an Addy for Severin

[HelenaWojtczak]

Been thinking a lot about this again, particularly the theory that he was at the White Hart in 1888 (Levisohn's version) and the one that places him there in 1890 (Baderski and Schumann's version). Something has occurred to me that has not been suggested before.

During 1888 Kłosowski was living with the Radins for five months and by December had moved to Cable Street. We do not know which five months. He could have moved into the Radins as early as January or as late as July.

(We know that from Cable Street he moved to Commercial Street around May 1890 and was then, or shortly after, working at the White Hart.)

Could it be possible that either before living with the Radins, or after he left them but before he went to Cable Street, that he lived or worked at a third location? And could that place have been the White Hart? Perhaps he was an assistant there, then set himself up alone in Cable Street, then that failed (he did not thrive alone, or the lease ran out) and he got his old job back at the White Hart.

It occurred to me that this would explain why Levisohn saw him at the White Hart in 1888 (before Baderski or Schumann had met him) and why Baderski and Schumann place him there in 1890.

Any problems with this hypothesis?

Helena

[HelenaWojtczak]

in August 1898 move to Bishops Stortford to The Grapes Public House

until May 1899,then back to London to the Monument public house Southwark

I have one to add in between the two above:

in August 1898 move to Bishops Stortford to The Grapes Public House

March 1899, back to London in lodgings at 8 Haberdasher Street with Bessie and Willie

Later that same month moved to the Monument public house Southwark

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks Mark,
I know what you mean ! Families are always very sceptical about anybody claiming to know anything a bit out of the ordinary. But it sounds like he may well have met some of these people in his daily tasks.

[m_w_r]

Hi Norma,

No - he probably wouldn't have known - he was just a filing clerk working in the Treasury, although it seems possible that he worked under Sir Edward Carson while he (Carson) was Solicitor General and perhaps later when he (Carson) was Attorney General. Carson prosecuted Klosowski, as you'll know.

But no, no hints, I'm afraid.

Regards,

Mark

*Edit - I've probably overstated the case a bit here. It's obvious that the receipt is signed on behalf of the Treasury Solicitor, who wouldn't necessarily have had much to do with loftier figures like the Solicitor General and the Attorney General. My ancestor is generally thought to have been a bit of a fantasist, and he probably never met anybody important in his life.

[Natalie Severn]

Mark,thats really so interesting! Did you Gt great Uncle leave any clues about Chapman and what police thinking was then?

[babybird67]

thanks for sharing Mark

fascinating.

[m_w_r]

Anyway,lets hope we may be able to fill these gaps by further research.

Agreed, and on that subject, I thought I'd post this up - it's not entirely off topic.



It's the Treasury's receipt of the exhibits presented in evidence against Klosowski at the Old Bailey, from the CRIM file at the National Archives. There is a list of the exhibits in the same file, corresponding to the numbers on the receipt, but I don't have a photo of it at the moment.

The C. Oldridge who signed it is my great great uncle.

Regards,

Mark

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks for this Norma, but the point remains that there are known and demonstrable gaps in Klosowski's history, so any attempt to put Cranbrook Street into the chronology at any given point - including as his first address - remains speculative, unless better evidence becomes available. I think perhaps I didn't communicate this very well in my post above.

Regards,

Mark

Yes Mark, I am not claiming there aren"t gaps-----my point is that the chronology is actually not "punctured with huge gaps" that make it impossible to track any of his movements .
Importantly, it is just as " speculative" -and highly unlikely that Klosowski "s was so very fortunate as to have found an immediate vacancy for a post as " assistant hairdresser" with the Radins as well as his digs----- --- no sooner has he set foot on British soil!
To my mind its more logical to have him looking round for digs upon his arrival here and THEN looking round for an assistant hairdresser vacancy,which may have taken several days or even weeks.Mrs Radin gives no hint of any "prior arrangement",or even that he came to their place "upon arrival".....she just says,in her March 1903 testimony,that he worked with them for five months about 15 years ago.
Ok ---it may not have been the case that the first digs were in Cranbrook Street or were even ones we know anything about -but if there is a case of a "huge gap" existing in the chronology ,then it is the one that exists after the last known record of him from the Praga hospital,Warsaw ,in February 1887 ,and the date referred to by Mrs Radin in her 1903 testimony which we know refers to some point in 1888.
Anyway,lets hope we may be able to fill these gaps by further research

Best Wishes


Norma

[m_w_r]

Thanks for this Norma, but the point remains that there are known and demonstrable gaps in Klosowski's history, so any attempt to put Cranbrook Street into the chronology at any given point - including as his first address - remains speculative, unless better evidence becomes available. I think perhaps I didn't communicate this very well in my post above.

