Inspector Andrews' Own Words on an American Suspect

[mklhawley]

Greetings all,

In view of Roger Palmer publishing part two of his three part article, it only makes sense that a Tumblety thread follows, and we must start with Stewart Evans’ own research. Stewart posted this article on Casebook (http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=3751&page=3), which he found in 1994. With the publication of two of the three parts of Roger Palmer’s article, you will see why it needs to be addressed again.

AFTER “JACK THE RIPPER.’
A Scotland Yard Detective Looking for Him in America.
Special to The Republic.

MONTREAL. Dec. 20.-Inspector Andrews of Scotland Yard arrived here to-day from Toronto and left to-night for New York. He tried to evade newspaper men, but incautiously revealed his identity at the central office, where he had an interview with Chief of Police Hughes. He refused to answer any questions regarding his mission, but said there were 23 detectives, 2 clerks and 1 inspector employed on the Whitechapel murder cases and that the police were without a jot of evidence upon which to arrest anybody.

"How many men have you working in America?”

“Half a dozen,” he replied; then hesitating, continued: “American detective agencies have offered to find the murderer on salaries and payment of expenses. But we can do that ourselves, you know.”

“Are you one of the half dozen?”

“No. Don’t say anything about that. I meant detective agencies.”

“But what are you here for?”

“I had rather not say just at present.”

Ten days ago Andrews brought Roland Gideon and Israel Barnet, charged with helping wreck the Central Bank of Toronto, to this country from England, and since his arrival he has receive orders from England which will keep him in America for some time. It was announced at police headquarters to-day that Andrews has a commission in connection with two other Scotland Yard men to find the murderer in America. His inaction for so long a time, and the fact that a man suspected of knowing considerable about the murders left England for this side three weeks ago, makes the London police believe “Jack” has left that country for this.


Now, these are Inspector Andrews own words and not just a reporter’s take on it. Why would he send half a dozen men across the Altantic Ocean for merely a “jumping bail from a gross indecency charge” issue? Also, notice that Andrews has a commission to find JTR in America, specifically a man that fits the bill for Francis Tumblety.

Sincerely,

Mike

[Simon Wood]

Hi Mike,

Since I wrote "Smoke and Mirrors" [Ripperologist #106] the missing days in Inspector Andrews' North American itinerary have been successfully accounted for. As I was not the person who made the discovery the information is not within my gift to reveal, but in the meantime I can assure you that while in North America Inspector Walter Andrews did not get any closer than three hundred miles to New York.

Superintendent John Shore crossed the Atlantic, arriving in New York just four days after Tumblety, but he was just passing through on far more urgent business.

Although intriguing and compelling, the Tumblety as Ripper trope is a dud.

Regards,

Simon

[mklhawley]

Hi Simon,

It sounds like Roger Palmer's part three will be just up your alley, but this is actually skirting my issue on this thread. At the moment, Andrews making it to New York is besides the point I am attempting to make. Notice in Andrews' own words that the ripper investigation continues in America with a big investment in manpower, and notice the clear reference to Francis Tumblety. Again, this article is not "a misprint" or some reporter's theories, it is Inspector Andersons' own comments. With the information provided in Palmer's article, Tumblety was a serious JTR suspect in the eyes of Scotland Yard.

Now, there is the possibility of an internal cognitive battle between assimilation and accommodation when new information comes to light, such as the revelations in Palmer's article. That's expected, but for someone to merely fluff this article off as bad reporting just does not make sense.

Sincerely,

Mike

[mklhawley]

Notice this comment from the above article:

"...the fact that a man suspected of knowing considerable about the murders left England for this side three weeks ago, makes the London police believe “Jack” has left that country for this."

It seems quite convincing that this "fact" of Tumblety knowing considerable about the murders came from a Scotland Yard official. That's an unusual bit of information for someone to merely make up, and besides, the reporter just spoke with Scotland Yard officials. Could this be another one of the reasons why they considered him a suspect? In the Brooklyn Citizen (Nov 23, 1888) presented by Roger Palmer in his article, it states, "Since his incarceration in prison he has boasted of how he had succeeded in baffling the police." This seems to confirm that Tumblety spoke quite a bit while in jail.

By the way, if the bottom part of the phrase is true, "...makes the London police believe “Jack” has left that country for this", I'm sure the fact that the Whitechapel murders stopped must have further convinced some Scotland Yard officials they were correct.

