"I am a British Subject."

[Scott Nelson]

This is from Joe.



The two affidavits that will appear in the Dec 2015 issue of the Whitechapel Society Journal were 'sworn to' by a police detective and his supervisor. Both men were involved in Tumblety's 1865 arrest. There were three other affidavits which were recently found by David Barrat, and here is one of them. It was made before a U.S. Commissioner "in and for the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Missouri."




My name is John J. Outley, age fifty-two years, occupation merchant, residence Miami Street, corner Jefferson, St. Louis. I have resided in St. Louis during the last twenty-eight years. I formed the acquaintance of Dr. Francis Tumblety in the latter part of the month of January year 1865.






He had arrived in St. Louis a few weeks prior to the time I had become acquainted with him, and commenced practicing as a physician...I was at the doctor's office every two or three days, and had excellent opportunities of observing the extent of his practice.






There seemed to be a continuous throng of patients to his office. Every time that I called at his office there would be a number of patients in waiting. Curiosity led me to inquire into the extent of his practice, and from persons in his employ, his secretary, Mr. Wilson, and others, I learnt that he was making over two hundred dollars a day.






His business appeared to increase up to the time of his arrest. During a residence of twenty-eight years in St. Louis, I don't remember of ever having seen or heard of any physician in St. Louis who had met with such extraordinary success as Dr. Tumblety. His arrest in the month of May following a great deal of excitement in the city, the general impression being that he had committed some terrible crime.






My business calling me to New York some three weeks afterwards, I stopped on the way at Washington, and there met Dr. Tumblety. He looked emaciated, pale, and careworn. He looked to be a wreck of his former self. He complained to me of the treatment he had received and asked me what the people of St. Louis thought of it. I informed him of the general suspicion created in their minds by the arrest.






I have never seen Dr. Tumblety since, until with the last week, when I learned of his return to St. Louis and called to see him.






JOHN J. OUTLEY






30 May 1873





Outley spoke of Tumblety's employee, Mr. Wilson. This most likely was Oregon Wilson, the same man who was mentioned in an 1865 report to the Assistant Secretary of War, Charles Dana. The report identified Oregon Wilson as both an "artist" and one of Tumblety's principal associates in St. Louis.

[Robert]

The following is from Joe.







I'm sorry about the final few paragraphs in my last post. I didn't expect the sentence lines in those paragraphs to end up squished together like that. I won't use "bold type" anymore, since that probably was the cause of the problem.







The paperwork was found by David Barrat in the Foreign Office files of the National Archives. Everything was indexed with the "FO" prefix. It looks like the Foreign Office simply stored the paperwork of a civil matter involving one of its citizens and the U.S. Government. Tumblety's claim was eventually ruled upon by a Claims Commission that was set up by the 1871 Treaty of Washington.







David Barrat explains more thoroughly:







The files in which I found the letters comprise part of a series of Foreign Office files at the National Archives containing correspondence over a number of years relating to United States matters (including letters written directly by Tumblety to British foreign secretaries) and part of a series of files comprising about 24 volumes entitled "Claims Commission".





It's definitely not from a cache of Tumblety related papers and certainly has nothing to do with Jack the Ripper. All of the letters I found were in their original files up to 1876. There may even be more waiting to be found. I looked long and hard through many files but it's by no means impossible that I missed some, although the sequence seems to be mostly complete. Having said that, the correspondence certainly contains references to letters written by Tumblety to other government departments, such as the Treasury, but I wasn't able to locate them and they may be there for someone else to find.

[Pcdunn]

Tumblety's inflated sense of his own importance and self-worth comes across very well in his letters.

[mklhawley]

From Joe Chetcuti:


Once he was released from the Old Capitol Prison, Tumblety went to the Kirkwood House in Washington, D.C. From there, he wrote a letter expressing his innocence. Tumblety mailed out plenty of copies of his letter, and it was printed in various newspapers throughout the U.S.

But there were two additional letters that he wrote from Washington which were not publicly printed. They were both mailed to Sir Frederic Bruce. One was sent on June 1, 1865 and the other on June 6, 1865. In the second letter, Tumblety lamented over how his business "has been ruined". As for Tumblety's June 1st letter, he wrote:

When under arrest I was not able to defend myself against the wild storm of denunciation that was sweeping over the whole country. The Press and Telegraph, the Pulpit, and the Rostrum were ringing with denunciations. I firmly believe that all this fierce and unreasonable calumny was organized or concocted by some (directing?) of the govt. with the deliberate purpose to insult, humiliate, & ruin my character.

