The Murder of Elizabeth Stride

[Fleetwood Mac]

Swanson's report does specifically state that the man lighting his pipe was on the opposite side of the road to 'the man who threw the woman down'. This was thrashed out on JTRForums and is backed by Abberline's later report. I do not intend to get into another lengthy debate about semantics. The Star and Swanson do conflict on several points.

So Pipeman followed him down the road.

a) If Pipeman is some sort of look out, or even the killer, then why does Schwartz cross the road, on the same side as Pipeman, only for Pipeman to let him pass and then follow him? Seems pointless.

b) If Pipeman is an innocent bystander, then Schwartz crosses the road to the same side as Pipeman, who, once Schwartz has passed him, decides to run off in the same direction. How does Schwartz know this? By his own admission, Schwartz isn't looking back to see what happens to Stride.

Of all the witness statements, this one is unsurpassed in terms of being riddled with holes.

[Stewart P Evans]

Wording...

...
...
The Swanson report is indeed a bit unfortunate, lacking precision in its description:
On crossing to the opposite side of the street, he saw a second man standing, lighting his pipe. The man who threw Stride down called apparently to the man on the opposite side of the road “Lipski“
...

With all due respect, the wording in Swanson's report is not 'lacking precision in its description', nor is it ambigious. It's only when the dodgy Star report is introduced and you get people over-analysing it, engaging in semantics and trying to put their own 'spin' on it that any 'confusion' arises and that confusion is 'manufactured'.

If it is read straightforwardly and with common sense it really does have only one meaning. For we can see that everyone else involved in reading it at the time, Abberline and Home Office, referred to it in exactly the same way. Swanson wrote, 'On crossing to the opposite side of the street [i.e. Schwartz had crossed to the opposite side], he [Schwartz] saw a second man standing lighting his pipe. The man who threw the woman down called out apparently to the man on the opposite side of the road [i.e. the man lighting the pipe who was on the opposite side to the man who threw the woman down] 'Lipski'...'

[Stewart P Evans]

What about...

...
And, like I mentioned before, I cannot see anything in the police version of events that would make Schwartz break into a run anyway.
...

What about - 'Schwartz walked away, but finding that he was followed by the second man, he ran as far as the railway arch but the man did not follow so far'. - Chief Inspector Swanson, and

'Schwartz being a foreigner and unable to speak English became alarmed and ran away. The man whom he saw lighting his pipe also ran in the same direction as himself, but whether this man was running after him or not he could not tell, he might have been alarmed the same as himself and ran away.' - Inspector Abberline.

[Stewart P Evans]

The Hungarian

...
This last point is the only one you bring up that I have reservations about.
- In the article Schwartz is typically referred to as 'the Hungarian'.
- Schwartz did follow the 'first-man' (BS-man) down from the direction of Commercial Rd., so both the BS-man & Schwartz 'intruded' on the scene.
- As the Star's Pipeman=Knifeman is said to have stepped out of the doorway of the Nelson pub, while Schwartz was crossing the road, and rushed up towards the disturbance in the yard, then he was running in the general direction of Schwartz (being off to 'his' right) but directly towards Dutfields Yard. Schwartz, by this time was likely in the middle of the road.
I cannot see why Schwartz would continue south passed this knifeman if the knifeman was running at Schwartz. Surely Schwartz would turn tail and run back up Berner St. away from this knifeman?
The fact that the story still has Schwatrz continuing south towards the junction with Fairclough St. suggests to me that Schwartz anticipated the disturbance in Dutfields Yard was about to get bloody, not that he percieved a threat to himself directly.
Hence, Schwartz broke into a "I don't want to get involved - type" sprint.
And, like I mentioned before, I cannot see anything in the police version of events that would make Schwartz break into a run anyway.
If I have interpreted the events correctly then the 'intruder' referred to in the Star must have been this first-man, BS-man, not Schwartz.
...

The Star extract reads 'Before he [Schwartz] had gone many yards, however, he heard the sound of a quarrel, and turned back to learn what was the matter, but just as he stepped from the kerb a second man came out of the doorway of the public-house a few doors off, and shouting out some sort of warning to the man who was with the woman, rushed forward as if to attack the intruder. The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand...'