Sincerely,

Mike

[Tom_Wescott]

Although intriguing and compelling, the Tumblety as Ripper trope is a dud.

Hi Simon. I'm a great admirer of your 'Smoke and Mirrors' piece and it left me jaw-dropped and convinced that there had been no American hunt at all for Tumblety. Your approach in presenting the article by literally letting the reports speak for themselves was a great influence in how I chose to approach my Le Grand article, although you were far more successful in it than my wordy self. However, RJ's new article was so compelling and persuasive that I'm back on the fence. LOL. I'm curious if it made you second-guess any of your conclusions? Obviously, we'll have to wait to see what RJ has to say about the very important point you bring up regarding Andrews not going to New York, but aside from that, were you swayed by anything he had to write?

Mike and Simon,

Would you agree or disagree that, putting everything else aside - all the newspaper reports, etc. - the Littlechild letter by itself is definitive proof that Tumblety was a Ripper suspect?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom,

As I am not yet an Examiner subscriber I have only read Part One of RJP's article, so it's impossible to say if he has caused me to revise any of my earlier conclusions. But as I told Mike in an earlier post, important information missing from my article has now been unearthed [not by me, I hasten to add], so unless RJP is holding five Kings in his hand I feel he will be hard pushed to beat the four Aces which now leave no doubt that Tumblety was never a person of Ripperological interest to Inspectors Andrews and Jarvis, Superintendent Shore, ex-Superintendent Thomson and the whole gallimaufry of official and unofficial detectives swarming around North America at the time on behalf of Scotland Yard and The Times.

In the light of what we now know of the Tumblety affair, the Littlechild reference was merely a nod to Sims in the direction of a very clever piece of legerdemain backed up by a cleverly orchestrated blitzkrieg of US press articles. As we know, Sims didn't buy Tumblety for a moment, and we would be wise to follow his lead.

Dazzle and confuse.

Regards,

Simon

[mklhawley]

Greetings all,

Here is a discovery of Mike Covell, which is an article from the Eastern Morning News, January 2nd, 1889, which directly involves the article Stewart discovered. Notice what the last sentence states, "Irish Nationalists pretend that the inspector is hunting up certain evidence to be given before the Parnell Commission."

Why would Irish Nationalists pretend that the inspector is hunting up certain evidence with the Parnell Commission? What is being hidden?

Sincerely,

Mike

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Mike,

What would you say is the significance of this? This is the first time I've seen this article.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mklhawley]

Hi Mike,

What would you say is the significance of this? This is the first time I've seen this article.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

Notice a comment made by Tim Riordan on February 09, 2009, referring to the above two articles: "Both articles are copies of a New York World Cable Service dispatch which was sent out on December 21st by their Montreal reporter. Although that article states that Andrews was leaving Montreal for New York, in fact he was on his way to Halifax where on the 24th he sailed for Liverpool on the SS Peruvian. There has been considerable confusion about what Andrews said or did not say. The New York World story said that the Montreal police reported Andrews was looking into the Whitechapel case, but he never said that. What he specifically said was that while in Toronto, he collected important evidence concerning the Parnell case, which was probably why he went to Canada in the first place.”

Regardless of the New York World story, re-read the above articles and you’ll see Andrews certainly did state he was looking into the Whitechapel case:

"How many men have you working in America?” “Half a dozen,” he replied; then hesitating, continued: “American detective agencies have offered to find the murderer on salaries and payment of expenses. But we can do that ourselves, you know.” " Tim is wrong in this instance.

Now, we are faced with equal and opposing evidence (and not surprisingly opposing ripperologists), Andrews stated he came over to Canada because of the Whitechapel case and he apparently he stated came to Canada because of The Times “Parnell Commission”. This leads back to the last sentence, "Irish Nationalists pretend that the inspector is hunting up certain evidence to be given before the Parnell Commission." We know that Scotland Yard was never entirely forthright with the press, and this sentence seems to indicate Andrews may not have been entirely forthright when he spoke about the Parnell Commission.

Roger Palmer points out in his article that at the same time Anderson was negotiating with Canada to send his man to America (Nov. 19-27) he was also in contact with American Chief’s of Police specifically in regard to Francis Tumblety. Palmer’s part three is all about this, so it should be quite the interesting piece.

Sincerely,

Mike