Regards,

Mark

[Natalie Severn]

Mark,
While it is true that the period following his return from the states is difficult to follow with any exactitude-ie the period you refer to as needing to be "book marked",I am helped to work it out by the fact that he turned up at Lucy"s sister"s house in Scarborough St , Whitechapel upon returning from the States,that date being given as two weeks after Lucy gave birth,on May 12th 1892 to a daughter. During Mrs Rauch"s testimony she states "when the child was about a fortnight old the accused came back from America, AND I THEN LEFT MY SISTER,as they were going to live together.I left them IN THE SAME LODGINGS ---ie Scarborough Street----surely this must have happened some time in mid summer 1892?
This statement is followed later by Stanislaus Baderski,his brother in Law and Lucy"s brother stating ,"he next saw them in CITY ROAD about TEN years ago ie in 1893.Then he states Lucy left the accused and after that he did not know what became of him.
Now while its quite true that that is as far as we can get in tracking his movements with any exactitude between the Summer of 1892 Scarborough address and the autumn of 1893 West Green Road address,Tottenham -when he met Annie Chapman ,we now know that in 1893 he was living with Lucy in "CITY ROAD " and his first meeting with Annie Chapman must have been around October 1893 when he was working at Haddin"s Barber shop in Tottenham, -----and we do happen to know that he met Annie PRIOR to November 1893 because she states that "she went out with him for a little while BEFORE moving into Haddin"s as a housekeeper "in November 1893".
After these dates we actually have a pretty clear idea of his movements so its important to stay within these dates,as per your suggestion, for the period June 1892----Autumn 1893.

His movements look as follows:
Scarborough Street[Whitechapel] living with Lucy Baderski again ----June 1892------>?

City Road [West of Whitechapel] still living with Lucy Baderski-------------------1893-----until


West Green Road several miles NORTH of Whitechapel---and separated from Lucy again now and living with the Haddins at their barber shop in West Green Road TOTTENHAM Autumn 1893

After his stay in Tottenham,[quite far NORTH of Whitechapel---4 or 5 miles] which lasted up until early Summer 1895 he then moved to Leytonstone a long way EAST of Whitechapel again.erasing his name of Severin Klosowski and calling himself George Chapman.



All this can possibly provide some clues.When he moves away from Whitechapel in 1892 with Lucy he appears to go North West to go to City Road ,After they split up he goes quite far EAST of the River Lea to Leytonstone .Then he moves back again NORTH WEST to TOTTENHAM------We dont see him returning to the Dockland area of West India Dock Road or Cranbrook Street at any point.


Best
Norma

[m_w_r]

According to the summary on Chapman's page on this site (http://www.casebook.org/suspects/gchapman.html):
"Around the first of June [1892], Klosowski was to return [from the USA], and the two [he and Lucy] reunited for a bit before ending the relationship for good. In the winter or late fall of 1893, Klosowski met a woman named Annie Chapman (not the Ripper victim) in Haddin's hairdresser shop at 5 West Green Road, South Tottenham, where he had been working as an assistant."

This appears to leave a gap of well over a year, before his move to Tottenham, and at a time when he may still have been using the name Klosowski.

Chris - An excellent example.

Norma - Let's focus on the following question: "When did Klosowski move to Tottenham?" And let's be quite clear - we're talking about him moving, not him being spotted there. When we look for dates to put things in chronological order, we can talk about a terminus post quem and a terminus ante quem: a "point after which" and a "point before which", bookending a time period in which, by definition, the event must have occurred.

So, for the sake of argument, Klosowksi is known to have been in the East End with Lucy in June 1892 - this is the terminus post quem for the move to the Tottenham, which must have occurred after this point. He is employed in Tottenham, where he meets Annie Chapman, late in 1893 - this, then is the terminus ante quem for the move. In between, there is, as Chris points out, over a year in which we do not know the details of Klosowski's movements. He might have moved to Tottenham in July 1892; or literally days before he met Annie Chapman. We don't know, because the evidence isn't there. This clearly opens up the possibility of Klosowski's having had other addresses in the temporal window between the termini.

I think Sam was quite correct to point out that the in-court discussions of Klosowski's copy of 500 Prescriptions failed to provide us with any context by which we might place his residency at Cranbrook Street firmly into the timeline, except to say that it preceded his adoption of the Chapman alias. I attach the account which the Times published on 22 January 1903:



It should be pretty clear that the prosecution were not introducing the book as a means of determining a sequence of addresses, but as a way of demonstrating that Klosowski was - even before he became George Chapman - interested in, shall we say, pharmacology.

Regards,

Mark

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks Chris.Yes thats a bit more difficult as Lucy Baderski [Mrs Klosowski],though in court,was not called to give evidence.
However Stanislaus Baderski, her brother, was called and his statement is recorded as follows:

".........Lucy became acquainted with the accused who kept a barber"s shop in Cable Street . Later he heard of a wedding being celebrated between Lucy and the accused [23 October 1889].His sister and the accused lived at Cable Street
for about 6 months and then took lodgings in Commercial Street [I ommitted mention of this in the previous chronologies].The witness next sawthe accused in a barber"s shop under a Public House [the White Hart].At that time they were living together in Greenfield Street, and Lucy had a son HE NEXT SAW THEM IN CITY ROAD ABOUT TEN YEARS AGO."