In my opinion it seems pretty clear that it is being suggested that the 'man with the knife' was some sort of accomplice of the man attacking the woman and that he was calling out to warn the attacker of Schwartz's presence. Schwartz then ran off as he feared the man with the pipe (knife in the Star vesrion) was after him. In other words the Hungarian (Schwartz) was intruding on the scene of the attacker and his accomplice. I thought that this was the generally accepted scenario, especially as the police report clearly states that the second man (with the pipe) followed Schwartz.

In the Star report the first suspect is referred to variously as 'a man walking as if partially intoxicated', 'the half tipsy man', 'the man who was with the woman' and 'the man with the woman'.

The second man (suspect) is described as 'a second man' and 'the man who came at him with a knife'. Indeed as the report goes on to give the descriptions furnished by Schwartz of the two suspects and states clearly, 'The man who came at him with a knife he also describes, but not in detail' which makes it pretty obvious that earlier the Star report is referring to Schwartz as 'the intruder'.

It is also worth noting that the description of the second man given by the Star is, '...taller than the other, but not so stout, and that his moustaches were red'. Which is another difference to the police report which describes the second man as 'age 35 ht. 5ft. 11in. comp. fresh, hair light brown, moustache brown, dress dark overcoat, old black hard felt hat wide brim, had a clay pipe in his hand.'

[Wickerman]

...The Star report has the second man 'rushing forward as if to attack' Schwartz with 'a knife in his hand', not a pipe.

Good morning Stewart (well, it is in Canada) :-)

This last point is the only one you bring up that I have reservations about.

- In the article Schwartz is typically referred to as 'the Hungarian'.

- Schwartz did follow the 'first-man' (BS-man) down from the direction of Commercial Rd., so both the BS-man & Schwartz 'intruded' on the scene.

- As the Star's Pipeman=Knifeman is said to have stepped out of the doorway of the Nelson pub, while Schwartz was crossing the road, and rushed up towards the disturbance in the yard, then he was running in the general direction of Schwartz (being off to 'his' right) but directly towards Dutfields Yard. Schwartz, by this time was likely in the middle of the road.

I cannot see why Schwartz would continue south passed this knifeman if the knifeman was running at Schwartz. Surely Schwartz would turn tail and run back up Berner St. away from this knifeman?

The fact that the story still has Schwatrz continuing south towards the junction with Fairclough St. suggests to me that Schwartz anticipated the disturbance in Dutfields Yard was about to get bloody, not that he percieved a threat to himself directly.

Hence, Schwartz broke into a "I don't want to get involved - type" sprint.

And, like I mentioned before, I cannot see anything in the police version of events that would make Schwartz break into a run anyway.

If I have interpreted the events correctly then the 'intruder' referred to in the Star must have been this first-man, BS-man, not Schwartz.

My two-penneth.

Best Wishes, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

sweating

Hello Maria.

"Isolated individuals doing what, Lynn, if I might inquire?"

Mostly complaining about the sweating system and complaining of the firm, Maples.

Cheers.
LC

[mariab]

People will excuse me hopefully, but I simply HAD to look this up.

Swanson's report does specifically state that the man lighting his pipe was on the opposite side of the road to 'the man who threw the woman down'. This was thrashed out on JTRForums and is backed by Abberline's later report. I do not intend to get into another lengthy debate about semantics.

Swanson's report does not specifically state that Pipeman was on the board school side. Due to Swanson's rather rushed writing, it's ambiguous.

The Swanson report is indeed a bit unfortunate, lacking precision in its description:
On crossing to the opposite side of the street, he saw a second man standing, lighting his pipe. The man who threw Stride down called apparently to the man on the opposite side of the road “Lipski“

The Abberline report states it completely unambiguously, and corroborates what Mr. Evans said:
There was only one other person to be seen in the street, and that was a man in the opposite side of the road in the act of lighting a pipe.

[mariab]

Isolated individuals doing what, Lynn, if I might inquire?
Lynn, thank you SO much for your dedication and patience in going through such a thick bunch of materials!

[lynn cates]

right

Hello Maria.

"but so far I think that they don't contain any workers' lists. Am I right, Lynn?"

Right, only isolated individuals.

Cheers.
LC

[mariab]

Surely, according to the Echo report, the man whose name the secretary said he couldn't remember was not a member of the Club:
The man pursued escaped, however, and the secretary of the Club cannot remember the name of the man who gave chase, but he is not a member of their body.

