A Cross by any other name...smells like JtR?

[MrBarnett]

Mr B's man T may indeed be an interesting study in Victorian London, but isn't it illustrative that it is being seized on already when we know nothing about T yet, whether he is a valid comparison, whether he was picked at random, and whether his records are actually comparable.

Ed,

You don't have his name or therefore the ability to check him out, but I have provided the salient points in his life, so it should be possible to acknowledge or challenge his general suitability for this exercise.

I have no idea how one would go about picking a random subject for this. I genuinely (trust me!) had no idea how many records T would provide before I started this. I had his BMD certs and the censuses and that was it. I chose him because he was a close contemporary of Lech, and had followed a similar rags to riches trajectory - the Cockney dream, a small corner shop in 'ackney.

I do have carmen on the other side of the family, but these are some of Booth's blackest of the black from Spitalfields and St. George's, so probably not a good enough match for mister squeaky clean. Even so, they left behind quite a few records (the Old Bailey online has been particularly fruitful!)

MrB

[Sally]

Mr B's man T may indeed be an interesting study in Victorian London, but isn't it illustrative that it is being seized on already when we know nothing about T yet, whether he is a valid comparison, whether he was picked at random, and whether his records are actually comparable.

Ed,

What do you mean by 'a valid comparison'? Perhaps you could clarify. As Mr. B has said, Mr T is demographically similar to Crossmere - that ought to make him valid for comparison, surely?

What's the test, else?

But actually, you hit on a point here inasmuch as an equally fair test would be to pick at random a sample of men demographically similar to Crossmere. Well, perhaps I'll have a go at that, if I can find the time.

For the avoidance of doubt, perhaps you could let us know [as above] what you would consider a fair test? It'd be in your interests to discover just how unique Crossmere and his hundred records are either way. If it does turn out to be remarkable - well then, perhaps you have a point. If not, it saves you the embarrassment of pressing the point further.

Thanks in advance

[MrBarnett]

Hi Sally,

Great idea. I know it's all probably a huge waste of time, but somehow I got it into my head that 100 records was exceptional and I felt the need to check it out.

As it stands, I do have gaps in T's record which it may or may not be possible to fill. Some electoral records appear to be missing for other residents in the same street, so possibly they have not made it into the digital age. So if Lech's record is as complete as it sounds, then perhaps his malign influence is present in cyberspace, jealously guarding his record for posterity.

MrB

[bolo]

Hi Lechmere and MrB,

perhaps you guys could underline your respective arguments with a more in-depth statistical analysis of the available data of a representative group of LVP East Enders. Crossmere and T are just two of many people who lived in the area, after all.

Best wishes,

Boris

[MrBarnett]

Hi Bolo,

To do this you would have to use online resources that are equally accessible in Germany. To avoid any charge of bias, perhaps you could have a go.

Seriously, that would be beyond my limited research skills. I'm happy to plug away at my ancestors' records to see if they bring up anything interesting, but beyond that I'd be lost .

MrB

[Sally]

Hi Bolo,

To do this you would have to use online resources that are equally accessible in Germany. To avoid any charge of bias, perhaps you could have a go.

Seriously, that would be beyond my limited research skills. I'm happy to plug away at my ancestors' records to see if they bring up anything interesting, but beyond that I'd be lost .

MrB

Yep, that'd be a huge job. It could be done, you'd need a representative sample, rather than looking at the whole lot [what - some 100k people in Whitechapel alone??]

Even if you took say, 1% and applied other defining criteria, you'd be looking at a lot of work.

We could do 5 or 6 living on Doveton Street? See how that worked out. If nothing else, it might tell us whether Doveton Street was some sort of Hell Mouth inhabited by controlling record keepers....

[bolo]

Hello MrB and Sally,

it goes without saying that compiling a statistic like that would be a huge task, I wouldn't even know where to start. What I want to say is that after a second thought I've come to the conclusion that neither Crossmere nor T could be called representative for whether or not the common East Ender took care in keeping his records straight without comparing them to a more or less representative group.

This is not meant to diminish the value of your research, I just think that we need more data to base any theories on the record thing.

Best wishes,

Boris

[Sally]

Hello MrB and Sally,

it goes without saying that compiling a statistic like that would be a huge task, I wouldn't even know where to start. What I want to say is that after a second thought I've come to the conclusion that neither Crossmere nor T could be called representative for whether or not the common East Ender took care in keeping his records straight without comparing them to a more or less representative group.

This is not meant to diminish the value of your research, I just think that we need more data to base any theories on the record thing.

Best wishes,

Boris

Hi Boris,

You are right in that we couldn't use a sample of 2 to make any informed judgements on the record-keeping habits of the common East Ender. The sample is far too small; and we haven't even defined what the common East Ender is for the purposes of data collection!

Perhaps whether either Crossmere or Mr T are representative is a different question from whether Crossmere was unique or extraordinary though?

The latter is an easier question to answer.

[bolo]

Hi Sally,

Perhaps whether either Crossmere or Mr T are representative is a different question from whether Crossmere was unique or extraordinary though?

extraordinary? Perhaps, who knows. Unique? No.

