Maybrick--a Problem in Logic

[Graham]

In one recent post, ‘Erobitha’ denies that money could have been a motive for hoaxing the Maybrick watch, because “no money came.” O really? Robbie Johnson fetched a cool £15,000 and Albert took in at least £2,000 by selling the visual rights to Feldman. Adjusted for inflation, that’s a total of around £29,000 in today’s currency. This doesn’t prove that either of the Johnsons faked the watch, but it certainly blows apart the claim that money couldn’t have been a motivator. Yet Erobitha’s misinformation went entirely unchallenged

I don't really wish to get involved in a debate which has become tedious in the extreme, but didn't Albert Johnson turn down a much larger sum than £2000 offered to him by that collector in Texas? $50000 or something like that, was it?

Graham

[rjpalmer]

In Harrison’s 1998 book she writes that Whay checked on ‘either side of the dates’ (plural) given by Barrett. Which was it? Date or dates? )(I am assuming Harrison is mistaken, but I am not suggesting it was deliberate).

I should say that this is in the 2010 reprint of Harrison's book, available in snippet view format on Google Books. My copy of her 1998 book is in storage.

[rjpalmer]

One other thing, Caz. I’ll study what you’ve written—and thanks, for it must have taken quite a lot of effort to compile these notes--but, to be honest, I’m disinclined to contribute any further to this conversation. A couple of recent posts have disheartened me to the point of tossing in my chap book. They’ve shown the utter futility of my evangelical efforts: there is no hope of converting the wayward believer. As Anne Graham once said, “people will believe what they want to believe.”

In one recent post, ‘Erobitha’ denies that money could have been a motive for hoaxing the Maybrick watch, because “no money came.” O really? Robbie Johnson fetched a cool £15,000 and Albert took in at least £2,000 by selling the visual rights to Feldman. Adjusted for inflation, that’s a total of around £29,000 in today’s currency. This doesn’t prove that either of the Johnsons faked the watch, but it certainly blows apart the claim that money couldn’t have been a motivator. Yet Erobitha’s misinformation went entirely unchallenged.

Next up we have Iconoclast, now claiming that Kevin Whay of O & L checked the dates around 31 March 1992 for Barrett’s purchase of a black ledger. Dear Gawd. This has been discussed so many times that Ike is either being utterly careless in his claims or is simply making things up. What evidence can he show to back this up? As documented by Harrison, Whay was asked to check the date(s) given in Barrett’s sworn affidavit, which were January/February 1990. This would have been a full 25 MONTHS before March 1992—the logical date of Barrett having visited O & L! Yet Ike claims, ridiculously, that Whay would have checked this date also. Again--no one bothered to correct or challenge Ike’s statement. Why is that?

I am not in contact with David B., but I trust he won’t mind me reprinting a statement from his article “A Man in A Pub” [see Orsam Books website] which is highly relevant, and should put the question of Barrett’s missing auction slip to bed once and for all:

“In a statement made by Kevin Whay to Shirley Harrison on 16 January 1995, which was, for some unexplained reason, omitted from inclusion in 'Inside Story', and is thus not very well known, Whay said that, 'Between 1990-1991 they [O&L] held about 300 or more auctions and items such as an old photo album would have been in a job lot marked "miscellaneous items".' Consequently, even a search of the records in the correct year would not have revealed the sale of the photo album (or ledger or scrapbook). Those records would, according to Whay, only have recorded it as a 'miscellaneous' item.”

Thus, even if Barrett had produced the auction slip, and Whay had been asked to check the logical dates, it is very unlikely that any record of the purchase would have been recognizable in O & L's records. What would an entry reading “miscellaneous” tell Keith that cannot already be discerned in Martin Earl’s advertisement? In short, I think it's time to forget Barrett's auction slip. It's irrelevant.

Finally, a minor point. Keith quotes Whay’s statement of having checked on ‘either side of the date’ given by Barrett. [See 38:09 in the tape of the Cloak and Dagger meeting]. In Harrison’s 1998 book she writes that Whay checked on ‘either side of the dates’ (plural) given by Barrett. Which was it? Date or dates? )(I am assuming Harrison is mistaken, but I am not suggesting it was deliberate). And is anyone prepared to back-up Iconoclast’s statement that Whay checked March 1992? (Not that it necessarily matters anymore, based on the statement reproduced by David B). If such claims are to go unchallenged, then I can only assume I have wandered into an enclave of true believers, and any further efforts are futile. The natives are sharpening their knives and getting ready to boil my flesh. Time to head back to the continent.

