Maybrick--a Problem in Logic

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

It clearly wasn't he, then.

Hello Iconoclast,

I'll begin by saying, whenever I read your posts, I always hear the voice of Malcolm McDowell as Alex in A Clockwork Orange?

Anyway, I've just finished reading your article, Societies Pillar, and what a cracking read it was! I've never been a believer in Maybrick as the ripper, and would definitely have fallen into the category of thinking that the diary is an established hoax and Maybrick an implausible suspect. So, credit where it's due, it was good to read a review of the case from a pro Maybrick view that also acknowledges the stand out points that make and break the respective cases for and against.
Certainly some interesting points, not sure I'll ever be particularly convinced by cryptic clues, hidden codes and ciphers, but hey, just because I don't believe doesn't mean it's not real!
I did also read Orsams rebuttal. To say he picked a few holes in your theory is is probably a polite way of putting it.
But not to worry, I felt it was actually as well put a case for Maybrick as anyone could put together, and agreeing or not, I'd recommend giving it a fair perusal.
To you I do doff my peaked hat. (Or was it a BillyCock?)

[Graham]

Ikey, m'boy!

There is absolutely no doubt that there is no evidence whatsoever that Maybrick actually "did live and work in Whitechapel, for one Gustavus Witt if memory serves". I think Graham wasn't worrying too much about the final accuracy of his statement but - rather - that he meant that there was some evidence that Maybrick had a very direct link with the East End through his doing Witt's "London work".

Indeed yes, that is precisely what I was meaning. I ought to have added, for the ears of the general nit-pickers who post here, that Witt was Liverpool based but had London connections. There is little doubt that Maybrick knew the East End pretty well. Whilst adding another 'IIRC', was he not some kind of common-law husband to a woman called Elizabeth who lived near to, or actually in, Whitechapel? Normally, my extensive library is within arm's length, but just now I am lounging in a kind of rural paradise, having my wine poured for me, my figs opened for me, my ears being shielded from the fact that the bloody Villa lost at home today. More later, I hope.

Graham

[MrBarnett]

Ikey, m'boy!



Indeed yes, that is precisely what I was meaning. I ought to have added, for the ears of the general nit-pickers who post here, that Witt was Liverpool based but had London connections. There is little doubt that Maybrick knew the East End pretty well. Whilst adding another 'IIRC', was he not some kind of common-law husband to a woman called Elizabeth who lived near to, or actually in, Whitechapel? Normally, my extensive library is within arm's length, but just now I am lounging in a kind of rural paradise, having my wine poured for me, my figs opened for me, my ears being shielded from the fact that the bloody Villa lost at home today. More later, I hope.

Graham

Hi Graham,

What evidence is there that Witt was Liverpool based?

Gary

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Ikey, m'boy!



Indeed yes, that is precisely what I was meaning. I ought to have added, for the ears of the general nit-pickers who post here, that Witt was Liverpool based but had London connections. There is little doubt that Maybrick knew the East End pretty well. Whilst adding another 'IIRC', was he not some kind of common-law husband to a woman called Elizabeth who lived near to, or actually in, Whitechapel? Normally, my extensive library is within arm's length, but just now I am lounging in a kind of rural paradise, having my wine poured for me, my figs opened for me, my ears being shielded from the fact that the bloody Villa lost at home today. More later, I hope.

Graham

Bollocks. I was going to watch that tomorrow. Never thought casebook would have spoilers. Bah.
Still, we'll always have that semi final.

[MrBarnett]

Hi Graham,

What evidence is there that Witt was Liverpool based?

Gary

I am interested in Witt for reasons other than his ‘intimate friendship’ with James Maybrick.

Although he was born in Germany in 1840, Witt appears to have been well and truly London-based from at least the late 1860s until the end of his life (1905).

A Mr Gustavus Witt is mentioned in a press report of a charity event in aid of the German Hospital in Dalston which took place at the London Tavern, Bishopgate in 1868.

