Ostrog's 1888 arrest

[mariab]

A translation of the Gazette des tribunaux report from Nov. 14, 1888: Notice the misconceptions and numerous erroneous details. Amazing journalism, esp. when one keeps in mind that this is a police gazette!

INTERNATIONAL.
England, London, November 10.
A crime similar to these committed in Whitechapel occurred in Spitalfields in Dorset Court, Dorset Street, Commercial Street. The atrociously mutilated dead body of a young woman was found in a house in Dorset Court. The victim's head was almost separated from her body. Her ears and nose were cut off; her bowels pulled out; pieces of flesh lying on the ground; her breasts were placed on a table.
The woman's name was Jeanne Kelly; at least she had lived in a common law marriage with a man of that name. She was last seen at 10 o'clock last evening in the company of a man whom she had just met. They went inside of a public house and they must have gone to the poor woman's home at midnight. There has been an arrest made by the police.

[mariab]

Thanxs so much Rob!
I was at the Archives of the Paris Police Museum today and went through the Gazette des Tribunaux, which is the French equivalent to the London Police Gazette, and there was NO mention of Ostrog (as Stanislas Lublinski) around November 14 1888, but as a petty thief of a microscope and illegal alien in France he was too insignificant to be mentioned in the newspaper. At the time the Gazette des Tribunaux was covering the trial of the murder of Marie Agnétant plus a case of a 13 year old maid who murdered an old couple she was working for and took their money – Lizzie Borden like.
What is ironic and of interest is that PRECISELY on November 14 1888, the day of Ostrog's conviction in Paris, the Gazette des Tribunaux published a short report on the MJK murder. This is what Rob has attached in his post.
I might translate it if people are interested, when less beat.

Off topic PS.: If the French movie Polisse comes to your town, go see it without reservations, folks. It's real good. (And I went see it with a French cop!! Plus there's a French rapper starring in the movie and giving an outstanding performance whom I happen to know, him and his wife. Small world...)

[Rob Clack]

Posting for Maria.

[mariab]

Wow! Indeed in my post #18 I referred to “Cutbush“ while intending to say “Sadler“. Wasn't even aware of this. Good to know that completely irrelevant, uncontrolable stuff comes out of my mouth occasionally, and it has happened before.

(Tom Sadler is turned into the definite killer of Coles in 'Aberconway').

Sadler, after much adverse publicity, was not brought to trial for any murders, and apparently successfully sued certain tabloids for claiming he was a killer. Yet Mac, in 'Aberconway' only, forthrightly claims the burly seaman definitely killed Coles. I think Mac did this so that Griffiths and Sims would not query whether Jack was not still about in 1891 -- which would, of course, exclude 'Dr Druitt' being the fiend.

Thank you so much for explaining about a section of the Aberconway version I was completely clueless about, and apologies for having called you a Professor, Dr. or Mr. Hainsworth.

[lynn cates]

hmm

Hello Chris.

"The Banstead records are certainly held by the London Metropolitan Archives, and the catalogue can be viewed online:"

Now that I think on it, this seems correct. I wonder why I had to send twice for those? Perhaps because they are held separately from the Colney Hatch materials?

Cheers.
LC

[Jonathan H]

To Mariab

I'm not a 'professor' though thanks for the promotion.

I think you are momentarily confusing Cutbush with the Ripper suspect Tom Sadler a sailor who was arrested for the murder of Frances and Coles and investigated as a potential 'Jack'?

Sadler, after much adverse publicity, was not brought to trial for any murders, and apparently successfully sued certain tabloids for claiming he was a killer. Yet Mac, in 'Aberconway' only, forthrightly claims the burly seaman definitely killed Coles. I think Mac did this so that Griffiths and Sims would not query whether Jack was not still about in 1891 -- which would, of course, exclude 'Dr Druitt' being the fiend.

To Jason C

I would argue it this way. MM was a diligent, hands-on administrator. No doubt he wrote letters to loads of people about all sorts of matters.

He was obsessed with the Ripper case, and miffed that he missed out on the 'initial' murders of late 1888. He claims in his memoirs that on his very first day he was ploughing though letters to the police allegedly written by the fiend. If there was a list of possible 'Jacks', there might have been Ostrog -- as a vile and dangerous character though nobody important.