[Observer]

Hi Caz, I do have a quick question (actually several, but I will limit it to one). You write that

Keith "retained the spelling throughout" in his transcription of Mike's undated letter of October 1994. Are the upper and lower cases of the lettering also retained?

The first thing that strikes me is that Barrett appears to be able to correctly spell the word IDENTITY...when he wants. And only a few lines after botching it badly.

I find this somewhat suspicious, kind of like the illiterate 'Lusk Letter' correspondent being familiar with the silent 'k' of knife.

Mike Barrett's "confessions" are strewn with such inconsistencies. The one that tickled me the most was his spelling of always as all ways, whilst in the same breath there are several fairly difficult words spelt correctly.

Also take a look at this from his 1995 confession

"When I got the Album and Compass home, I examined it closely, inside the front cover I noticed a makers stamp mark, dated 1908 or 1909 to remove this without trace I soaked the whole of the front cover in Linseed Oil, once the oil was absorbed by the front cover, which took about 2 days to dry out. I even used the heat from the gas oven to assist in the drying out"

No spelling mistakes here. examined spelled correctly, absorbed, compass, you get the idea.

A couple of paragraphs down we have this

We went home and on the same evening that we had purchased everything, that is the materials we needed, We decided to have a practise run and we used A4 paper for this, and at first we tried it in my handwriting, but we realised and I must emphasie (sic) this, my handwriting was to (sic) disstinctive (sic) so it had to be in Anne's handwriting, after the practise run which took us approximately two days, we decided to go for hell or bust.

I think what Barrett is doing here is to emphasie in a disstintive way he's no good at spelling.

[StevenOwl]

In the summer of 1994, before Mike’s first confession, his Sphere volumes are taking up space and he sees no need to hang onto any of them, despite having decided back in November 1993 that enough was enough and making it clear from that time that the diary was a forgery. [Mike only recalls this later, in January 1995, but doesn’t say how he made it ‘clear’ at that early stage or to whom.] Anyway, he takes all the volumes to his new friend Jenny, for her son. His Crashaw evidence is out of sight, out of mind – for the time being.

How much is known about Jenny Morrison, Caz? Seems to me if you take her out of the equation there's no corroboration for Mike already owning a copy of the Sphere volume. Did anyone other than SH ever get the chance to question her?

[rjpalmer]

'MB says he...never heard of 'Poisoned Life of Mrs Maybrick' before SH mentioned it to him.'

As Mandy Rice-Davies said when she was told that Lord Aston had denied sleeping with her, or even knowing her.

"Well he would, wouldn't he?"

* * *

Hi Caz, I do have a quick question (actually several, but I will limit it to one). You write that

Keith "retained the spelling throughout" in his transcription of Mike's undated letter of October 1994. Are the upper and lower cases of the lettering also retained?

The first thing that strikes me is that Barrett appears to be able to correctly spell the word IDENTITY...when he wants. And only a few lines after botching it badly.

I find this somewhat suspicious, kind of like the illiterate 'Lusk Letter' correspondent being familiar with the silent 'k' of knife.

[caz]

Hi R.J,

I’ve tried to come up with a partly documented, partly hypothetical chronology of events from mid-1994 to early 1995, which most closely reflects your own belief that Mike and Anne were ‘in it together’ to create the Maybrick diary. Where I have included details which may challenge or conflict with that belief, you can take it these come strictly from the documented record, not the hypothetical elements. I’d be very interested in any observations or changes – however major or minor - you would make, so here we go:

In the summer of 1994, before Mike’s first confession, his Sphere volumes are taking up space and he sees no need to hang onto any of them, despite having decided back in November 1993 that enough was enough and making it clear from that time that the diary was a forgery. [Mike only recalls this later, in January 1995, but doesn’t say how he made it ‘clear’ at that early stage or to whom.] Anyway, he takes all the volumes to his new friend Jenny, for her son. His Crashaw evidence is out of sight, out of mind – for the time being.

Then in late June, he decides to come clean and confesses to forging the diary. He thinks he can produce the evidence, if and when necessary, to prove it.

Despite this setback, and just a month later, towards the end of July, Anne claims the diary has been in her family for years. Shirley is relieved, but disappointed that Anne said nothing before, and has now chosen to reveal all to Feldman.

‘Disappointed’ doesn’t come close to describing how Mike feels about it, and he could not be less relieved. Hacked off, jealous and resentful, he is now determined to put an end to the diary, and with it Anne and Feldman’s scheming.