When he married in 1869, in Camberwell, Witt was described as being ‘of London’. Over the next decade or so he and his wife produced a string of children in Camberwell and G. A. can be found there on the 1871/1881/1891 and 1901 censuses.

He had various business addresses in the City of London from the 1870s.

During the 1870s his firm, G. A. Witt, registered a number of trade marks, e.g. this from the NA catalogue:



'Drawing of G A Witt and Co's trademark. An Indian chieftain on a horse enclosed in a square border with lettering G A Witt and Co., London'.

Copyright owner of work: G A Witt and Company, 45 Lime Street, London. Copyright author of work: J J Sale and Sons, Manchester. Form completed: 1 May 1873. Registration stamp: 1873 May 2



Witt died in Freiburg, Germany in 1905 and the probate calendar describes him as being of Champion Hill House, Champion Hill, Surrey (Camberwell) and of 36, Lime Street, London.

I am trying to work out the connection between GAW and a West End music publisher named Augustus Witt who was involved in a messy divorce case in 1862.

[Graham]

All I know of G Witt is what Feldman published in his book - the research presumably carried out by Keith Skinner. I can only suggest that if you haven't read Feldman's book, you should do so, never mind the bad publicity he gets on here.

ABE, so sorry for spilling the beans about the Villa. On top of the Rugby final it was all just too much for me to bear.....

Graham

[MrBarnett]

All I know of G Witt is what Feldman published in his book - the research presumably carried out by Keith Skinner. I can only suggest that if you haven't read Feldman's book, you should do so, never mind the bad publicity he gets on here.

ABE, so sorry for spilling the beans about the Villa. On top of the Rugby final it was all just too much for me to bear.....

Graham

Looking at the Google preview online, there are two references to Witt in Feldman’s ‘Jack the Ripper: The Final Chapter’, on pages 219 and 410. On neither of those pages is it claimed that Witt was ever based in Liverpool.

Is that the book you are referring to?

[Graham]

Mr B,

am now back where my books are. First, I never myself said that Witt was based in Liverpool. I said that Jim worked for Witt at his London office near to Whitechapel.

On Page 219 of Feldman's book, is reproduced a letter sent by Witt to the Home Secretary just after Florence's trial:

4 Cullum Street
London EC

August 29 1889

Though you are no doubt more than tired of the unfortunate Maybrick affair, permit me as one of the late Mr Maybrick's most intimate friends...he was my partner in Liverpool up to 1875 & continued to do my London firm's business up to the time of his death.

I remain, Sir,
Your obed't servant
G A Witt

In itself this does not confirm that Jim actually spent any time in London working for Witt, but it is highly suggestive that he did. Again, this is academic as far as I'm personally concerned, as I don't believe Jim was the Ripper. But it does at least give some support to those who do feel that he was. Feldman also notes that Jim visited London on several occasions, not necessarily for his work but to visit his brother and also on at least one occasion a doctor. And then, of course, there is the business of his 'marriage' to a woman who lived in London....but you'd need to read Feldman's book regarding this.

Graham

[MrBarnett]

Mr B,

am now back where my books are. First, I never myself said that Witt was based in Liverpool. I said that Jim worked for Witt at his London office near to Whitechapel.

On Page 219 of Feldman's book, is reproduced a letter sent by Witt to the Home Secretary just after Florence's trial:

4 Cullum Street
London EC

August 29 1889

Though you are no doubt more than tired of the unfortunate Maybrick affair, permit me as one of the late Mr Maybrick's most intimate friends...he was my partner in Liverpool up to 1875 & continued to do my London firm's business up to the time of his death.

I remain, Sir,
Your obed't servant
G A Witt

In itself this does not confirm that Jim actually spent any time in London working for Witt, but it is highly suggestive that he did. Again, this is academic as far as I'm personally concerned, as I don't believe Jim was the Ripper. But it does at least give some support to those who do feel that he was. Feldman also notes that Jim visited London on several occasions, not necessarily for his work but to visit his brother and also on at least one occasion a doctor. And then, of course, there is the business of his 'marriage' to a woman who lived in London....but you'd need to read Feldman's book regarding this.

