Francis Thompson. The Perfect Suspect.

[jerryd]

Hi Jerryd

Thanks for the compliment on my work done. You provide a lot of food for thought. Yes Thompson's prostitute did live in Cheslea. I have also pondered the parallels between the Winslow suspect. The connection first occurred to me when I read The English writer Robert Thurston Hopkins book, “Life and Death at the Old Bailey,” and the chapter within it, “Shadowing The Shadow Of A Murderer,” which begins with the idea that Ripper was motivated by religious fanaticism. This is of interest considering Thompson, was an obsessive religionist. Hopkins wrote of Forbes Winslow's account of the man seen outside St. Pauls Cathedral. Winslow was convinced that the man was a ‘religious homicidal monomaniac.’ Hopkins said that the police did not take Winslow seriously and press reports on it scared the suspect into hiding. I have wondered if this was Thompson. The Winslow suspect, like Thompson, was a medical student. He also, like Thompson had blue eyes, but the only thing that prevented my from looking further into this is simply that Thompson was a Catholic but St. Pauls is an Anglican church. I think too that Winslow student was named as someone else. It might be just a coincidence but there are some strange parallels like you say.

Richard.

Well here's a another strange parallel. Thompson wrote his essay "Shelley" in 1889 and it was published posthumously. The subject of the essay was Percy Bysshe Shelley. Percy Shelley was an atheist and Thompson held to his Catholic beliefs. Percy Shelley was also a poet and the second husband of Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein. It was on the Percy Shelley estate in 1889, that the thigh of Elizabeth Jackson was found in the garden. Elizabeth, as we know, was living in Chelsea at the time.

Thompson living on the embankment brought that thought up.

[Ausgirl]

but then the poem isn't metaphoric, even if the title is.

You've lost me, there?

Anyway, you can't, I think, feasibly say that the poem about anyone named Mary actually dying of five wounds.

[Ausgirl]

Well here's a another strange parallel. Thompson wrote his essay "Shelley" in 1889 and it was published posthumously. The subject of the essay was Percy Bysshe Shelley. Percy Shelley was an atheist and Thompson held to his Catholic beliefs. Percy Shelley was also a poet and the second husband of Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein. It was on the Percy Shelley estate in 1889, that the thigh of Elizabeth Jackson was found in the garden. Elizabeth, as we know, was living in Chelsea at the time.

Thompson living on the embankment brought that thought up.

Perhaps he's a better suspect for some of the torso murders?

I've always thought the Shelley estate parcel was some sort of message.. a joke, a statement. If a coincidence, then a truly weird one.

[Richard Patterson]

You've lost me, there?

Anyway, you can't, I think, feasibly say that the poem about anyone named Mary actually dying of five wounds.

No Ausgirl, that would be ridiculous. We both know of none of the canonical 'five' dying of five wounds. Maybe the number five meant something to the Ripper, who knows right? Nobody should die over a number and that Passion of Mary suggest this is simply one interpretation. Even if he Thompson did say the number had special magical power. Here is some of what he wrote about it, I found this in the archives at Burns Library on him. He does go on but here is the short version.

‘five among the ancients was called the number of Justice as “justly” dividing the digits & for mathematical reasons...Also that they called it the conjugal number; because resolvable into 2 & 3, parity and imparity the active & passive digits, the material & formal principles “in generative Societies” five wise and foolish virgins, Romans allowed but five torches in their nuptial solemnities.The most generative animals created on the fifth day. In kabala, the fifth letter of the Hebrew alphabet is the character of generation.’

All the best Ausgirl, and thanks for your continued interest. Don't worry I won't go on about here because it goes up that dangerous saint day road and all that is reserved for the chapter in my paperback.

Richard.

[Ausgirl]

No Ausgirl, that would be ridiculous. We both know of none of the canonical 'five' dying of five wounds. Maybe the number five meant something to the Ripper, who knows right? Nobody should die over a number and that Passion of Mary suggest this is simply one interpretation. Even if he Thompson did say the number had special magical power. Here is some of what he wrote about it, I found this in the archives at Burns Library on him. He does go on but here is the short version.