August goes by and at some point in September, Mike remembers Shirley asking him to see if he can track down a source for the quote in the diary. Knowing he can identify it because he put it there himself, Mike can have a little fun at both Shirley’s and Feldman’s expense. He leaves a decent interval of about a week, in which he can pretend to search for it in the library. He doesn’t need to go there, because he thinks he can remember the volume in question without retrieving it from Jenny, and only needs to phone the library to check that they have the same set of volumes on their shelves.

Getting a positive response, Mike is now ready to spring the ‘good’ news on Shirley and the ‘bad’ on Feldman. From what Mike tells Shirley about the book [after first giving her the wrong volume number: Volume 6 – The Victorians, and pretending to return to the library to find the right one and make a note of it this time] she is able to phone the library herself and confirm that they have a copy, but there is no mention of a man with a Liverpool accent having very recently made an almost identical enquiry, so different staff members presumably dealt with Mike’s.

Mike then decides it is Shirley’s turn for some more bad news, so he tells her about the books he took round to Jenny in the summer, and the volume in particular which contains the Crashaw quote. The volumes were sent to him, brand new, back in 1989, in connection with the Hillsborough Appeal. The plan was to auction them to raise money for the appeal, but that failed so he hung onto them instead.

On October 12^th 1994, he tells Shirley he is seeing his solicitor that very afternoon and will take the Sphere volume with him. But the following day he phones Liz Winter, his solicitor’s assistant, and tells her he has found the phrase “O sweet intercourse of death” [sic] in the library. She makes a note that it’s in ‘Vol 2 P 184’. There is no record of the actual book being lodged at any time with the solicitor or later withdrawn, but he knows he can access it whenever it suits him.

At around this time, Mike is telling Alan Gray as much as he can remember about the forgery. He no longer has the two hard back discs which the diary was on when he finished it, nor any of the writing materials, because they were taken by his sister to her home and later destroyed to protect him after she read an article in the Daily Post. But he does have access to his Sphere volume, and in his possession is the little red 1891 diary, plus receipt. He also has the ticket from the O&L auction where he obtained the scrapbook used for the diary.

Mike presumably has his reasons for not showing Gray any of this evidence at the earliest opportunity. Instead, he gets Gray to drive him to O&L, where they remain outside. Mike does his best to recall when he attended the auction, or even whether it may have been Anne, and Gray struggles to make sense of what he’s hearing and to get enough details to make the appropriate enquiries. Mike could simply show Gray the auction ticket, or give him a photocopy, so he can keep hold of the original, but that would be too easy.

On December 6^th 1994, however, Mike decides to give Gray a break and hands him the same Sphere volume he was sent brand new in 1989, which he has retrieved at some point from Jenny. The smoking gun that is the auction ticket can wait.

Between then and Mike’s sworn affidavit of January 5^th 1995, he goes to see Anne at her home address, where she asks him for the red diary, remembering that it is evidence of her participation in the forgery. Mike, having temporarily forgotten it is evidence of her participation in the forgery, and therefore not particularly curious to know why Anne suddenly wants it, digs it out and gives it to her the next time they meet. He realises his mistake just in time to mention the red diary in the affidavit, and of course he still has the receipt for it. No doubt he also recalls cursing when the tiny diary was delivered, on a sale or return basis. Mike really should have paid more attention when Martin Earl was talking the item through with him, as he did as a matter of course with all his customers, to get their agreement before purchasing it from his supplier. “It’s a small diary for the year 1891, Mr Barrett, X by Y inches, with the dates printed on every page. Are you happy for me to go ahead and order it for you?” But his words must have fallen on deaf ears, leaving Mike eagerly awaiting the arrival of something that was no bloody use at all for faking James Maybrick’s diary for 1888/9. But finally the 1891 diary can serve a purpose, and take Anne down with him. Thank goodness he hadn’t returned it within the standard settlement time, and Anne agreed to pay for it by cheque when Martin Earl phoned Mike to chase it up.

Something else Mike remembers by January 1995 is the fact that the scrapbook was not sold singly, as he had recalled in the summer of 1994, but as part of a lot. It was probably Shirley who jogged his memory because she writes in her 1994 paperback that O&L said no unremarkable empty album such as Mike’s would have been sold singly. In fact, it appears on the very same page where she so upset him by mentioning that his drinking had led to ‘confabulation’ and suggested he was an alcoholic. So in his January 5^th affidavit, Mike is able to recall that it was part of lot no. 126, up for auction with a brass compass. He remembers it was about 11.30 in the morning when he went there, although he feels sure this was the end of January 1990 – so he is only out by 2 years and 2 months. The compass went the way of the discs and writing materials, destroyed by Mike’s sister.