Graham

Thanks, Graham.

I was reacting to your statement, “I ought to have added, for the ears of the general nit-pickers who post here, that Witt was Liverpool based but had London connections.”

I read Witt’s comment as meaning that Maybrick acted as an agent for his London business in Liverpool. Witt’s business that had included an office in Liverpool went under in 1875/6. The furnishings etc in Knowsley Buildings were sold off to pay creditors. Thereafter he only had a London business (as far as I’m aware).

I don’t want to stray too far into the Diary swamp, that’s not really why I’m interested in Witt, but you have to ask yourself how two men living in cities so far apart could have developed an intimate friendship. It must have involved some travelling between the two cities.

[MrBarnett]

From things I’ve read on here, I gained the impression that some believe the story to have been:

Witt was a Liverpool merchant for whom Maybrick worked (in Liverpool). When Witt branched out and opened a London office he sent Maybrick south to look after his London operation.

My understanding is that Witt was an East India merchant based in the City of London who imported goods via the port of Liverpool and went into partnership with Maybrick who handled things at the Liverpool end while he (Witt) remained in the capital. Maybrick bailed in 1874, shortly before the firm of G. A. Witt went under.

When Witt got back on his feet, his London-based operation still required an agent in Liverpool and Maybrick fulfilled that role.

So, no working in London for Maybrick, but a strong personal relationship with his ex business partner who lived and worked there.

This is obviously just my interpretation, but I think it fits the known facts reasonably well.

[Iconoclast]

Hello Iconoclast,

I'll begin by saying, whenever I read your posts, I always hear the voice of Malcolm McDowell as Alex in A Clockwork Orange?

I haven't seen it, AB'sEs, but I imagine it's probably me to a T, most voices in people's heads are (or is that just me?).

Anyway, I've just finished reading your article, Societies Pillar, and what a cracking read it was!

You'll be wanting some money for this, I assume?

So, credit where it's due, it was good to read a review of the case from a pro Maybrick view that also acknowledges the stand out points that make and break the respective cases for and against.

The version sitting in Dropbox is what I could muster in six months whilst holding down a demanding job. I always intended to improve it, and - if I ever get a free twenty years - I plan to also read Lord Orsam's rebuttal in detail and incorporate his points into the text, perhaps with a cheeky wee rebuttal of his rebuttal, just for jolly. So I'd say the text as it stands is a 6 out of 10. I reckon my major revisions - Lord if they ever come! - will raise that to an 8 out of 10. My lack of original research will always hold it back from a 9 or a 10, sadly. Perhaps the 2030 edition will feature some of that? I know we'll still be arguing about Maybrick's candidature, anyway ...

To say he picked a few holes in your theory is is probably a polite way of putting it.

If it were ever possible to pick a few holes with a pneumatic drill, Lord Orsam showed us the way ...

I'd recommend giving it a fair perusal.

It's always nice to get a compliment or two, so all joking apart it's much appreciated.

Ike

[Iconoclast]

All I know of G Witt is what Feldman published in his book - the research presumably carried out by Keith Skinner. I can only suggest that if you haven't read Feldman's book, you should do so, never mind the bad publicity he gets on here.

ABE, so sorry for spilling the beans about the Villa. On top of the Rugby final it was all just too much for me to bear.....

Graham

Hmmm. As Liverpool are the team I hate more than any other bar the jokers who turn up occasionally at the Stadium of S**te, I was truly gutted that they scored one never mind two (sorry - given the score away too now!). Still, the Villa pushed us up a place in defeat so every silver could and all that ...

:-)

[Iconoclast]

This is obviously just my interpretation, but I think it fits the known facts reasonably well.

On the balance of probability, you are probably right, though it is hard to imagine that Maybrick never visited Witt at his London address. At very least, the fact that Callum Street was so close to Aldgate would have given Maybrick legitimacy if he were ever asked why he had taken a room in Middlesex Street (should anyone in Whitechapel or indeed Liverpool have asked).

