Is Kosminski the man really viable?

[Jenni Shelden]

Re the Russian's - id agree if it werent for the fact that it was his family who had him incarsarated.

PS why was Aaron never naturalised?

[Howard Brown]

The Standard
Page 3
June 4, 1889
***********

[Paddy]

Tom Here is a fuller article that isnt the one that mentioned the Abrahams brothers ..I will find that hopefully

Tue 04 Jun 1889, London Standard, London, England

Pat

[Tom_Wescott]

Bad day to be a window. What a strange story. Thanks, Howard.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Howard Brown]

The story that the fellow posted earlier on this thread doesn't appear in the edition of The Standard that I have on that date.

Daily News
June 5, 1889
***********

[Paddy]

Re the Russian's - id agree if it werent for the fact that it was his family who had him incarsarated.

Jenny I would have my son or brother incarcerated rather than him be arrested as JTR. They might have got the Russians involved or tried to.
It was only a theory, but as the previous poster said the Russians would not want to know about him !

PS why was Aaron never naturalised?

I expect he could not be a citizen because he had been sectioned under the mental health act. Saying that I am no expert on immigration laws of that time.

Pat

[Paddy]

Howard I am not a fellow I'm afraid. I'm Pat Marshall, female, I done the bit on Aaron etc with Chris Phillips in Rip128. Al lot of things I remember were from when I was researching that some while ago....
Hence why I dont have the sources immediately...

I am still looking for the article that named the Abrahams though, I wanted to explain it wasnt Aaron. ...still looking

Pat

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Pat, thanks for this. A very curious event. I for one would like to learn more about the Bell club. I'll keep my eye out for it. Disappointing that Abrahams isn't Koz. Like Rob, that was my first thought when I read your first post on this.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Errata]

Errata,

I have to agree with most of your post in reply to me. Our researches of socialists/anarchists of that period seem to have led us to very different conclusions.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

It's not so much research as the old family stories. I had family in London then, and most of them were socialists. Theater folk. Peculiar stories about meetings, including a multi great uncle dipping his shoes in paint and walking on his hands to put painted footprints on the ceiling of a meeting hall... a feat subsequently reenacted by my Grandfather at a Communist meeting in New York, and myself in a courthouse bathroom. Anyway, as my great uncle tells it "faith is one of those things worth dying for, and none of these people had been willing to die for their faith back home. They sure as hell weren't going to die for a convenience they had back in the Pale just when they got out of it"

I can't think he's wrong. Socialists really didn't tend towards violence. Impassioned speeches, a riot or two, a little looting, certainly trespassing or sedition.

Now, you say "socialists/anarchists", the slash indicating that the two are the same. They were not. Anarchists as a general rule don't know what they want. They don't want the government they have. But they haven't come up with something to put in its place, even though most "anarchists" agree that no government at all is a bad idea. My old boss (a cult investigator) said they were more properly called "Antis". Anti what? Anything. Anti the status quo. Anti coming up with something to replace the status quo. They are angry angry people. And typically are violent. They have disguised wanting to hurt people as much as they perceive themselves having been hurt as a political thing. It's not. It's a barely aimed cannon of rage.

Nor can the two philosophies really be combined. Now technically Socialism is an economic structure and not a political one, but it implies a government doing the distributing, which is tough in an anarchy.

But most in my family are still socialists. We crank out a conservative Republican once a generation or so. There's three currently, out of a less than immediate family of 70ish. I'm still a socialist. As was my father before me. He could have been a Communist like my grandfather, but that was such a close call what with being friends with the Rosenbergs, and getting summoned before HUAC that it would take a stronger man than my dad to keep up that belief. So, we remain rabidly liberal, democrat/socialists. And I'm still theater folk. It's funny how things usually cycle around. Consequently I might have a rosier vision of the Victorian socialist than a book or a newspaper article.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Errata. Did I type that I agree with most of your post? If so, I apologize. I meant that I disagree. I had a feeling you were relying on family stories, etc, but wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt regarding researching. Anarchists, by and large, didnt take people out into the streets and cut their throats. But some of them made people swim with the fishes...or explode...depending on their whim.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Paddy]

Tom, It just shows how much the old memory plays tricks...The following was why I discounted it....I knew it was related to brothers.
I think it must have been an Abraham Michals I thought the girls were referring to. Seeing as there seemed to be three Michals.. Rueban, Moss and Phillip in the thick of it... I assumed they were defending Abraham Michals
who was in the crowd mentioned below...From The Times (London, England), Tuesday, Jun 04, 1889;

So did the girls mean Abraham Michals or another Abrahams ???
We couldnt find any more on it I'm afraid......
I just wondered why I thought of a Nathaniel Abrahams (god knows where he come from?)
Pat.............................

[Tom_Wescott]

Thanks, Pat. I wonder where these guys lived? And while I'm thinking of it, did you and Chris happen to take a look at Wolf's Providence Street neighbors in 1888?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Paddy]

My great great uncle, Henry (Cox) CID stated the following when talking about the chap he and others thought was JTR
(see Ripper Wiki :Henry Cox)

He said that he was on duty in the street where the un-named suspect had his place of business for nearly three months after the last murder (This could have been anytime I think, not literally three months after)

He relates how he shadowed the man one night. Waiting until the man had left the street before emerging, he followed him to Leman Street, where he visited a shop which was the abode of known criminals

[Roy Corduroy]

Errata, you have a good point. Seeing that the International Workingmen's Educational Society on Berner Street, St George in the East, scene of the Stride murder in 1888 is brought into this conversation.

At this time and place, the IWES was aspiring to be a union hall. An organizing place. Socialism. Worker's rights. Not anarchism per se. These men were not anarchists. They were called anarchists, and the club was called an anarchists club sometimes in the press, and by the police. But it was like a nascent union hall, appealing to mostly the immigrant population.

An anarchist for instance was the man who blew himself up with his own bomb at the Royal Observatory Park, Greenwich in 1894. And the police raided the Autonomie Club. An event which, for one thing, totally overshadowed the Sun articles that week implying Tom Cutbush was the Ripper. That's an anarchist.

An anarchist assasinated President McKinley. That's an anarchist.

Roy

ps Pat, enjoyed your Rip article. And that is very interesting about your ancestor. It's good of you to share with us. - Roy

[Paddy]

Hi Tom Yes we found a Michals family next door !
Sorry couldn't resist that

No didnt find much out I'm afraid, other than 1891 census and some woman getting done for palm reading a few doors away.

You could try the school admissions around that date and see if there were any Michals or whatever the other names were.....That would give addresses?

Pat