On January 18^th, 13 days later, Mike repeats the claim he made back in April 1994, that he had never heard of Ryan’s book before Shirley mentioned it to him. Funny how the memory can play such mean tricks on Mike when he is trying to tell the truth, as in his affidavit, yet he can have perfect recall of a lie he told a year ago about one of the sources he used to forge the diary.

Meanwhile Mike has left the indefatigable Alan Gray to check and worry the life out of O&L, checking this date and that date – nothing. By April 1995, Mike’s lot 112 has changed to lot 53 [it was lot 126 on January 5^th] and Gray can’t reconcile this with whichever date Mike has finally settled on for the auction. It’s not clear what years Gray has covered by this point, but he has been given so many different dates that his frustration is showing.

I expect, R.J, that you will have recognised instantly where I have filled some gaps in the documentation to try and make your forgery hypothesis work as best I can. So I would very much like to know how close this all is to what you actually believe.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

...Moving on, I'm trying to think when Mike would have heard Feldman or Harris discussing the diary, or possible sources. He had been contracted to work with Shirley on their diary book since 1992, 'helping' her with the Maybrick research and what have you. For what little it's worth, when Keith Skinner interviewed Mike at Liverpool Library in April 1994 [two months before his first 'confession'], Mike told him had never heard of Ryan until Shirley mentioned the book to him. Here is the extract from my timeline:

Thursday April 14^th 1994
'MB had never heard of 'Poisoned Life of Mrs Maybrick' until SH told him about it.'...

In addition to the above, I have a timeline entry for Wednesday January 18th 1995, which includes the following:

'MB says he didn't take diary seriously at first. Never heard of 'Poisoned Life of Mrs Maybrick' before SH mentioned it to him.'

Nothing much wrong with Mike's memory, just 13 days after his affidavit of January 5th, if he could recall precisely what he had claimed about Ryan's book 9 months previously, before he came out with his first forgery claim. Or was it the truth for once?

In the same entry, I also noted this, regarding the Sphere volumes:

'Also says he found same volumes, "piles of them", in an out-of-print bookshop.'

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hi Caz. I fully agree that Barrett was working all sides against one another, or, more accurately, perhaps, was simultaneously giving multiple accounts to multiple people for multiple reasons. I fail to see how this helps your attempt to get at the truth. All it really shows is that Barrett was devious. His first 'Crashaw' call seems to have been to Feldman, as a sort of threat; his next call was to Harrison (unless she delayed a good while before contacting Keith) but this time it was simply to gloat about his research skills for the reasons you cite. So here we have Mike telling different stories to different people. But within two weeks Mike was now telling Harrison what he had implied to Feldman's personal assistant back on Sept 30--that he had owned the book all along--so, reading between the lines, I figure Harrison did something to upset Mike and he was now playing hardball, just as he had been playing hardball with Feldman all along. It's all about leverage. So, it seems to me, the logical inference is that Mike was b.s.ing Harrison the first go around, and now he was getting nasty since he didn't get what he wanted. As for going to the CLL to confirm they owned the volume--a simple phone call would have sufficed, so I don't consider this observation helpful. It's not sufficiently weird that the CLL owned the book, so I draw no conclusions from this rather pedestrian fact. Now, if anyone could have confirmed that Reid of Liverpool had sold the volume...I would be forced to whistle a different tune, one, perhaps by Michael Maybrick.

Enjoy your weekend; I'll think over your post as I dig some more post-holes out in the garden. RP

Well, if Mike could have spent a week looking for the Crashaw quote before finally finding it at some point on Friday, September 30^th, when he immediately called Feldman to gloat about it, I imagine he’d have been equally keen to let Shirley know, so both calls were probably made around the same time, although we can’t know for certain which one he made first. The weekend came and went and on the Monday, Keith picked up a message on his phone from Shirley, so she was hardly delaying things ‘a good while’, unless you know more about her working practices than I do. When writing Ripper Diary, we tried to stick with the dated and documented or recorded material, to produce an accurate chronology of the main events, and to rely less on any undated correspondence or conversations, including what anyone may have been telling Keith from memory.