[erobitha]

The diary is not all we have linking Maybrick. We also have a gold watch, whilst not 100% imposible to be forged, would require expert knowledge on how to place microscopic aged brass particles deep into the tiniest of scratches. The watch was owned by Albert Johnson who paid for the testing himself. If we dismiss the diary we must also dismiss the watch? I would argue the watch is harder to dismiss than the diary.

James Maybrick's father William was an engraver by trade so it's inetresting that there is a watch with engravings on the rear. Albeit amatuerirsh, it would still require some skill, probably gained from watching someone more profesional and then at least knowing how to find a suitable tool. We know James went on to use "Tinme Reveals All" as his family motto. I believe the original professional egraved initials J.O is that of his first victim in Manchester. I have a name that matches from the death records of the Manchester area, but I cant find much more about her, but she was 37 at the time of death in January 1888. She wasn't listed as being murdered, so logic suggests her death would have been considered non-suspicious. If the diary is right suffocation could be how she died, but depending how she was suffocated may give the impression of a disease rather than foul play.

So we dismiss the watch and the diary and the argument becomes that James Maybrick cannot be considered a likely suspect. I would argue why not? James Maybrick knew the East End very well having spent his twenties as a shipping clerk in the docklands which is guess where? One of his census addresses around this time lists an East London address as his residence. He also had a relationship that we know of with a girl called Sarah Ann Robertson who lived in the East End. Evidence has suggested they had children together and continued their romance even into James' marriage with Florence. It is believed it is her Florence was aware of as another woman in James' life. So we know he has intimate knowledge of the East End, long before Witt confirmed he also did some work for him in London. Okay, so he knows the East End so what?

I believe, but I cannot in anwyway conclusively prove this, that James Maybrick suffered from syphillis. I believe "malaria" was a medical euphemism employed by doctors of the time in America that allowed men of certain standing to get the relevant prescriptions without being branded with the negativity of such a disease. I know he and his American doctor shared membership of the same lodge in Virgina, but I am unsure if it was masonic. I believe he contracted this from an American prostitute in Virgina whilst he was working there, and herein lies his deep seated hate towards "whores". Over time syhphillis degenrates the brain and can cause episodes of extreme mania. Combined with an out-of-control arsenic addiction which he had at the time of the murders and you have someone not at all in their right mind. The trigger of Florence's affair simply sparked the fuse that was slowly burning anyway. Of a recent US suvey of 2,600 (yes that many) serial killers from the past 40 years, would most likely be male (92%), white (52%) and over 35 (when caught - around 45%). The average starting age of the first kill is around 28 years old. Around 70% would have most likely wet the bed, started fires or injured animals as children. We have no present evidence for this for James Maybrick, but should something emerge that would be a red flag for me. So Maybrick could easily fit the profile of a serial killer.

James Maybrick has no alibi for the dates of any of the canonical victims.

I also believe that a reasearcher along the line also mentioned that Scotland Yard may be witholding some information that might give the Maybrick story some more credence but the nature of this information is "classified".

I know peoiple are quick to dismiss James Maybrick, most this is most likely because of people's instant suspicion of Mike Barrett in particular, who can hardly be taken seriously in the quest of any kind of providence either way, but I fear the motto "Time Reveals All" will only ask more questions than answer.

[Sam Flynn]

The diary is not all we have linking Maybrick. We also have a gold watch

Which came to light not long after the diary surfaced... fancy that!

whilst not 100% imposible to be forged, would require expert knowledge on how to place microscopic aged brass particles deep into the tiniest of scratches.

If you use a less-than shiny engraving implement, then I'd have thought that it would leave such particles behind.

James Maybrick has no alibi for the dates of any of the canonical victims.

Apart from the odd event here and there, we have no idea what James Maybrick was doing at any time before, during or after 1888. The same is true for many millions of other men who were living in Britain at the time.