The following February, Tumblety wrote to Sir Frederic Bruce again. Tumblety wanted the British Minister to help him reach a financial settlement with the U.S. Government. Tumblety claimed he can "conscientiously aver a loss of $100,000" from his St. Louis arrest and from his ordeal in the Old Capitol Prison.
But Sir Frederic Bruce didn't buy into any of this, and he practically ignored the message.
Tumblety was furious over this neglect. He angrily wrote this following letter on February 25, 1866 and mailed it to T. J. H. Thurlow, who held the position of "2nd Secretary to the Legation" in Washington.



Cincinnati

February 25, 1866
Sir,
An application made three weeks ago to Sir Frederic Bruce in respect of my claim for redress for personal and pecuniary suffering at the hands of the American Secretary of War, has up to this time remained unanswered.
Am I to conclude that the personal liberty & property of a British subject are trifles unworthy of the consideration of H. M. Minister in Washington, for if it is so the sooner my fellow countrymen in the U.S. of America are fully cognizant of their protection, the better, for in that case, they may conclude that it is useless as well as inconvenient for them to cherish an allegiance so utterly worthless.
Will you please advise me, as in such case I shall take measures to present my case to the people of England and the Home Govt.
I remain sir,
(Signed Francis Tumblety)

FOREIGN OFFICE NOTE
In reply, repeated that he must submit his case thro' HM's Consul at St. Louis who alone is competent to judge whether his estimate of his sustained losses is reasonable or excessive. Add Sir Fck's belief that U.S.G. at this moment would not embrace this claim with favour.

(In a few days, we'll post the exact location in the National Archives where the documents were found by David Barrat.)

[Pcdunn]

He was born in Ireland and came over on a famine ship when he was a teenager, so I believe he was.

Mike

Very interesting. Thank you.

[mklhawley]

Was Tumblety really a British subject, or was it some of his con-man talk?

He was born in Ireland and came over on a famine ship when he was a teenager, so I believe he was.

Mike

[Pcdunn]

Was Tumblety really a British subject, or was it some of his con-man talk?

[mklhawley]

Interesting that Tumblety passes himself off as an M.D. in his signature.

c.d.

Hi c.d,

He always did and it's even on his family gravestone.

Mike

[c.d.]

Interesting that Tumblety passes himself off as an M.D. in his signature.

c.d.

[Robert]

Carroll Prison


May 30, 1865


Sir Frederic Bruce,

I am a British Subject. I have been kidnapped in St. Louis, MO, on the fifth of this month and I have had no trial. Judge Holt sent my discharge to the Sec. of War to sign and he has neglected it.

Will you see that I get justice?

Respectfully yours,

(Signed F. Tumblety M.D.)

p.s. Before I left St. Louis the Chief of Police received a despatch from the Sec. of War stating that he had no charges against me but would like to see me. I am here three weeks and have not seen him yet.

(Signed F.T. M.D.)



The following is from Joe Chetcuti.

Tumblety was released from jail the next day, May 31st. The possibility arises that Sir Frederic Bruce received Tumblety's letter and then acted upon it.

Sir Frederic died in 1867, but the letter that had been sent to him from Tumblety's jail cell was preserved.

The letter made its way into the hands of Sir Edward Thornton. On June 7, 1873 Thornton informed Lord Granville:

"It does not appear that (Tumblety) made any communication to Her Majesty's Legation until the 30th of that month (May 1865) as shown by a letter of that date to Sir Frederic Bruce, copy of which is enclosed. It is possible that his release on the following day was due to a verbal application made to Mr. Seward by Sir F. Bruce."

[lynn cates]

kudos

Hello Mike. Kudos.

Cheers.
LC

[mklhawley]

Curious to your point, though, Howard, if Sir Frederick Bruce's files would make it to Scotland Yard.

Sincerely,

Mike

[mklhawley]

Howard,

You and I (Jonathan, Chris, and anyone else) will be enjoying a few fine lagers in Baltimore discussing this!

Mike

[Howard Brown]

Mike:

A cache that size suggests the 'dossier' that Littlechild refers to in the letter to Sims.

[jmenges]

Great news! Send along my congrats on the find, I can't wait to read them. This period of Tumblety's history has long been my personal favorite to ponder.


JM