But if you prefer, you could have Mike only pretending to search in the library, then calling both Feldman and Shirley to say he knew where the quote came from.

I’ve just consulted my own timeline to refresh my memory and found the following entries for you:

Friday 30^th September 1994
Hand-written letter from SH to Keith:
The Baroness and “Miss Roques” arrived in NY, on Saturday August 10^th 1878 from L’Pool, on ? [Name of ship unclear]
‘I am hotfoot on the “intercourse” quote. Will report.’
‘Still think Billy’s childhood friends are the best bet for the oral tradition. Will pursue.’
Source: copy of letter (CAM/KS/1994)

Monday 3^rd October 1994
KS notes ansafone message from SH:
Mike seems to have found “Oh Costly Intercourse of Death” – quite by chance.
Is in the Sphere Companion To English Literature Vol 6 (MB thinks) – did not even make a note of it!
Source: copy of notes by KS, 3^rd - 12^th October 1994 (CAM/KS/1994)

Thursday 6^th October 1994
Fax sent to SH by L’Pool City Library, with page from Sphere volume containing ‘O costly…’ quote.
Source: copy of fax (CAM/KS/1994)

Friday 7^th October 1994
KS Diary Note:
PF telephoned – MB had been asking everybody at Liverpool Library whether they knew source for ‘O costly…’
Carol Emmas supports this.
Source: copy of fax from KS to PF, 29^th January 1997, including summary by Martin Howells, received by KS on 24^th October 1995 (CAM/KS/1995)

Tuesday 11^th October 1994
KS conversation with SH:
MB v. upset (w/b Sept 26^th 1994) by remarks in p/back about him being alcoholic…determined to do something serious about this he spends week in L’pool library trying to find source of O Costly Intercourse (p231 of Shirley’s p/back)…
Finds it but does not make a note of it. Phones Duocrave on Fri 30^th Sept…
Around this time his mother has read p/back – upset – throws MB out of house
Mon Oct 3^rd – MB phones Shirley – Shirley tells MB to go back to library and find the reference… By Oct 6^th Shirley has reference.
Source: copy of notes by KS, 3^rd - 12^th October 1994 (CAM/KS/1994)

Hope these help!

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hi Ike - Yes. The Central Liverpool Library owned The Sphere Companion, Vol. 2. Why do you find this compelling? The original library was built in the 1860s and currently holds 330,000 volumes and nearly a mile of shelf space. It's a major research library, so it's not much of a shocker that they owned it. I am more interested in whether Barrett owned it, as seemingly confirmed by Jennifer Morrison. Seriously, mate, how many volumes would you expect Barrett to have flipped through in those 1,500 meters of shelves before he gave up and went and had a pint? Would he have stuck with it for 15 mintues? 60 minutes? His mythical 'week' spent in the CLL is a nice round figure, aint it? Almost like he's codding us.

Hi R.J,

I know this was addressed to Ike, but you tell me, R.J. How long do you think Mike would have stuck with anything, in that case? How about researching, then creating the diary on his word processor, just as a for instance? A trifle longer than 60 minutes, surely, before giving it up as a lost cause and going for a pint while Anne did all the work. All the ripper books would have given him conflicting information on the murders for starters, before he even got as far as checking where James Maybrick may have been at the time. Yet you can’t see the same man spending a few days looking for something specific in the library, which we know would have been right there on the shelves, if only he thought to look in the section on English Literature reference works?

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Not for one moment wishing to impugn Shirley Harrison's reliability, but there are several posters to these boards who knew, or at least on occasion met, Michael Barrett; I would like to know if any or all of them ever heard him 'quoting Latin phrases' at the drop of a hat.

Graham

Hi Graham,

Not me personally, but Keith Skinner was looking through copies of letters he has, which were written by Mike to Shirley and Anne. He could only find one letter where Mike uses Latin quotes and it comes right in the middle of his famous Sphere Book Adventure. The letter is undated but Shirley noted that she received it on Thursday Oct 20^th 1994, around three weeks after Mike first revealed that the quote was from 'Sancta Maria' by Crashaw. The letter is handwritten but Keith has very kindly transcribed it for us, retaining Mike's spelling throughout.

Enjoy!

Dear Shirly

No offence! even with

out a telephone can’t get

a way from you or the

Book.

Listened To your Telephone

Interview on Radio Mersyside.

Very good.

But one mistake. You stated

Mrs Hammersmith was in

the Drive of Battlecrease house.