‘five among the ancients was called the number of Justice as “justly” dividing the digits & for mathematical reasons...Also that they called it the conjugal number; because resolvable into 2 & 3, parity and imparity the active & passive digits, the material & formal principles “in generative Societies” five wise and foolish virgins, Romans allowed but five torches in their nuptial solemnities.The most generative animals created on the fifth day. In kabala, the fifth letter of the Hebrew alphabet is the character of generation.’

All the best Ausgirl, and thanks for your continued interest. Don't worry I won't go on about here because it goes up that dangerous saint day road and all that is reserved for the chapter in my paperback.

Richard.

I'm not a total stranger to the Kabbalah and occult numerical symbolism in general, myself.. and frankly, even squinting at that poem very hard through gematria-coloured glasses, I can't find anything at all in the poem to suggest that:

Thompson described the mother of Christ, bleeding to death from the five wounds

.. which is what you plainly claimed it did.

And yes, I did actually ponder the potential for the "five" being of significance in relation to victim numbers (let's pretend that's been at all proven...) and this being a burden, blah de blah. And concluded it was a stretch of the highest order, considering the poem in its entirety does not support this, at all, that I can fathom.

Sometimes, your "maybes" extend very far beyond the realm of feasibility, Richard. And this one appears to me to have crossed over into Rorschach territory.

[Richard Patterson]

Crazy I know but I believe that Thompson, in his poem 'The Passion of Mary' implies that the wounds done to Christ were also done to her.

'In the five wounds of Jesus dyed,
And in thy bleeding thoughts, Mary!

The soldier struck a triple stroke,
That smote thy Jesus on the tree:
He broke the Heart of Hearts, and broke
The Saint's and Mother's hearts in thee

[Ausgirl]

Crazy I know but I believe that Thompson, in his poem 'The Passion of Mary' implies that the wounds done to Christ were also done to her.

'In the five wounds of Jesus dyed,
And in thy bleeding thoughts, Mary!

The soldier struck a triple stroke,
That smote thy Jesus on the tree:
He broke the Heart of Hearts, and broke
The Saint's and Mother's hearts in thee

Madness, isn't it, for a pious man to write a poem about the burden of survival, for the mother of Christ. If there's personal symbolism, it's clearly about the difficulty of carrying on after an unthinkably profound loss.

So what what loss would be? Not his prostitute, surely.

[Richard Patterson]

Madness, isn't it, for a pious man to write a poem about the burden of survival, for the mother of Christ. If there's personal symbolism, it's clearly about the difficulty of carrying on after an unthinkably profound loss.

So what what loss would be? Not his prostitute, surely.

No Ausgirl, most likely he connected it to the loss of his own mother in 1879. It is interesting that his poem 'The Passion of Mary' was inspired by a sermon given by the brother of his step-mother, Ann Richardson. He wasn't too pleased about her replacing his mother Mary. Here is what he wrote of how he felt about it all.

'My father, too cruel,
Would scorn me and beat me;
My wicked stepmother
Would take me and eat me,
They looked in the deep grass
Where it was deepest;
They looked down the steep bank
Where it was steepest;
But under the bruised fern
Crushed in its feather
The head and the body
Were lying together,-
Ah, death of fair weather!
Tell me, thou perished head,
What hand could sever thee?...
My evil stepmother,
So witch-like in wish,
She caught all my pretty blood
Up in a dish,
She took out my heart
For a ghoul-meal together,
But peaceful my body lies
In the fern-feather,
For now is fair weather.'

Of his mother's death Thompson wrote,

'Died; and horribly
Saw the mystery
Saw the grime of it-...
Saw the sear of it,
Saw the fear of it,
Saw the slime of it,
Saw it whole!
Son of the womb of her,
Loved till the doom of her
Thought of the brain of her.
Heart of her side,
Joyed in him, grieved in him-
God grew fain [pleased] of her,
And she died.'

[Ausgirl]

I pondered it might have something to do with his own mother - but then, who in the poem's context is the dead Christ, and who's the (erstwhile) living Mary?

And what's it all to do with a bunch of dead East-end "unfortunates?"

