New Tumblety Articles

[mklhawley]

My research indicates that £500 was equivalent to $2,435 in 1888.

Hi Siobhan and Heinrich,

The New York Tribune (Dec 4, 1888) reported the bail to be 500 pounds, while most other US newspapers reported $1,500. According to Joe Chetcuti and Tim Riordan, the bail was 300 pounds, which means the US papers reporting $1,500 was more accurate than the New York Tribune's report.

Sincerely,

Mike

[Siobhan Patricia Mulcahy]

Thanks for that. Yea, I agree the police were taking a very big interest in Tumblety for someone who was only officially accused of homosexual acts. But as you said on another thread, in an interview the following year Tumblety admitted he was a suspect (once safely back in the US). At least the newspapers got that part correct even if the bail money (amount in translation) appears to be incorrect.

[mklhawley]

Thank you Heinrich.

Hi Archaic. Joseph R. Conlin, author of The American Past, wrote,

'...during the nineteenth century -the Victorian Era - respectable middle-class Americans did not mention sex in polite conversation except in euphemisms and they condemned frank literature as "scandalous," not to be read by decent people...'

It sounds like that was how things were done even in the US.

Mike

[Heinrich]

I'm sorry Siobhan, I forgot to answer your question. £500 was equivalent to $1,500 in 1888.

My research indicates that £500 was equivalent to $2,435 in 1888.

[Archaic]

Hi Mike, thanks for the articles.

Did you notice how discreetly the NY World describes the charge brought against Tumblety? "The police, being unable to procure the necessary evidence against him in connection therewith decided to hold him for trial for another offense against a statute which was passed shortly after the publication in the Pall Mall Gazette of “The Maiden Tribute,” and as a direct consequence thereof Dr. Tumblety was committed for trial and liberated on bail, two gentlemen coming forward to act as bondsmen in the amount of $1,500." They don't name the statute in question at all, merely state that said statute was passed "shortly after the publication" of Stead's famous article.

I wonder if the newspaper was afraid of shocking readers by hinting at homosexuality, or of being sued by Tumblety, or both? They didn't even make some oblique reference to "gross indecency".

Did they just assume that their more sophisticated readers would know that since they were talking about Dr T. they weren't referring to some form of female prostitution?

Best regards,
Archaic

[mklhawley]

I'm sorry Siobhan, I forgot to answer your question. £500 was equivalent to $1,500 in 1888.

Sincerely,
Mike

[mklhawley]

Well done for getting all the material into one post and for bringing it to our attention. Did you notice that there is a discrepancy over the amount of bail money in one of the newspaper articles? Or was £500 (mentioned in one report) the equivalent of $1,500 (mentioned in two) in 1888. Perhaps accuracy in reporting was not a priority even then! I thought only modern day newspapers made it up as they went along. Interesting that the "hatred of women" and "anatomical specimens" are also mentioned even though Dunham has been discedited by most since then.

Hi Siobhan,

It's nice to hear from you. Another thing that I've noticed is, if reported correctly, this article hints at how Scotland Yard knew Tumblety jumped bail. Notice the sentence:

Dr. Twomblety was missed from his usual haunts in London last week, and was tracked to Havre, France.

If true, Scotland Yard was tailing him, most likely on the West End, Birmingham, and Liverpool (niece lived there and this was his usual England point of entry and departure). He was even 'tracked to Havre, France'. It seems implausible that they would care so much about a man merely enjoying the homosexual subculture in the West End (gross indecency charge) that they would waste the manpower and resources (and funding) determining he was not at 'his usual haunts' and then discovering he made it to France from Dover (the opposite coast from Liverpool - Tricky Tumblety). Keep in mind, if they really cared less about Tumblety, jumping bail would only have been known AT THE TIME of the trial, which was set for early December -but they knew he fled earlier.

...or the papers and Canadian authorities got it right that he was a suspect and Tumblety knew it, just as he admitted. The US authorities were not even surprised the newspapers were reporting his suspect status.

[Siobhan Patricia Mulcahy]

Greetings all,

I don’t recall seeing these first two Tumblety articles. They both have comments I had not heard. I added all of the other New York Newspaper articles on the same event, including the New York World article which came out the day prior to Tumblety’s return to NYC.
[/I] Sincerely,
Mike

Well done for getting all the material into one post and for bringing it to our attention. Did you notice that there is a discrepancy over the amount of bail money in one of the newspaper articles? Or was £500 (mentioned in one report) the equivalent of $1,500 (mentioned in two) in 1888. Perhaps accuracy in reporting was not a priority even then! I thought only modern day newspapers made it up as they went along. Interesting that the "hatred of women" and "anatomical specimens" are also mentioned even though Dunham has been discedited by most since then.

[mklhawley]

Greetings all,

I don’t recall seeing these first two Tumblety articles. They both have comments I had not heard. I added all of the other New York Newspaper articles on the same event, including the New York World article which came out the day prior to Tumblety’s return to NYC. Interestingly, The Evening World is dated one day earlier than the others. When it mentions Tumblety’s anatomical museum collection, the reporter claims it is one of the reasons ‘which led some of THEM to believe’ –a reference most likely to those across the Atlantic. I do not recall the Colonel Dunham interview suggesting that. The first reason was certainly a reason known by them.