I think he also took a personal interest in Ostrog because on one of the many days he was back at Eton, as an old scholar on this occasion playing (and Captaining) in a cricket match, Ostrog had one of his Eton 'adventures' involving theft.

On the same day!

In his memoirs, Mac claimed that not only were his Eton days the highlight of his entire life, but that he knew this as he experienced those 'days'. Though a responsible and successful adult, with a distinguished career, and a loving family (his second daughter described him as affectionate, supportive but also a harmless fibber when it suited him) he nevertheless suffered from some degree of 'arrested development'.

Thus to me it would be stranger if this 'honourable schoolboy' did not keep tabs on the bounder who defiled his alma mater, and did not take some kind of self-amused, long-distance revenge.

[lynn cates]

Lma

Hello Maria.

"Does LMA mean “London Metropolitan Archives“ or “London Medical Archives“?"

The former.

Cheers.
LC

[jason_c]

To Mariab

It's just my opinion, but I think that Macnaghten chose two suspects in the Ripper mystery who were minor, if suspects at all, that is Michael Ostrog and 'Kosminski'. He did this for his own purposes; trying to 'cut the knot his own way' and keeping several competing groups satisfied at once.

For example, Tumblety, Sadler, and Grant -- all 'more likely' suspects than Cutbush -- must not be mentioned (Tom Sadler is turned into the definite killer of Coles in 'Aberconway').

I think that Mac believed by 1891 that Druitt was the fiend, and so, ipso facto, that excluded everybody else.

Michael Ostrog appealed to Macnaghtem, he the 'keenest of Old Etonians', because the Russian con man had defiled his beloved Eton with his thieving, and thus subsequently turning the swine into Ripper camouflage was a kind of delicious, though juvenile revenge.

A more important point is that Mac was choosing footnote suspects with whose biographical details he could play around with by the time, 1898, he disseminated the 'Drowned Doctor' and his hapless sidekicks to the public.

I doubt even Ostrog would have recognized himself in the writings of Griffiths and Sims, as he had never carried knives (maybe stole some?) and was not 'habitually cruel' to women, or anybody, and was not known to be a 'homicidal maniac' -- and was locked up in a French asylum at the time of the murders.

Jonathan

How do you square your above statement with the MM letter below? How often would MM request such information on a prisoner?

The latter question I really dont know the answer to. Any details from anyone would be welcome.

‘In 1891 Melville Macnaghten wrote to Banstead requesting that the Convict Supervision Office be informed if Ostrog was released. There is no suggestion that Banstead were informed that Ostrog was potentially dangerous, possibly a multiple murderer and perhaps Jacks the Ripper.’

[mariab]

Endlessly thank you for the pertinent help, Chris (and I hope it doesn't sound disrespectful to be thanking you personally). I had it in my mind to ask you (or Robert Linford, or Chris Scott) but was hesitant. Yes, these hospital records were uncatalogued in Sugden's time, as he says so himself on p. 480.
I'll check out the case files online catalogue, only not right now, I can't. Maybe very late tonight.

[Chris]

Hello Maria. Banstead? I have Isenschmid's committal records from there. Why not send a message to the LMA and ask for the address of the appropriate authority in regards to these records? The LMA are easy to work with.

The Banstead records are certainly held by the London Metropolitan Archives, and the catalogue can be viewed online:

http://tinyurl.com/64vhvu7

Evidently these records were uncatalogued when Sugden saw them; otherwise I'm sure he would have given a precise reference. At a guess, the letter might be in the case files:

http://tinyurl.com/6yw2867

[mariab]

It's just my opinion, but I think that Macnaghten chose two suspects in the Ripper mystery who were minor, if suspects at all, that is Michael Ostrog and 'Kosminski'. He did this for his own purposes

I'm very aware of your opinion on this, Prof. Hainsworth, and I'm not essentially disagreeing, just trying to get to the bottom of the facts (as a newbie and still pretty clueless).

Tom Sadler is turned into the definite killer of Coles in 'Aberconway'.

This is news to me! Am I to understand that the Aberconway version (which, unfortunately, I haven't yet read in its entirety) implicates Cutbush? I thought it was the opposite? (This is unrelated to the thread, but nevertheless important.)

Hello Maria. Banstead? I have Isenschmid's committal records from there. Why not send a message to the LMA and ask for the address of the appropriate authority in regards to these records? The LMA are easy to work with.

