in the literal sense to mean somewhere else, i.e. the pub where the interview may have taken place. In which case, we can take Hutchinson at his word; “I told a fellow lodger (from the place where I usually sleep – the Victoria Home) about it here (at the pub).”

“Can we help him out in any way, so he does not have to feel embarrased about that? Maybe you could call me something and I could sulk, or something like that?”

Oh, I think you’re better off just doing what you’re doing over on those Crossmere threads which, sad to say, have pretty much died a death - claim that you like Lechmere’s arguments so much that you completely reject them and argue something completely different, and anxiously distance yourself from them whenever I erroneously conclude that you’re in sync on the subject.

[Sally]

In some cases, yes - but it was easy to see what Observer meant.

Fisherman

I'm sure it was, Fish. After all, it was Team Lechmere's 'Mediocre Hilarity' that led me to mine to begin with

[Observer]

Not for you, evidently.

What more, give me an alternative interpretation.

[Fisherman]

I think 'mediocre hilarity' may be a contradiction in terms.

In some cases, yes - but it was easy to see what Observer meant.

Fisherman

[Observer]

Not unlike Hutchinson 's candidacy as a suspect in the Whitechapel murder series then.

[Sally]

"Carry on up the Carman.Oooh Mizen." Are there any other ways to interpret it? Now if you had put a comma after the word on. It is indeed a Hutchison thread, hence it's descent into mediocre hilarity.

Not for you, evidently.

And I think 'mediocre hilarity' may be a contradiction in terms.

[Observer]

"Carry on up the Carman.Oooh Mizen." Are there any other ways to interpret it? Now if you had put a comma after the word on. It is indeed a Hutchison thread, hence it's descent into mediocre hilarity.

[Sally]

That's a bit risqué is it not?

It could be. It all depends on how you interpret it - it always does when it comes to the behaviour of a carman.

But I digress - this is, after all, a Hutchinson thread. Crossmere has quite enough of his own.

[Observer]

Carry on up the Carman, perhaps?

'Oooh Mizen!!'

That's a bit risqué is it not? I'm sure Pc Mizen would not entertain such behaviour. Not while he was on duty at any rate.

[Sally]

Nay
Nay
And thrice nay.

Yes, I expect that's what Hutchinson said when he was closeted in that Romford stable for three days.

It's like something out of a Carry On film - I can almost hear the dulcet tones of Kenneth Williams right now...

Carry on up the Carman, perhaps?

'Oooh Mizen!!'

[Fisherman]

That should do it, Edward, thanks! Now Iīll just do my part and sulk for some time, and we will all be on dry land!
Fisherman