The Evening World, December 3, 1888
DR. TWOMBLETY IN TOWN.
He Arrives on La Bretagne, and Is Traced to Tenth Street.
Dr. Francis Twomblety, the eccentric American physician who was arrested in London suspected of the Whitechapel murders, arrived on the French steamship La Bretagne yesterday. He was shadowed to a boarding-house in West Tenth street by two of Inspector Byrnes’s detectives. Dr. Twomblety was missed from his usual haunts in London last week, and was tracked to Havre, France. It was supposed that he had taken passage on La Bretagne, which sailed Nov. 24, and Inspector Byrnes had been watching for his coming on that vessel. The police refuse to make known his whereabouts further than to locate him in Tenth street. He will be kept under strict surveillance while here. Inspector Byrnes says that, although Dr. Twomblety is a fugitive from Justice, being under $1,500 for a violation of the “Maiden Tribute” Act of Parliament, passed after the Pall Mall Gazette exposures, he cannot be arrested here. Men who were well acquainted with Twomblety during his life in this city and in Brooklyn say that they did not know by what right he assumed the title M.D. Reasons which led some of them to believe that Twomblety is the fiend who so successfully eluded the London police are that the “Doctor” had an inveterate hatred for women and kept an anatomical museum in which portions of human bodies similar to those cut from the Whitechapel victims predominated. The London police are anxiously searching for samples of his handwriting to compare with that of “Jack the Ripper.”

The Sun, December 4, 1888
TWOMBLETY ARRIVES.
Came Away from London in a Hurry Without His Luggage.
“Dr.” Francis Tumblety or Twomblety, who was arrested in London on suspicion of knowing something about the horrible Whitechapel murders, but against whom no direct proof could be found and who was held in $1,500 bail on a charge of dealing in gross literature, arrived in this city on Sunday on the French line steamer La Bretagne. He disappeared from London shortly after his release on bail and nothing more was heard of him until news arrived from Havre that he had sailed from there for this country. Inspector Byrnes said yesterday that he knew of Tumblety’s expected arrival in this city a week ago and had determined to make sure that his information was correct by having men who knew him on the wharf when the steamer arrived. Tumblety was short enough of luggage to make it appear that his departure from the other side was hurried. He was among the first to leave the steamer, and he went direct to a house in Tenth street just west of Third avenue, where furnished rooms are let. He will probably be an object of curiosity to the police for some time, but Inspector Byrnes said that no one has any right to bother him for what occurred across the ocean, unless the Government becomes interested and issues a warrant for his detention. He is a tall fellow, with a sweeping dark moustache, and used to sell salve, and parade on Broadway with a valet and two greyhounds.



New York World, December 2, 1888

TUMBLETY IS MISSING
The American Charlatan Suspected of the Whitechapel Murders Skips from London
HE WAS LAST SEEN AT HAVRE
Is He On His Way Home Over the Ocean to New York?
HE HAD A BITTER HATRED OF WOMEN

London, Dec. 1. The last seen of Dr. Tumblety was at Havre, and it is taken for granted that he has sailed for New York. It will be remembered that the doctor, who is known in this country for his eccentricities, was arrested some time ago in London on suspicion of being concerned in the perpetration of the Whitechapel murders. The police, being unable to procure the necessary evidence against him in connection therewith decided to hold him for trial for another offense against a statute which was passed shortly after the publication in the Pall Mall Gazette of “The Maiden Tribute,” and as a direct consequence thereof Dr. Tumblety was committed for trial and liberated on bail, two gentlemen coming forward to act as bondsmen in the amount of $1,500. On being hunted by the police today, they asserted that they had only known the doctor for a few days previous to his arrest.

The New York Tribune, December 04, 1888. (http://www.casebook.org/press_report.../18881204.html)

DR. TUMBLETY ARRIVES IN NEW-YORK.
DETECTIVES KEEPING THEIR EYE ON HIM-HIS ARREST IN LONDON HAS EXCITED PEOPLE HERE SOMEWHAT.
Doctor Francis Tumblety, or, as is known in England, Twomblety, is in New-York. He was arrested on suspicion of being implicated in the Whitechapel butcheries. When the French steamer La Bretagne arrived at her pier on Sunday, two of Inspector Byrnes’s men were in waiting there, and followed the large, dignified-looking man, who was driven in a cab by the shortest way to Mrs. McNamara’s boarding house, No. 79 East Tenth-st.
Inspector Byrnes promptly received reports from his men regarding the new arrival, and ordered his subordinates quietly to keep an eye on the doctor. He has been charge with a fondness for collecting anatomical specimens, and this has made his connection with the Whitechapel atrocities appear probable. It is a fact that after he was discharged for lack of evidence from the accusation of being implicated in the Whitechapel horrors he was re-arrested in London for a violation of the “Maiden Tribute” act, and released under 500 pounds bail. He “jumped” his bail and came to America.
A Tribune reporter called at Mrs. McNamara’s house early yesterday afternoon. Mrs. McNamara came to the door and said that the doctor had arrived the night before, but had gone out. When another call was made, however, she positively declared that Dr. Tumblety had not been there at all for over six months. The neighborhood of Tenth-st. and fourth-ave. was in a state of excitement all day yesterday. Inspector Byrnes’s men had been seen about there, and the most startling stories about the horrible London crimes were abroad. It was supposed in the neighborhood that the doctor had left the house, but that the American detectives at least were watching him.

The New York world, Dec 4, 1888
http://www.casebook.org/press_report.../18881204.html

The New York Herald, Dec 4, 1888
http://www.casebook.org/press_report...ld/881204.html

The New York Times, Dec 4, 1888
http://www.casebook.org/press_report...nyt881204.html

Sincerely,
Mike