Or perhaps we've found the only two control freaks of the LVP East End?

Best wishes,

Boris

[MrBarnett]

Hi Boris,

I wouldn't tar T with the control freak brush just yet. There are still quite a few gaps to be filled before his record is anywhere near complete.

Cheers,

MrB

[Sally]

Hi Boris,

I wouldn't tar T with the control freak brush just yet. There are still quite a few gaps to be filled before his record is anywhere near complete.

Cheers,

MrB

If we were to look at a sample as we have discussed above, Mr B, my prediction would be that Crossmere and Mr T are far from isolated examples. But perhaps we'll see

[Lechmere]

Bolo
My comments upon what can be discerned about Charles Lechmere’s character by the nature of the records that we have of him have been somewhat distorted out of shape by other people’s commentary.
Hence I don’t have to rethink an aspect of the Lechmere theory that has him down as a control freak. I have never suggested he was a control freak.

Mr B
I didn’t pick up on a previous mention that this Mr T was an ancestor of yours.
I don’t know whether your ancestor ended up but Charles Lechmere, in running a corner shop, didn’t acquire riches. He was a comfortably off working class man. His children mostly stayed in the East End doing typical East End jobs with no silver spoons.
Without much more detail it frankly isn’t possible to judge whether your comparison is of any service.
Having said that the obvious problem with your comparison is that you are comparing Charles Lechmere with someone who you already knew was similar. So it is hardly surprising if they have similar records.
My point was that if you compare Lechmere to other average people in the East End his number of records is unusual. Not unique, just unusual.
Just as Charles Lechmere was not unique in coming from a home where he was brought up by a step father, or no father at all for a lot of the time.
Just as he was not unique in coming from a wealthy family, while his branch had fallen on hard times.
Just as he was not unique (clearly) in being brought up in the most overcrowded district in the country

You have said several times that it was a legal requirement to register to vote back then. What is your authority for this?

Sally
Your strange concern over me being embarrassed by the potential discovery another individual with 100 plus records is in drastic and equally strange contrast to your earlier attitude when you refused to believe that there were 100 plus Lechmere records. Now you think it is commonplace. Try and get some constituency or you will give the impression that you make it up as you go along.

[MrBarnett]

Ed,

T did not end up particularly wealthy either. He left approx. £200 in his will in 1924. His immediate descendants remained working class Londoners.

If we are trying to gauge whether Lech was unusual in respect of his form-filling, we must choose someone with a similar background to compare him with. A truly random choice could produce a woman, a sailor, a catholic priest, an MP, a tramp or anyone of thousands of other people who would be totally useless for our purposes. It has to be narrowed down to a contemporary working man who had a fairly stable career, a large family and a few house moves. T fits that spec. perfectly.

In my opinion what we are trying to assess is whether Lech was unusually diligent for the type of man he was. The idea of an ‘average’ LVP East Ender is ever so slightly absurd.

Anyway, I’d keep my powder dry if I were you, I seem to have hit a brick wall with the kids’ school records and there are some other anomalies, so T may end up proving your case rather than challenging it. On second thoughts, perhaps not. Given that he assiduously registered to vote before it was a legal requirement to do so (did I sneak that in without anyone noticing?) and had most, if not all, of his large brood baptised, we can reasonably assume he sent them all to school, can’t we? That was a legal requirement.

Your advice to Boris is sound. Go back to the source and read what team Lechmere really said about the record keeping and then make your own mind up whether there is the slightest hint of there being anything sinister about it.

MrB

[Sally]

Hi Mr B,

If we are trying to gauge whether Lech was unusual in respect of his form-filling, we must choose someone with a similar background to compare him with. A truly random choice could produce a woman, a sailor, a catholic priest, an MP, a tramp or anyone of thousands of other people who would be totally useless for our purposes. It has to be narrowed down to a contemporary working man who had a fairly stable career, a large family and a few house moves. T fits that spec. perfectly.

In my opinion what we are trying to assess is whether Lech was unusually diligent for the type of man he was. The idea of an ‘average’ LVP East Ender is ever so slightly absurd.

All good, sensible criteria. I don't know how important the few house moves would have any significant causal relationship with the propensity to vote of any given individual. If they had the motivation to vote at one address, the chances are that it'd be there wherever they lived - in other words, location may be less important than the individual. This may be why, for example, we see one or two residents of Millers Court appear on the electoral register.

[Sally]

Sally
Your strange concern over me being embarrassed by the potential discovery another individual with 100 plus records is in drastic and equally strange contrast to your earlier attitude when you refused to believe that there were 100 plus Lechmere records. Now you think it is commonplace. Try and get some constituency or you will give the impression that you make it up as you go along.

What a shame that you've chosen to resort to meaningless bluster Ed. You, as a supporter of a suspect in this case, are obliged to live in the main in a world of 'ifs' and 'maybes' - as are all who push for a suspect.

Here is one strand of your argument which can actually be empirically tested - perhaps to your benefit - and yet you are more interested in using tired distraction techniques than in actually engaging with it.

Baffling.