One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[Iconoclast]

Yes they are in Middlesex Street but they are huge compared to the streets in existence in 1888, they were all three story affairs. The Sugar refinery would have blocked any view.

I don't follow the logic. If a sugar refinery can be 7 storeys high, why can't a tenement? And why can't a building to the west of the sugar refinery not have a line of sight to Middlesex Street?

I think this may well be the actual sugar refinery in question (it is certainly a photograph of Goulston Street, from Google Images, though it clearly isn't seven storeys high). If it is then I'm not convinced we can be categorical about what can be seen of Middlesex Street to its left.

[Observer]

Here is what appears to be the same cream building at the southern foot of Petticoat Lane (picture from Google images).

And??? They are modern buildings, as I said the buildings situated there in 1888 would have been much smaller. By the way the image of the Goads map I'm trying to upload is 1.2 mb I'm selecting full size as an option, so I don't know why it's appearing so small.

[Observer]

The pink building on the left by the way is on the corner of Wentworth Street

[Iconoclast]

The pink building on the left by the way is on the corner of Wentworth Street

Yep, that would be about right from my recollection.

[Iconoclast]

If the sugar refinery was to the immediate left of 'Vape Heaven' ...

By the way, everyone, I'm not suggesting for a moment that the sugar refinery was to the left of 'Vape Heaven' in 1888.

[Observer]

By the way, everyone, I'm not suggesting for a moment that the sugar refinery was to the left of 'Vape Heaven' in 1888.

It occupied that whole empty area to the left of Vape Heaven. Give it up. As I said the buildings in Middlesex Street were three story affairs

[Joshua Rogan]

Would you have a map per chance, Joshua?

I would, it's the same one Observer has been trying to post.

[Iconoclast]

And??? They are modern buildings, as I said the buildings situated there in 1888 would have been much smaller. By the way the image of the Goads map I'm trying to upload is 1.2 mb I'm selecting full size as an option, so I don't know why it's appearing so small.

Yes they are modern buildings. It took me a while to create the photograph and by the time I had posted it the discussion had moved on. I was attempting to illustrate that they were indeed in Middlesex Street not New Goulston Street which one of your responses had suggested.

The point is that the cream building you see in my photograph in Dec 2018 clearly occupies a space which is just visible despite a sugar refinery. We have no evidence (yet) of how much of that space was visible in 1888, or how much to the west of the cream building heading to the south end of Middlesex Street.

If the buildings in Middlesex Street were three storey affairs, four storey affairs, or twelve storey affairs, the rear of one on the east side could still have had a line of sight of the GSG. This has not yet been disproven. If other people think I'm missing the point here, please speak up!

But who says (other than you) that buildings in Middlesex Street were three storey affairs? And who says this would prevent a line of sight to the GSG?

You can't simply say it for it to be so, you know.

[Iconoclast]

It occupied that whole empty area to the left of Vape Heaven. Give it up. As I said the buildings in Middlesex Street were three story affairs

Calm down Observer. My comment related to the fact that it sounded as though I was implying in one of my earlier posts that 'Vape Heaven' existed in 1888.

[Observer]

I would, it's the same one Observer has been trying to post.

Hi Mr Rogan just been looking at Buildings from Goads on the West side of Middlesex Street. The very tall modern block featured in the photograph, was in 1888, as I said, occupied by 3 storied buildings, and there is the odd 4 story.

[Joshua Rogan]

I don't follow the logic. If a sugar refinery can be 7 storeys high, why can't a tenement? And why can't a building to the west of the sugar refinery not have a line of sight to Middlesex Street?

As Observer says, the buildings occupying that site in 1888 were only 2-4 stories high. The East side of Middlesex St had recently been rebuilt when it was widened, and were on the whole 4-storey warehouses. I don't believe any could have overlooked the doorway where the apron was found though.

I think this may well be the actual sugar refinery in question (it is certainly a photograph of Goulston Street, from Google Images, though it clearly isn't seven storeys high). If it is then I'm not convinced we can be categorical about what can be seen of Middlesex Street to its left.

The building you've highlighted is actually the one containing the GSG, I believe. It faced an equally tall block on the opposite side of the road, as well as the refinery (which would be just off camera to the left, in New Goulston St). The low building right foreground is the public swimming baths.

[Iconoclast]

It is interesting to note that some sort of line of building is peaking-out from the right of what I am taking to be the sugar refinery (top right of the red box). The angle would not favour New Goulston Street but, rather, Middlesex Street. And that looks to me to be of similar height to the sugar refinery.

[Iconoclast]

Okay, the building may have been Wentworth Dwellings itself, so scratch that if it is.

Joshua, you say "I don't believe any could have overlooked the doorway where the apron was found though". Are you willing to go further and say that this was categorically impossible, or is this just the impression you have?

[Observer]

Yes they are modern buildings. It took me a while to create the photograph and by the time I had posted it the discussion had moved on. I was attempting to illustrate that they were indeed in Middlesex Street not New Goulston Street which one of your responses had suggested.

The point is that the cream building you see in my photograph in Dec 2018 clearly occupies a space which is just visible despite a sugar refinery. We have no evidence (yet) of how much of that space was visible in 1888, or how much to the west of the cream building heading to the south end of Middlesex Street.

If the buildings in Middlesex Street were three storey affairs, four storey affairs, or twelve storey affairs, the rear of one on the east side could still have had a line of sight of the GSG. This has not yet been disproven. If other people think I'm missing the point here, please speak up!

But who says (other than you) that buildings in Middlesex Street were three storey affairs? And who says this would prevent a line of sight to the GSG?

You can't simply say it for it to be so, you know.

I have the Goad maps, and they specifically state three and four storied buildings. With regard to the larger buildings in the background, I thought you were referring to the smaller ones in front of them they are in New Goulston Street. Believe me once you see the map which includes the sugar refinery, you'll realise the error of your way.

[Observer]

As Observer says, the buildings occupying that site in 1888 were only 2-4 stories high. The East side of Middlesex St had recently been rebuilt when it was widened, and were on the whole 4-storey warehouses. I don't believe any could have overlooked the doorway where the apron was found though.



The building you've highlighted is actually the one containing the GSG, I believe. It faced an equally tall block on the opposite side of the road, as well as the refinery (which would be just off camera to the left, in New Goulston St). The low building right foreground is the public swimming baths.

That's correct Joshua, the building to it's right in the foreground id the Public Baths.