Eddowes Pawn Ticket/Finances (moved from another thread)

[Bridewell]

1881

Excellent. many thanks Debs!! I`ll bookmark that site, cheers :-)

In the 1881 Census there is a John and Mary Ann Kelly living at 3 Little Paternoster Row. The age is correct for John but three years difference for Mary Ann. She is a charwoman and he`s a dock labourer (although i`m sure he was working for Lander the fruiterer since 1878). Both born in Whitechapel. This is the closest I can find for the couple. What do you think?

Hi Jon & Debs,

In the 1881 census there's also a 23-year-old Mary Kelly "prostitute" living in the District Infirmary of the Whitechapel Union on Bakers Row. She's probably too young to have been John Kelly's partner though.
It's a bit prosaic, but is it not possible that this was the name given by all the street prostitutes whenever they encountered officialdom? If so, perhaps MJK just took it a stage further by using it all the time. That scenario would explain Caroline Maxwell & Maurice Lewis having seen a woman they knew as "Mary Kelly" on the morning of 9th November.

[Robert]

Surely Eddowes is listed as Eddowes?

With the searches, although Ancestry use Free BMD data for stuff before 1916, the search engines aren't the same. If you search Free BMD for John A Smith you get all those registered as John A Smith plus John Alfred Smith, John Alexander Smith etc. With Ancestry you don't get the middle name unless you include it as part of the search term. If you search for John A Smith, all you'll get is "John A Smith." So when only the initial is known, it's best to search for John Smith and then you'll get the lot. Or use Free BMD. Sometimes Free BMD grinds really slow and then Ancestry is a good substitute.

[Debra A]

Excellent. many thanks Debs!! I`ll bookmark that site, cheers :-)

In the 1881 Census there is a John and Mary Ann Kelly living at 3 Little Paternoster Row. The age is correct for John but three years difference for Mary Ann. She is a charwoman and he`s a dock labourer (although i`m sure he was working for Lander the fruiterer since 1878). Both born in Whitechapel. This is the closest I can find for the couple. What do you think?

Hi again, Jon.
Last year, Lynn asked me about this particular couple from Paternoster Row and whether I thought they were John Kelly and Catherine Eddowes. I looked in the Infirmary Regsisters and concluded they were a different couple, is that what you are also saying too?-apologies-I haven't read the whole thread.

I believe Eddowes partner,John Kelly, is listed in the Infirmary records as a market porter and that one of his last entries there was in 1890 with dropsy:

Whitechapel Infirmary
#4535 Mon Feb. 24 1890, John Kelly, age 49, 55 Flower and Dean St, single, market porter, cause of admittance-dropsy, discharged 27 Feb 1890.

There is a little bit about it on this forums thread:

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=12219

[Paddy]

Re Hoofing
Lynn Thanks,
Being a Cockney myself I found Kellys choice of the word strange.

If someone said how did you get back, one could say "on the oof"
But the way he worded it "Hoofed it back" it implied slight haste. There are nuances even with cockney. My lot would probably have said "Shankseys Pony" (walking) Strange all very horse related !

Also re coming back 2 weeks late. There is apple or sprout picking after hops maybe they found a little work? Or when the famer done his final tally they stayed on a bit and partied. We always used to stay on at least a week and visit local towns and have a spend.
We used to do the trip in a lorry with lots of stops on the way. I remember Blackheath and Shooters hill, after that there was lots of trees fields and loads of "are we there yet".

[Debra A]

Hi again, Jon.
Last year, Lynn asked me about this particular couple from Paternoster Row and whether I thought they were John Kelly and Catherine Eddowes. I looked in the Infirmary Regsisters and concluded they were a different couple, is that what you are also saying too?-apologies-I haven't read the whole thread.

I believe Eddowes partner,John Kelly, is listed in the Infirmary records as a market porter and that one of his last entries there was in 1890 with dropsy:

Whitechapel Infirmary
#4535 Mon Feb. 24 1890, John Kelly, age 49, 55 Flower and Dean St, single, market porter, cause of admittance-dropsy, discharged 27 Feb 1890.

There is a little bit about it on this forums thread:
http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=12219

I did find one last entry for John Kelly. He is listed as entering the Whitechapel Infirmary on 27th June 1890 and dying on the 29th of June 1890 from dropsy. His age is given as 47 , single, address 55 Flower and Dean Street and occupation a market porter.

Here's the death in free BMD

Deaths Sep 1890
Kelly John 47 Whitechapel 1c 189

[Debra A]

Hi Jon & Debs,

In the 1881 census there's also a 23-year-old Mary Kelly "prostitute" living in the District Infirmary of the Whitechapel Union on Bakers Row. She's probably too young to have been John Kelly's partner though.
It's a bit prosaic, but is it not possible that this was the name given by all the street prostitutes whenever they encountered officialdom? If so, perhaps MJK just took it a stage further by using it all the time. That scenario would explain Caroline Maxwell & Maurice Lewis having seen a woman they knew as "Mary Kelly" on the morning of 9th November.