Stupid mistake of mine, and many apologies. I actually KNEW this important detail, but I'm currently very tired and about to go to sleep (after working on polishing a long manuscript), with an eye leaking tears. (Not that any of this is a valiant enough excuse.)
Technically Schwartz would have been too new and unimportant to have (yet?) been a full-fledged member of the IWEC in 1888.
It appears suspicious to me that Wess chose to give the Echo an interview while pretending to ignore the name of the witness, as if he was covering for him, while at the same time directing the information leaking to the press. How the mistake of Schwartz supposedly having chased Pipeman came to be, I don't know. It reminds me a bit of the alleged knife in Pipeman's hands in the Star report, both as a possible augmentaion of “heroics“ supposedly displayed by Schwartz.

[Chris]

Well, the Echo mentioned Schwartz anonymously as a member of the IWEC, while William Wess pretended not to know Schwartz' name in this specific newspaper report. Newspaper coverage on Schwartz was very limited.

Surely, according to the Echo report, the man whose name the secretary said he couldn't remember was not a member of the Club:
"The man pursued escaped, however, and the secretary of the Club cannot remember the name of the man who gave chase, but he is not a member of their body."

[mariab]

My point is that Berner Street was full of Jewish immigrants, so the fact that Schwartz was a Jewish immigrant living in Berner Street is really no reason to suppose he was living at the Club. If he had been, I think it would be amazing if the police and newspaper reports hadn't mentioned it.

Well, the Echo mentioned Schwartz anonymously as a member of the IWEC, while William Wess pretended not to know Schwartz' name in this specific newspaper report. Newspaper coverage on Schwartz was very limited.

I'm researching a Schwartz Polish/Hungarian anarchist orator connected to William Wess in 1902-1905 in French spy reports about Whitechapel anarchist activity. The remaining 8 boxes of these materials in the Paris Archives Nationales contain files of anarchists under supervision, listed alphabetically. I've stopped at letter "C“ last time I was in Paris. I'm extremely curious about letters “K“ and “R“ (for Krantz/Rombro), “S“, and “W“. (I do hope that the 8 last boxes to go through DO continue with files of anarchists listed alphabetically. These are uncatalogued materials, so the inventaries aren't specific.)

I've followed up some of your censuses/naturalization finds pertaining to Schwartz, but I'm waiting to finish with the French materials first.

[Chris]

It appears that the IWEC helped newly arrived Jewish immigrants by providing temporary shelter – in the interest of recruiting them for manual jobs and, later, potentially as members. Schwartz stated that he lived on Berner Street before moving to a house on Ellen Street.

My point is that Berner Street was full of Jewish immigrants, so the fact that Schwartz was a Jewish immigrant living in Berner Street is really no reason to suppose he was living at the Club. If he had been, I think it would be amazing if the police and newspaper reports hadn't mentioned it.

[mariab]

I was merely pointing out a tendency.
'Red Demon' and I go back a long way and I have a lot of respect for the work he has done, and is doing. However, he has displayed an increasing fixation on 'Le Grand' that, I feel, sometimes clouds his judgement. But I don't wish to put him off (not that I could) and he is pursuing valid research.

I understand. What personally puzzles me is that Le Grand seems to have been involved with a host of different activities, even with the Parnell saga! It's very hard not to want to research all this. In the end I'll start seing this guy in my sleep. (Le Grand, probably not “Red Demon“!) It's an undeniable fact that my real (currently primeraly editorial, thus a bit boring) work has started suffering, since research is much more “light on one's feet“ as work and more exciting.

I don't think there's any reason to suppose Schwartz and his wife would have been living in some kind of institution, rather than just renting property like all the other immigrant Jews in the area. As far as I know the address they moved to in Ellen Street was just an ordinary house.

It appears that the IWEC helped newly arrived Jewish immigrants by providing temporary shelter – in the interest of recruiting them for manual jobs and, later, potentially as members. Schwartz stated that he lived on Berner Street before moving to a house on Ellen Street. Lynn Cates has been patiently going through 4.000 pages of sweaters' materials provided by Debra Arif, but so far I think that they don't contain any workers' lists. Am I right, Lynn?

[Chris]

Regarding Schwartz, what made me first think he might be affiliated with the club is that he lived on Berner Street until the day of the murder, and the club is the only place I'm aware of that took in young, immigrant Jews.

I don't think there's any reason to suppose Schwartz and his wife would have been living in some kind of institution, rather than just renting property like all the other immigrant Jews in the area. As far as I know the address they moved to in Ellen Street was just an ordinary house.