[Richard Patterson]

I pondered it might have something to do with his own mother - but then, who in the poem's context is the dead Christ, and who's the (erstwhile) living Mary?

And what's it all to do with a bunch of dead East-end "unfortunates?"

What does his mother, Mary's death have to do with the East End dead prostitutes victims, or the death of other females he loved like his sister Helen who died when he was five for that matter? His editor son says it best in his biography when we explained how Thompson felt about his prostitute friend alerting him to the fact she was going to leave him.

’After his first interview with my father he had taken her his news. "They will not understand our friendship." She said and then, "I always knew you were a genius." And so she strangled the opportunity; she killed again the child, the sister; the mother had come to life within her. She went away. Without warning she went to unknown lodgings and was lost to him '

{LIFE.p.83}

Funny the use of the words killed and strangled, considering the prostitutes were strangled and killed.

[Ausgirl]

What does his mother, Mary's death have to do with the East End dead prostitutes victims, or the death of other females he loved like his sister Helen who died when he was five for that matter?

I just can't see any of that in the poem concerned. Sorry.

[Richard Patterson]

I just can't see any of that in the poem concerned. Sorry.

That's ok. It's not you. It's me. I must not have explained myself properly here. Win some lose some. You know I have no idea why you think Thompson is a good suspect. You have never liked/agreed with any point I have made. Perhaps you know something I don't. Anyway we make a good team, only I don't know yet which one of us is the fall guy.

[Patrick S]

Hello, Richard.

First, congratulations on the book. I've read this thread in its entirety it is obvious that you have done a tremendous amount of research. You've provided - I think - invaluable and interesting information on Thompson and his possible connection to the Whitechapel murders. I find that I'm now required to read Walsh's biography and then, of course, your book before I can speak lucidly about Thompson, and ask the myriad questions I'm certain to have.

I'll can say at this early stage, though, that I find Thompson very interesting, mainly because of what we know of his background, his lifestyle, how he related to others, how others perceived him. Again, I have only a cursory knowledge, at this point. But, in reading the information you've provided here it is obvious that Thompson was not a family man, working man, every man, etc. He was - it seems - a very unusual and disturbed man with the requisite childhood/life preceding 1888 that one might reasonably expect of the Whitechapel murderer. This, obviously, makes us look more closely at Thompson as a possible 'Ripper'.

The last "suspect" I took seriously enough to fully familiarize myself with was "Lechmere". Perhaps even more so than Thompson, the idea of Lechmere as Jack the Ripper was interesting and intriguing. Of course, as many here know, my research into him led me to discount him. And I now view him as an unlikely killer.

I would compare Thompson's poetry to Lechmere's "false" name issue. It's enough make one look more closely, to become intrigued. Scratching the surface, with Lechmere, we find eleven children, a fifty year marriage, a stable, twenty-plus year career with one employer (no mean feat in the Victorian East End), a pensioner who opens a small shop, dies past 70, leaving his family a (for then) tidy estate. Clearly, these things do not make it impossible that he was a serial killer. But the possibility becomes less plausible when one learns that some - shall we say - creative thinking must be applied to the "hows" and "whys" of his actions, not only in Buck's Row and at the inquest, but throughout his life.

As I say, based on what you've presented of Thompson's character and personality, I'm quite anxious to begin my reading.

Thanks.

[Richard Patterson]

Hello, Richard.

First, congratulations on the book. I've read this thread in its entirety it is obvious that you have done a tremendous amount of research. You've provided - I think - invaluable and interesting information on Thompson and his possible connection to the Whitechapel murders. I find that I'm now required to read Walsh's biography and then, of course, your book before I can speak lucidly about Thompson, and ask the myriad questions I'm certain to have.

I'll can say at this early stage, though, that I find Thompson very interesting, mainly because of what we know of his background, his lifestyle, how he related to others, how others perceived him. Again, I have only a cursory knowledge, at this point. But, in reading the information you've provided here it is obvious that Thompson was not a family man, working man, every man, etc. He was - it seems - a very unusual and disturbed man with the requisite childhood/life preceding 1888 that one might reasonably expect of the Whitechapel murderer. This, obviously, makes us look more closely at Thompson as a possible 'Ripper'.