Hi Colin,
Also, Kelly has to be among the top ten surnames in Ireland, maybe top five? With such a large population of Irish descent in Whitechapel there is bound to be a lot of people named Kelly and among them a fair few unfortunates, given the conditions in the area at the time?

Hi Robert,
I seem to be having a lot of difficulty with Ancestry lately, full stop. When I put in a name and year of birth +/- 2 years I get a bigger list than when extend the list to +/- 5 years in some cases. It doesn't seem to work the same way it used to a year or so ago.

[Bridewell]

I seem to be having a lot of difficulty with Ancestry lately, full stop. When I put in a name and year of birth +/- 2 years I get a bigger list than when extend the list to +/- 5 years in some cases. It doesn't seem to work the same way it used to a year or so ago.

Hi Debs,

I've noticed that as well. Thought I was doing something wrong, but presumably not.

[Debra A]

Hi Debs,

I've noticed that as well. Thought I was doing something wrong, but presumably not.

Thanks Colin. Hopefully it may be just a blip as more and more records are being added.

[Michael W Richards]

Hello all,

Off the issue of Ancestry for a moment I wonder what can be deduced from her use of a Kelly surname on the ticket. After all, Kate did have Conway's initials tattooed on her arm although there is no evidence, to my knowledge, that they ever married. I believe Ive read one piece that referred to her as being known as "Kate Kelly".

Other choices seems less obvious, but more intriguing. The choice of Jane is perhaps just a random choice, but added to a Dorset Street address, #6, and added to her choice of name to give Hutt, Mary Kelly of Fashion Street, one does find Mary Jane Kelly _6 Dorset Street within those 2 names and addresses used. I find that beyond coincidental given the name of the following victim, assumed to be by the same killer as Kate.

Ive wondered just what information she might have been trying to sell, and to whom,...if thats how she managed to get staggering drunk before 8pm without any money that is traceable.

The pawn ticket reveals that the last time her and John had any money was actually Friday night, not Saturday morning, which makes John Kelly a forgetful fellow at best, he wasnt sure... and it tells us that Kate used aliases for some unknown reason.

Aliases that contain the composite name and address of Mary Jane Kelly of Dorset Street.

Best regards all

[Debra A]

I hope this isn't going too off-topic but I was doing some reading up on something posted by John Guy about John Kelly's first 'marriage' to a Mary Ann Kelly.
Here's an archived message on Mark King's research posted by Dave O

http://www.casebook.org/forum/messages/4921/5410.html

There doesn't appear to be any mention of John Kelly in the details Mark King gives us from the death certificate but an address of 55 Flower and Dean Street is given.

But,to complicate things-While looking through the Whitechapel Infirmary records I came across another Mary Ann Kelly (one time Kelley)also living at 55 Flower Flower and Dean Street in 87 and 88 and she was the widow of a William Kelly, not a John Kelly. Could this be the woman who dies in May 88?

I think this is worth looking further at. I haven't read Mark king's research at all so I'm not sure how he linked Mary Ann and John if not by the death certificate. If anyone can enlighten me? Is it perhaps because of the 1881 census entry at Paternoster Row showing a John and Mary Ann Kelly ? Thanks in advance for any help.

[Robert]

Oh, i don't get a proper list. I get a list not only of those born with the search name, but also of those whose mother's maiden name is the search name even if their surname is different. One gets so tired of the general tendency for search engines to try to take over. I am the searcher, I know what I'm searching for.

[Bridewell]

Oh, i don't get a proper list. I get a list not only of those born with the search name, but also of those whose mother's maiden name is the search name even if their surname is different. One gets so tired of the general tendency for search engines to try to take over. I am the searcher, I know what I'm searching for.

Hi Robert,

I get fed up with it as well, but I find the 'Advanced Search' option sorts out some of the silliness.

[Bridewell]

Just What Did She Know?

Other choices seems less obvious, but more intriguing. The choice of Jane is perhaps just a random choice, but added to a Dorset Street address, #6, and added to her choice of name to give Hutt, Mary Kelly of Fashion Street, one does find Mary Jane Kelly _6 Dorset Street within those 2 names and addresses used. I find that beyond coincidental given the name of the following victim, assumed to be by the same killer as Kate.

Hi Michael,

Interesting thought but, unless it is coincidence, it would mean that Eddowes not only knew the identity of the killer, but also who he was going to target next (or next but one) - which seems unlikely.

[lynn cates]

good luck

Hello Jon. Thanks. Good luck on that.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Shankseys Pony

Hello Paddy. Thanks.

""Shankseys Pony" (walking)" Haven't heard that since my sainted mum died.

Cheers.
LC