Critiquing arguments against Tumblety, or Francis the Ripper

[Tom_Wescott]

I would agree that, AP, although I'm not sure as to how arsed he can be or not. I know you can be quite the arse, though. j/k

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Cap'n Jack]

Then I'd suggest to you, Tom, that SPE is the most superbly equipped human being on this planet to write a new Tumblety volume but he can't be arsed either.

[Tom_Wescott]

However, it has been the somewhat acrimonious situation that has developed in very recent years that concerns me, where others who have read your volume regard what is written there as the final word on Tumblety; and resist any attempts to digest or progress the wealth of new information that we have been flooded with in these recent years.

Speaking as a Tumbelty 'outsider', let me say that I don't know of anyone who has 'resisted' the new information in favor of the old, but I can say that because there has been literally and endless stream of information, from every corner, coming in about Tumblety, and scattered in thread after thread, or buried in posts, it's extremely difficult to follow or understand unless you make a focused study of it. When I jump in one of the overlong threads, I find I don't understand what I'm reading so it's easier just not to follow along.

I guess what I'm saying is that a new volume on Tumblety is long overdue. The same might interesting for Cutbush, but it seems AP can't be arsed.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Chadwick]

Thanks Chadwick, but the original spelling mistake was Banana's, for he wanted to take a long jump and he mistakenly thought he could do so off a 'peer'.
I know my 'peers'; why only yesterday I plucked a fine one off a tree.

...and you naturally slipped on Banana's mistake? Stepping in about this was just too a - peeling.

Okay, I'll bow out and leave the discussion to those who are far more informed. I'm finding it fascinating and informative. Thanks to all!

Best,
~Chadwick

[Cap'n Jack]

Thanks Chadwick, but the original spelling mistake was Banana's, for he wanted to take a long jump and he mistakenly thought he could do so off a 'peer'.
I know my 'peers'; why only yesterday I plucked a fine one off a tree.

[Chadwick]

No mike, you are in dire need of a peer, and when you find one, do me a favour, jump off the end. I can't stand snobs.

Not to get in the middle of this happy discussion, but I have been reading along on these interesting posts.

Cap'n Jack, you keep spelling "peer", which either means an equal or a member of the realm. However, you actually mean the word "Pier", which is a wooden extention into a body of water.

Just to help you out...

Best
~Chadwick

[Simon Wood]

Hi Chris,

A barge named WC Streeter, eh? Nice find. Thank you.

All I can tell you for sure at the moment is—

The Captain WC Streeter buried in Rochester was a locksmith with Sargent & Greenleaf and member of the city's Microscopical Society, although in the early 1870s he was briefly listed in the city directory as a boatman.

WC Streeter's daughter Sarah died in the early 1880s, and his wife Mary died in 1885. So if we are talking about the same person then the NY World reporter finding "the Captain in his snug cabin surrounded by his wife, daughter, and son" cannot be true.

If WC Streeter was in truth Ben Streeter, one of Rochester's most infamous sons, then he would have been 76 years old at the time of the NY World interview, but after a few arrests had given up the canal barge business in the mid 1860s and become a relic of the past. He died in 1904 at the age of 92 with two wives and eleven children, the youngest of whom was 10 years old.

The plot thickens.

Regards,

Simon

[Cap'n Jack]

No Stewart, the bumbling old drunk did not go to Liverpool, for he travels not well across borders.
Without let, argument or common hindrance, I am in perfect agreement with your view of the sources available to you when you researched and wrote the Tumblety volume. I was writing the Myth at about the same time period, so I am acutely aware of the situation regarding sources then, and now.
However, it has been the somewhat acrimonious situation that has developed in very recent years that concerns me, where others who have read your volume regard what is written there as the final word on Tumblety; and resist any attempts to digest or progress the wealth of new information that we have been flooded with in these recent years.
Would it be unfair to suggest that you have also battled your corner in this regard? That you have resisted new information in favour of old?
Yes, perhaps that would be unfair, so I won't ask you.
Regardless of your own attititudes to this sad little affair - which are always fair and laudable - what seems to happen, or be happening, is that ardent followers of your very original work see any criticism of your Tumblety work as a direct criticism against you, rather than the volume itself.
This is a parlous situation that can only get worse unless these people begin to react and register to the new information that is now available, as one would expect in such a situation.
But they don't... they hammer away at the old myths and legends surrounding Tumblety, and they wave your book as justification for their strange and totally illogical behaviour.
I'm just glad I don't have groupies... man, they can drag you down.

[mklhawley]

'it seems clear to me that Scotland Yard certainly did consider Tumblety as a woman hater.'

Your deductive powers leave me agape in awe.
It was Littlechild who claimed Tumblety was a 'woman hater'; Scotland Yard don't appear to have ever heard of the moustachiod one.
Please take into account that Littlechild also related - in the same letter - the completely unfounded claim that Harry Thaw had whipped a boy in a London Hotel room.
He propagated the fantasy because Pinkerton told him to.
Where does that leave you Miss Marple?

Hey, Miss Marple was old and wise, but I still prefer banana. I don't think it was confirmed the Dunham interview predated the letter, just that there still is a chance. Before I fall off the peer, I'm sticking to my guns.

Mike

[Cap'n Jack]

'it seems clear to me that Scotland Yard certainly did consider Tumblety as a woman hater.'

Your deductive powers leave me agape in awe.
It was Littlechild who claimed Tumblety was a 'woman hater'; Scotland Yard don't appear to have ever heard of the moustachiod one.
Please take into account that Littlechild also related - in the same letter - the completely unfounded claim that Harry Thaw had whipped a boy in a London Hotel room.
He propagated the fantasy because Pinkerton told him to.
Where does that leave you Miss Marple?

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Chris G,

Your latest post seems to have disappeared.

Regards,

Simon

Yes it did. I deleted the post rather than appear foolish but I can rephrase it. Evidently there was a barge known as the "W. C. Streeter" -- it's shown on this pdf from the Buffalo Evening Courier & Republic from July 7 1865 -- see list at bottom of page of barges coming through the city in "the 24 hours hours ending last evening." Maybe "W. C. Streeter" was the name of Ben Streeter's barge, or else possibly W. C. Streeter really was a bargeman and not a locksmith?

Chris

[mklhawley]

Point well taken Tim.

[timothy]

Western Druggist

So, in view of the December Western Druggist article (commenting upon Tumblety being a woman-hater) predating the Dunham interview plus the connotation of woman-hater meaning just that (Littlechild letter), it seems clear to me that Scotland Yard certainly did consider Tumblety as a woman hater.

Mike

Mike,

Before you read too much into this reference please note that the same issue that has the Tumblety item also has letters dated December 6 and December 12, welll after the publication of Dunham's story.

Best,

Tim

[Simon Wood]

Hi Chris G,

Your latest post seems to have disappeared.

Regards,

Simon

[Simon Wood]

Hi Stewart,

Captain WC Streeter wasn't a bargee [for want of a better word]. There was a famous Ben Streeter who was a Rochester bargee, but he's another story altogether. WC Streeter's captaincy came from his service in the army; it had nothing to do with matters nautical. He was living in Vermont in the 1840s, where his stock in trade was locksmithing. There was a brief episode of boatwork when he first arrived in 1870 Rochester, but he soon went to work for a famous lock company.

I am in the process of assembling Streeter's origins, marriage, children, army service and later years, and will report back when it's done and dusted.

It's a mystery. I certainly don't pretend to understand it

Regards,

Simon