The DRIVE [underlined twice] MAYBRICK

was refering to in the ‘Dairy”

was AIGBUTH HALL DRIVE

which is opposit Riverdale

Road. All Locals call it

the DRIVE.

Bet you don’t find

Mr Hammersith. Have you tryied

A ANAGRAM. Remberer Maybrick

And is FUNNY LITTLE GAMES.

And could you please, if

you don’t mind me asking

mention the fact that I,

and I alone Discoved,

“Jack the Rippers” indentaty.

it anoys me when

people prussem you did. Believe

me quite a few people have

said that to me. Happend,

Even after your Interview,

No less than three people

stop me on my way out,

And said “They thought I

discoved his IDENTITY. Not

you. Sorry can’t help peoples

misentrations.

As regard skipin rymes

Try This One :

Say it in you mind, as if

you a child skiping the

way one did.

JACK LIKE TO HACK

HACK HACK HACK

COME WHAT MAY [MAY underlined twice]

HE’L STRICK TO DAY


ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE.

HIS KNIFE WILL

COME DOWN

AND SO WILL THE

CROWN

SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE, TEN

AND OF HE RUNS

BACK TO HIS DEN

Horid little Rhymes

ARNT They.

Shows you how easy

It is to write them

EXEMPLIT GRATIA

Not that I did. - [underlined twice]

But just trying to put

a point over.

Remember I know the

Dairy better than any one

in the World

If you do find ANNE’s

ADRESS, I would be gratfull

If you could send it on

To me.

CURRENTA CALAMO

Love,

Mike

Love,

Caz
X

[Iconoclast]

It's not sufficiently weird that the CLL owned the book, so I draw no conclusions from this rather pedestrian fact.

It's somewhat more than merely pedestrian, Roger. It serves to remind us that we can infer nothing from it! Had the book been absent, big problem for the likes of me. The fact that it wasn't absent merely reminds us that we cannot then infer or assume that Barrett already had a copy in his possession. That proposition just remains moot like so many other propositions in this twisted tale.

Now, if anyone could have confirmed that Reid of Liverpool had sold the volume...I would be forced to whistle a different tune, one, perhaps by Michael Maybrick.

Yes, and - Lord knows - how much easier if O&L had confirmed the same about Mike's claim that he bought the scrapbook from them. Clearly, I would be whistling a different tune myself.

To help me sleep. Crying.

Ike

[rjpalmer]

Hi Caz. I fully agree that Barrett was working all sides against one another, or, more accurately, perhaps, was simultaneously giving multiple accounts to multiple people for multiple reasons. I fail to see how this helps your attempt to get at the truth. All it really shows is that Barrett was devious. His first 'Crashaw' call seems to have been to Feldman, as a sort of threat; his next call was to Harrison (unless she delayed a good while before contacting Keith) but this time it was simply to gloat about his research skills for the reasons you cite. So here we have Mike telling different stories to different people. But within two weeks Mike was now telling Harrison what he had implied to Feldman's personal assistant back on Sept 30--that he had owned the book all along--so, reading between the lines, I figure Harrison did something to upset Mike and he was now playing hardball, just as he had been playing hardball with Feldman all along. It's all about leverage. So, it seems to me, the logical inference is that Mike was b.s.ing Harrison the first go around, and now he was getting nasty since he didn't get what he wanted. As for going to the CLL to confirm they owned the volume--a simple phone call would have sufficed, so I don't consider this observation helpful. It's not sufficiently weird that the CLL owned the book, so I draw no conclusions from this rather pedestrian fact. Now, if anyone could have confirmed that Reid of Liverpool had sold the volume...I would be forced to whistle a different tune, one, perhaps by Michael Maybrick.

Enjoy your weekend; I'll think over your post as I dig some more post-holes out in the garden. RP

[jmenges]

There's too much insulting of fellow Casebook members going on here leading to posts being reported.

If you all can't discuss and debate civilly we'll have no choice but to shut it down.

Play nice, or don't play at all.

Thanks

JM

[Iconoclast]

I have no intention of reading your brilliant Society's Pillar, I've had a taste of your posts in the various Maybrick threads, that enough for me. I hear Mr Orsam has reduced it to a pile of rubble anyway.

Lord Orsam's usual long-winded response to my brilliant Society's Pillar is far from a demolition of its principles or ideas. It's simply the latest shout in the argument. When I can arse myself to shout back, I will. Anyone who reads the Good Lord's endless epistle will already know that it is far from over.

Obviously you would have had no way of knowing this.