[Since the above evidence was given in 1903 this dates Lucy and Klosowski as continuing their "reconciliation", in 1893 -Lucy having moved from Scarborough Street near Leman Street where their initial reconciliation took place after he had returned from America in June 1892 ].

Next comes the testimony of Alfred Wicken,a hairdresser at Market terrace
Lea Bridge Road ,Leytonstone.
He states that "he too was employed by Mr Haddin in West Green Road Tottenham....He worked there for about NINE TO TWELVE MONTHS with me, after which he took a shop in High Road Tottenham---[Jan 1895 -see above].......It was in 1892 or 1893 that I met him."
If we now refer to Annie Chapman"s testimony [page 100]we are told by her that she met the accused towards the end of 1893 where he was then employed as a hairdressers assistant at West Green Road ,Tottenham and where he was going under the name "Klosowski" ....I went out with him a little while....THEN I lived with him as his wife we passed as Mr and Mrs Klosowski.I went to live with him in November 1893 [so she had been "going out with him"a little prior to this] and left him in November or December 1894.In January or February 1895 I went to ,consult Mr Bray,a solicitor"s clerk.[she must have realised by then she was pregnant].
She later states that Mrs Lucy Klosowski"s made another "reappearance" at Haddin"s shop and then she moved in with them caused her [Annie] to move out.We have specific dates for this because Mr Bray gave evidence that Klosowski next took his own shop at High Street Tottenham .Mr Bray drew up the agreement for it dated 7 January 1895 .He took it for "about two months" and during that time Mr Bray saw him several times.

I know these are later dates than you asked for Chris, but they may help contextualise this on/off relationship with him and Lucy, which can be tantalisingly difficult to keep track of.It appears to me that he and Lucy after moving out of her sister"s house,Mrs Stanilaus Rauch"s in Scarborough Street where they were both reunited in June 1892 - moved over to City Road and split up soon after Stanislaus Baderski saw them there in 1893.You are right in that so far we can"t track his place of work in 1893 -only an address for him and Lucy given by Stanislaus Baderski,Lucy"s brother.

[Chris]

You have made a statement about HL Adam"s book having "huge gaps" and I have asked you to show me these gaps which you still havent done. Where are the gaps of which you speak?

In your summary, you say "Returns June or early July 1892 to Scarborough Street [just to the West of Leman Street]. He then moved five miles North to Tottenham working in Haddin"s Barbers Shop in West Green Road, ..."

According to the summary on Chapman's page on this site (http://www.casebook.org/suspects/gchapman.html):
"Around the first of June [1892], Klosowski was to return [from the USA], and the two [he and Lucy] reunited for a bit before ending the relationship for good. In the winter or late fall of 1893, Klosowski met a woman named Annie Chapman (not the Ripper victim) in Haddin's hairdresser shop at 5 West Green Road, South Tottenham, where he had been working as an assistant."

This appears to leave a gap of well over a year, before his move to Tottenham, and at a time when he may still have been using the name Klosowski.

Unfortunately many ordinary people did move about frequently at that time, and I know from experience how difficult it can be to put together a complete chronological account of where they lived.

[Natalie Severn]

Sam ,
Philip"s street atlas of London shows a measurement of 7 inches from Cranbrook Street to Victoria Wharf, Limehouse, close to where such ships as Chapman most likely would have arrived on ,docked.The scale of Philip"s atlas is 5 inches to the mile so the distance from Cranbrook Street to Victoria Wharf is ONE MILE and a quarter.Ofcourse you can go on detours but the road system, then as now, was pretty straight.So yes,its perfectly likely he stayed at Cranbrook Street on arrival here.Moreover Mrs Radin,in all her testimony, never once said "he came here[West India Dock Road"] when he arrived" or anything like that----just that he was an assistant hairdresser with them there for about five months "about 15 years ago".

You have made a statement about HL Adam"s book having "huge gaps" and I have asked you to show me these gaps which you still havent done. Where are the gaps of which you speak?

The entire trial is entered in his book ,plus verbatim statements from witnesses plus police court proceedings etc The police went into great detail in order to prove that George Chapman was Klosowski and it involved going right back as far as they could and questioning many many people----neighbours,relatives,chemists,doctors etc.
Point to the gaps and lets discuss this properly.

[Sam Flynn]

Sam,
Are you being serious here?

Totally serious.

Either you cant work maps or you are deliberately pretending not to be able to measure the distance between Cranbrook St .and docklands.

Sorry, my bad - or rather Google Maps. It's actually 2.4 miles (walking), and about 4 miles by car (because of one-way systems, etc.).

Moreover, instead of making sweeping statements about "huge gaps" can you just point out where exactly these " gaps" exist for you and I will point you to the page in the Adam"s book where you will be able to trace his movements and so fill in these gaps ......as I tried to explain above.

Adam's book doesn't contain a monthly journal of Klosowski's movements. There are huge gaps, and I'm certainly not the one making sweeping statements.

Again, what's more likely - that he emigrated to London and headed inland for some 2.4 miles to a largely non-immigrant area, or that he stayed near the Docks to find accommodation and employment with people who spoke his mother tongue?

I've underlined the answer for you.