The last "suspect" I took seriously enough to fully familiarize myself with was "Lechmere". Perhaps even more so than Thompson, the idea of Lechmere as Jack the Ripper was interesting and intriguing. Of course, as many here know, my research into him led me to discount him. And I now view him as an unlikely killer.

I would compare Thompson's poetry to Lechmere's "false" name issue. It's enough make one look more closely, to become intrigued. Scratching the surface, with Lechmere, we find eleven children, a fifty year marriage, a stable, twenty-plus year career with one employer (no mean feat in the Victorian East End), a pensioner who opens a small shop, dies past 70, leaving his family a (for then) tidy estate. Clearly, these things do not make it impossible that he was a serial killer. But the possibility becomes less plausible when one learns that some - shall we say - creative thinking must be applied to the "hows" and "whys" of his actions, not only in Buck's Row and at the inquest, but throughout his life.

As I say, based on what you've presented of Thompson's character and personality, I'm quite anxious to begin my reading.

Thanks.

Hi Patrick,

Thanks for taking an interest in Francis Thompson. I like you see merit in Thompson because unlike other suspects, who were either run of the mill murderers or conmen or simply witnesses on their way to work, Thompson is situated far removed from the normalcy that we would even assign to the common criminal. This removal from the affairs of everyday man is to me the type of person we should be studying when it comes to a series of murders also far removed from anything else that society had encountered. The writer G.K Chesterton said of Thompson that he stood outside from the Victorian age and the same can be said of the Ripper murders.

I am happy to answer any questions of course, though it may help you if I restate the conclusions that I have reached so far. I think that he was the murderer but I am happy to have other people prove or disprove it. If I have simply raised his profile so that others investigate, then I have done my part. I do think that he planned the murders beforehand and justified it afterwards. I think that his luck after each successful murder increased his daring and bolstered his belief that he was acting as some sort of agent to a greater divine plan. I also think that Wilfrid Meynell and perhaps a few others also came to the same realization though I cannot unequivocally state when they did. I believe that some knew certainly by after his death and perhaps even sooner. I believe that their was a concerted attempt to rebrand Thompson as the most innocent of men after his death and a cover up. I do not think that this cover up was orchestrated by agencies who controlled large sections of the police or press, so it was not a vast conspiracy of the likes that theorists like to apply to other mysteries. Finally, I do not think that only Joseph Rupp, in 1988, saw Thompson as the person responsible before I did, but that bringing forward Thompson as a suspect, while his popularity was at its height would have been doomed to failure. These are just my thoughts and these observations could never be fully explained on this forum, much of what I have summarized are dealt with in my book.

I recommend that before you read Walsh’s book, or even mine, that you read Everard Meynell’s ‘The life of Francis Thompson’. It is written for a turn of the century Catholic literary audience so many of the terms within it are obscure now and there is strong bias towards Thompson since it was written by the son of Thompson’s editor, benefactor and literary heir. Also the editor, Wilfrid Meynell, had final say over its contents. Yet despite all this it gives a comprehensive account of Thompson. When you read Walsh’s book, you will be surprised how much of what Walsh writes comes from this single book. Here is a link to the book.

https://archive.org/details/lifeoffrancistho00meyn

Of course my website on my book does cover a lot of ground and also my Facebook Thompson Ripper group has a lot of material too which you are welcome to join if you use that social network.

Good luck with it all,
Richard.

[Ausgirl]

That's ok. It's not you. It's me. I must not have explained myself properly here. Win some lose some. You know I have no idea why you think Thompson is a good suspect. You have never liked/agreed with any point I have made. Perhaps you know something I don't. Anyway we make a good team, only I don't know yet which one of us is the fall guy.

Oh don't cry.

I think Thompson is a decent suspect for reasons I would state but Patrick S has just now posted up \a pretty decent summary of I would have said anyway.

I do argue points, where I think you're seriously overstating something, or joining dots in such an obviously forced way that it (as I've said before..) undermines the credibility of the rest of your argument, makes it too easy to poke holes in where there's no real need to include such wispy things at all.

Perhaps I could pat your back for the convincing bits, but I'd rather wait until after I obtain the book.