All roads lead to Lechmere.

[drstrange169]

I can't speak for what happened to Lechmere's, but I had to walk a mile and a half to school from 5 onwards (usually with my older siblings) until I got a bike, as did many of my school mates. It was a different time back then and I'm sure even more so in the Victorian era. I know my mother had to walk over a mile just to get fresh water back in the 1920's. The world is an ever changing place, you can't judge the past by modern standards.

[Hair Bear]

Interesting find. The question is whether this is "our" Charles Cross.

The Pitts Head is about 9 minutes walk from 22 Doveton Street.

The Panther, which is where the article's Charles Cross would have met the article's John Hall, was about 19 minutes from 22 Doveton Street. A Thomas Brierley was the licensee of the Panther in 1884. Sometime between then and 1891, John Hall became the licensee, with Henry Forster replacing him later that same year.

So this Charles Cross needs to have been an adult living near the Panther sometime between 1884 and 1891 and still alive in 1901.

Using Ancestry, electoral registers show

Charles Cross - 16 Turville street, Bethnal Green South West 1894 and 1895.

Charles George Cross - Streatley buildings, Bethnal Green South West 1898

The Turville Street Cross lived a lot closer to the Panther than Charles Lechmere.

The only Charles George Cross that I can find lived 1847 to 1898, so he can't be the Charles Cross of the article.

Checking the 1891 Census, we find the Turville Street Cross was living there in 1891, aged 25, with a wife Ann, and children Charles and James. His occupation is Stick Dresser, whatever that is.

This doesn't eliminate Charles Lechmere from being the man in the article, but the Turville Street Cross seems more likely to me.

Are you able to check out the other people "all men good and true" in the article, like Harry Dawson and George Shepard? Charles Allen would have been over 50 in 1901, whilst the Turville St Charles was 25. I know you get a mix of ages in these places but occasionally it can be mostly older people or younger people. If Dawson and Shepard are more Lechmere's age it doesn't prove anything, of course, but if they were closer in age to Turville Charles, the probability swings further in his direction.

[Fiver]

Are you able to check out the other people "all men good and true" in the article, like Harry Dawson and George Shepard? Charles Allen would have been over 50 in 1901, whilst the Turville St Charles was 25. I know you get a mix of ages in these places but occasionally it can be mostly older people or younger people. If Dawson and Shepard are more Lechmere's age it doesn't prove anything, of course, but if they were closer in age to Turville Charles, the probability swings further in his direction.

I'll see if I can find anything.

[rjpalmer]

Regarding Maria Lechmere and her 'Boy Constable,' this is probably old news to some, but there's a bloke on Ancestry.com who has quite an elaborate tree for the Lechmere tribe, and he claims that Thomas Cross's older brother James Cross (born around 1831) married a woman named Harriett Phillips (widow of a Robert Eveness) in Breinton, Herefordshire on 11 July 1860. I'm not immediately finding the couple in 1861.

It is a somewhat compelling argument because Tom Cross, as discovered by Gary Barnett, was born in Breinton, but it would be interesting if there was more supportive evidence for this match between James and Harriett, as the documentation regarding this couple seems quite sketchy (I can't trace them elsewhere), but if correct, Harriet appears to have been born in or around 1818 (this according to the documentation this bloke has found), so this would make Harriett 11 or 12 years James's senior, roughly the same age gap between Thomas Cross and Maria. So, lightning struck twice, not once among the Cross brothers when it came to marrying substantially older women.

What am I driving at?

Well, I'm speculating, but it would mean that both the Cross brothers, James and Thomas, married women a decade older than they were, which could suggest that for some unknown reason (perhaps a psychological reason or something to do with the dynamics of the family) they were the ones who were attracted to older women, with the implication that Maria Lechmere wasn't necessarily attracted to young men, per se, though she did marry Thomas. Her other two husbands were not youngsters.

Anyway, I thought it was mildly interesting, but more work is needed, but I'm probably not the one who is going to do it. Fire away.

[rjpalmer]

It took me some effort, for his name was wrongly given as James Cron, but I'm confident that I found James Cross, PC Thomas Cross's brother, in the 1871 UK census, living at No. 16A Temple Street, Hackney. (Dalston)

His wife Harriett is listed as being born around 1820, but her baptism dates to 1817, so I think she's a bit older than that--roughly 13 years his senior. Interesting that he's listed as having no occupation.

What confirms this is James and Harriett Cross, beyond the ages, names, and having been born in Hereford[shire] is that a nephew living in the same household is given as Charles Phillips, which aligns with Harriett's birth name, Harriett Phillips of Madley.



There is a James Wilkin, born Hereford in the same household, evidently, which is probably relevant.

On second thought, that looks more like James Wilkes.

RP

[rjpalmer]

Maybe?

[Fiver]

Maybe?

Ancestry has the England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1858-1995, which says that "Harriot Eveness otherwise Cross" was a widow when she died 12 May 1777.

[John Wheat]

I still think this thread should be titled No Roads Lead to Lechmere as he's a terrible suspect.

[FISHY1118]

I still think this thread should be titled No Roads Lead to Lechmere as he's a terrible suspect.

Gotta agree with you there Wheat.

[rjpalmer]

Ancestry has the England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1858-1995, which says that "Harriot Eveness otherwise Cross" was a widow when she died 12 May 1777.

Thanks. I was looking for the record of a will and had missed this. She had a fair amount of money, clearly. The spelling 'Hariott' shows up in at least on other record. The first husband Eveness was a proprietor of a cab service, which must explain the brother Robert Phillips' occupation.

