If Mary Kelly really WAS a prostitute....

[Wickerman]

Thought there were 5 houses on one side of the street with Kelly and Carthy/McCarthy residing in number 1.
Sounds interesting.
Thanks again

Seems to be a number of Stephen Maywoods from Romford.

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=24207&page=35

Shelden writes:
- From 1881 to 1891 Breezers Hill had only four houses.....
- The houses were on the eastern side with number 4 nearest to St. George Street and number 1 being adjacent to 79 Pennington Street. On the western side of the street were warehouses.
- From 1883 to 1887 a couple called Stephen and Sarah Maywood lived at 1 Breezers Hill.

- "Stephen Maywood, a dealer, of Breezers Hill, St. George's, London, was summoned for working a horse in an unfit state at Romford on the 8th Sept."
Chelmsford Chronicle, 8th Oct. 1886.

- Stephen Maywood, Horse Dealer.
Lower Chapman Street School Register - 1888 (for his two sons, Stephen & Henry)

- Seemingly, following the Maywood's into 1 Breezers Hill was a couple called McCarthy. John and his wife Mary were summoned to court in May 1890 for selling liquor without a license, the article also mentions the use of prostitutes to draw in customers. The 1891 census listed "unfortunates" as residents of 1 Breezers Hill.

-A family of Morgenstern's lived at 31 (or 43) Victoria Rd. Fulham in 1881, Adrianus and his wife moved to the East End sometime after. The wife of Adrianus died about 1884 and Adrianus took up with a woman by the name of Elizabeth Felix.

- A brother of Adrianus, Johannes had already taken up residence in the East End in 1874. Two birth certificates for his children gave their home address in Oct. 1885 as 79 Pennington St.
- The maiden name of Johannes's wife was Boeku, Elizabeth Boeku was likely the elusive Mrs Buki.
- - - - - -

So it appears the Maywoods lived next door to the Morgenstern/Boeku family during the time that Mary Kelly is reputed to have lived in Breezers Hill.
The question therefore arises, did Hutchinson have some 'professional' connection to the Maywoods via the horse trade, and if so is this where he first met Mary Kelly.

[MsWeatherwax]

Ever hear of The Cleveland Street Scandal!

Same officials minus Warren who resigned in 1888.

Sure have, DJA and I take your point. I still feel that's it's wonky ethics to happily accuse people of conspiracy with absolutely no evidence of such, while continuing to refuse to name an alleged suspect because 'doing so will destroy Ripperology and upset Britain' or whatever it was he thought would happen.

[DJA]

Thought there were 5 houses on one side of the street with Kelly and Carthy/McCarthy residing in number 1.
Sounds interesting.
Thanks again

Seems to be a number of Stephen Maywoods from Romford.

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=24207&page=35

[Wickerman]

The piece about Romford came from Neil Shelden's book, Mary Jane Kelly and the victims of Jack the Ripper.
Kelly lived in Breezers Hill, only four houses were in that street, Stephen Maywood lived at No.1 from 1883-87, McCarthy lived at No.2, it was Maywood who was charged with some offense concerning the treatment of his horses at Romford.

I couldn't get all the details as the book was on my wife's ipad and the power ran out, it needs charging.
I'll see if I can expand on that issue tomorrow.

[DJA]

Thanks mate!

William Crossingham resided in Romford.
He owned Commercial Street Chambers at 15-20 Dorset Street,across the road from Millers Court.

[Wickerman]

Were did you get your information on Carthy of Breezer's Hill owning stables in Romford?

I think it was a Ripperologist article, I'll see if I can dig it out...

[DJA]

Go away.

Just for a bit (?).

Seems to be filling in for Pierre.
Must be his RDO
Mine tomorrow.

[DJA]

The other gas lamp

[Wickerman]

Well....there is that gas lamp

Didn't all pubs have a lamp outside?

[DJA]

The mistake you make is the use of "obviously".
We have no cause to assume Hutchinson knew the name of the pub he stood outside that night, in fact in his press account he only identifies it as "the public house".
So if it was Hutchinson's mistake we would expect to see it repeated, but we don't.

Well....there is that gas lamp

[DJA]

A personal groom is a valet, a groom looks after horses, but the groom must always be presentable as he is a reflection of his master in front of his master's peers at the horse track.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/groom

[Wickerman]

In your very unvaluable opinion perhaps, but what it actually "indicates" is that Hutchinson slipped up. Innocently or otherwise is for you to decide, but the mistake was obviously his.

The mistake you make is the use of "obviously".
We have no cause to assume Hutchinson knew the name of the pub he stood outside that night, in fact in his press account he only identifies it as "the public house".
So if it was Hutchinson's mistake we would expect to see it repeated, but we don't.

[DJA]

He doesn't have to live under the same roof, but if he worked for Carthy then he may have frequented the house where Kelly worked.
The potential for a connection cannot be dismissed without further investigation.

So is this plumber Hutchinson who was not out of work or sailor Hutchinson or another?

Were did you get your information on Carthy of Breezer's Hill owning stables in Romford?

[Wickerman]

Clutching at straws now

Have a little bit of military training and can spot similar.

Strongly suspect Hutchinson was a personal groom.

A personal groom is a valet, a groom looks after horses, but the groom must always be presentable as he is a reflection of his master in front of his master's peers at the horse track.

[Wickerman]

Are you suggesting that Hutchinson lived with Carthy and that they had stables at Romford?

He doesn't have to live under the same roof, but if he worked for Carthy then he may have frequented the house where Kelly worked.
The potential for a connection cannot be dismissed without further investigation.