Thank you so much for the information, Lynn. Does LMA mean “London Metropolitan Archives“ or “London Medical Archives“? I'll contact them then, only not this week, some other week, please. (To paraphrase Stride.) Terribly busy this week.

the GLRO is now the London Metropolitan Archives, 40 Northampton Road, London EC1R 0HB.

Thank you so much for the information. This fits with my plans of getting to London for a week in early October. Perhaps Rob Clack would accept to help with some research at the London Metropolitan Archives (the LMA?).

If Grand is used as an adjective, wouldn’t it have said ‘Guidon grand’, rather than ‘Grand Guidon’? A ‘Guidon’ is a small flag, so it would mean big small flag. Or great small flag, as in renowned.
Actually I suspect ‘Grand’ was given as a first name.

Nope, in French we say “grand whatever“, the adjective first. Otherwise it would be “Louis Le Grand, Alexandre le Grand“ etc., with the article before the adjective. “Guidon“ means also bike bell, and I recall Simon Wood discussing the possibility of “Grand Guidon“ meaning a big, Tumblety-like mustache shaped like bike handlebars. :-)
Grand was most certainly NOT given as a first name by Ostrog, but as an adjective for his nickname. Ostrog was relatively tall, 5.11'', despite Sugden once slipping and calling him only 5.8'' tall.

Either way I think it is more than a little tenuous to extrapolate from the inclusion of this word to imply any sort of connection to Le Grand.

Ostrog also called himself Dr. Grant in England (still not clear in which exact circumstances), and the MO (carrying around knifes, cruelty to women, criminal activity and arrests in Paris) fits to a t.

[lynn cates]

translation

Hello Lechmere.

"If Grand is used as an adjective, wouldn’t it have said ‘Guidon grand’, rather than ‘Grand Guidon’?"

Perhaps, but would that be true if it were rearranged as part of an English translation?

Cheers.
LC

[Lechmere]

“Sugden says the records from Banstead Hospital are held by GLRO, which I'm not sure what it is, neither have I ever conducted research in hospital records”
My apologies if I am mistaking what you meant here, but the GLRO is now the London Metropolitan Archives, 40 Northampton Road, London EC1R 0HB

If Grand is used as an adjective, wouldn’t it have said ‘Guidon grand’, rather than ‘Grand Guidon’?
I believe the placing of ‘grand’ depends on whether it means ‘great’ and so goes before the noun, or ‘tall or big’ in which case it goes after. In neither case would it be capitalised.
A ‘Guidon’ is a small flag, so it would mean big small flag. Or great small flag, as in renowned. Actually I suspect ‘Grand’ was given as a first name. Either way I think it is more than a little tenuous to extrapolate from the inclusion of this word to imply any sort of connection to Le Grand.
But the documents are interesting nevertheless.

[lynn cates]

Banstead

Hello Maria. Banstead? I have Isenschmid's committal records from there. Why not send a message to the LMA and ask for the address of the appropriate authority in regards to these records? The LMA are easy to work with.

Cheers.
LC

[Jonathan H]

To Mariab

It's just my opinion, but I think that Macnaghten chose two suspects in the Ripper mystery who were minor, if suspects at all, that is Michael Ostrog and 'Kosminski'. He did this for his own purposes; trying to 'cut the knot his own way' and keeping several competing groups satisfied at once.

For example, Tumblety, Sadler, and Grant -- all 'more likely' suspects than Cutbush -- must not be mentioned (Tom Sadler is turned into the definite killer of Coles in 'Aberconway').

I think that Mac believed by 1891 that Druitt was the fiend, and so, ipso facto, that excluded everybody else.

Michael Ostrog appealed to Macnaghtem, he the 'keenest of Old Etonians', because the Russian con man had defiled his beloved Eton with his thieving, and thus subsequently turning the swine into Ripper camouflage was a kind of delicious, though juvenile revenge.

A more important point is that Mac was choosing footnote suspects with whose biographical details he could play around with by the time, 1898, he disseminated the 'Drowned Doctor' and his hapless sidekicks to the public.

I doubt even Ostrog would have recognized himself in the writings of Griffiths and Sims, as he had never carried knives (maybe stole some?) and was not 'habitually cruel' to women, or anybody, and was not known to be a 'homicidal maniac' -- and was locked up in a French asylum at the time of the murders.