It's looking like the stepfather Thomas Cross wasn't a lone wolf in London; I suspect his brother James was there throughout the 1860s up until his death in 1878, roughly a year after his widow.

[rjpalmer]

Another interesting detail is that Harriot's brother Robert Phillips, the Hackney cabman originally from Madley, Herefordshire, also married a woman a decade his senior, as can be seen in the 1881 & 1891 census.

That makes three of them--James and Thomas Cross, and James' brother-in-law, Robert. Perhaps it wasn't as uncommon or as scandalous as some might think for a young man from Herefordshire to marry an older woman.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’m currently reading One-Armed Jack by Sarah Bax Horton and one point stood out as interesting when we consider the fact that some have for some reason thought it strange that Cross turned up at the inquest in his work clothes. On page 80 she says: ‘The second carman, Robert Paul, testified on the next day of the proceedings. Like Cross, he appeared in court in his work clothes, a rough sacking apron, and recounted….’ After another three lines the source is quoted as the Congleton & Macclesfield Mercury, and Cheshire General Advertiser, 22nd September 1888.

[JeffHamm]

I’m currently reading One-Armed Jack by Sarah Bax Horton and one point stood out as interesting when we consider the fact that some have for some reason thought it strange that Cross turned up at the inquest in his work clothes. On page 80 she says: ‘The second carman, Robert Paul, testified on the next day of the proceedings. Like Cross, he appeared in court in his work clothes, a rough sacking apron, and recounted….’ After another three lines the source is quoted as the Congleton & Macclesfield Mercury, and Cheshire General Advertiser, 22nd September 1888.

Well, that clearly is the smoking gun, he wore his work clothes at the inquest. Therefore, it is clear that Paul was JtR. He was a clever psychopath, and when Cross/Lechmere entered Buck's Row, he quickly circled back to re-enter Buck's Row, giving himself an alibi by being the 2nd on the scene. His checking of of the body for breathing allows him to explain any blood that may be on him, and allowing Cross/Lechmere to take the lead with PC Mizen is a good way to minimize his involvement when dealing with the police. While it probably was a concern to him that Cross/Lechmere continued along with him, trying to shake him would create suspicion so he had to tough it out. The lack of any name exchange (neither witness indicates they got the name of the other), suggests he again minimized conversation on the day. His various statements about the time are there to confuse, again, showing how his devious and planning mind works. Being a psychopath, once he successfully navigated the day, he later could not help but involve himself by talking to the press. By this time, he feels invincible and so caution is no longer needed. Moreover, his Lloyd's statements show the inflated ego of a psychopath, inflating his importance and minimizing Cross/Lechmere, because as a psychopath he cannot stand to share centre-stage.

Note how Chapman's murder is directly on his work route, and Kelly's is also right in the area that his normal route would familiarize himself with. Mitre Square is clearly not far from those obviously familiar areas as well, so his work ties him to those locations. While Stride may not be one of his, of course, but even if she was, there is no reason why anyone who lived in the area wouldn't be familiar with the main streets and locations.

Nicely done Herlock. Case closed I think.

- Jeff

[Herlock Sholmes]

Well, that clearly is the smoking gun, he wore his work clothes at the inquest. Therefore, it is clear that Paul was JtR. He was a clever psychopath, and when Cross/Lechmere entered Buck's Row, he quickly circled back to re-enter Buck's Row, giving himself an alibi by being the 2nd on the scene. His checking of of the body for breathing allows him to explain any blood that may be on him, and allowing Cross/Lechmere to take the lead with PC Mizen is a good way to minimize his involvement when dealing with the police. While it probably was a concern to him that Cross/Lechmere continued along with him, trying to shake him would create suspicion so he had to tough it out. The lack of any name exchange (neither witness indicates they got the name of the other), suggests he again minimized conversation on the day. His various statements about the time are there to confuse, again, showing how his devious and planning mind works. Being a psychopath, once he successfully navigated the day, he later could not help but involve himself by talking to the press. By this time, he feels invincible and so caution is no longer needed. Moreover, his Lloyd's statements show the inflated ego of a psychopath, inflating his importance and minimizing Cross/Lechmere, because as a psychopath he cannot stand to share centre-stage.

Note how Chapman's murder is directly on his work route, and Kelly's is also right in the area that his normal route would familiarize himself with. Mitre Square is clearly not far from those obviously familiar areas as well, so his work ties him to those locations. While Stride may not be one of his, of course, but even if she was, there is no reason why anyone who lived in the area wouldn't be familiar with the main streets and locations.

Nicely done Herlock. Case closed I think.

- Jeff

I knew that I’d solve it in the end Jeff.

[Elamarna]

I’m currently reading One-Armed Jack by Sarah Bax Horton and one point stood out as interesting when we consider the fact that some have for some reason thought it strange that Cross turned up at the inquest in his work clothes. On page 80 she says: ‘The second carman, Robert Paul, testified on the next day of the proceedings. Like Cross, he appeared in court in his work clothes, a rough sacking apron, and recounted….’ After another three lines the source is quoted as the Congleton & Macclesfield Mercury, and Cheshire General Advertiser, 22nd September 1888.

I hate to rain on people, but I have checked that paper on BNA.
I found the report mentioning Robert Paul, but could see no mention of his working clothes Herlock.
That's not a good start on her book.
Maybe I.have missed it.

Steve