Was Stride Really a JtR Victim?

[lynn cates]

one more down

Hello Jon. Thanks.

Cute. So I suppose Mae West can be crossed off the list?

Cheers.
LC

[Observer]

I'd suggest someone throw you one, before those conspiracy theories sink without trace.

[Colin Roberts]

Eddowes was known at the Mile End Ward, ...

Such was the claim of a single tabloid, Observer.

As I have already indicated, the tabloid failed to mention the identity of the Casual Ward superintendent in whom Eddowes allegedly confided; and no such person was called to testify at the Eddowes inquest.

And I seriously doubt that a casual ward superintendent would willingly concede that he had regularly admitted a casual pauper that had no claim to settlement within the Poor Law constituency that owned and operated the facility, i.e. the Hamlet of Mile End Old Town.

The notion that Eddowes believed that she knew the identity of the 'Whitechapel Fiend' needs to be scrapped, as it is surely mythical!

Never heard of this, who would issue the ticket?

The casual wards in various other towns.

As I said the tickets in question are a long shot.

I believe that Observer has confused his recollections of something that he may have read regarding the so-called 'way-ticket'.

http://books.google.com/books?id=QLQOAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA44&lpg=PA44&dq=way+ticket+casual+ward&source=bl&ots=gNPIKWk1NO&sig=P2hrvZIhIGbEWlTIJTOhXv6eD-M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UP6-UZLYM46K9ASQzoCIBw&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

Way Tickets and Bread Tickets

Over the years, the overall numbers admitted to casual wards rose and fell due to a variety of factors. In the "Hungry Forties", trade recessions coupled with the effects of the Irish Famine led to a sharp increase. In 1848, in an attempt to reverse this rise, the Poor Law Board's first President, Charles Buller, issued new guidelines for the admission of casuals. The so-called Buller memorandum urged unions to discriminate between the honest unemployed "temporarily and unavoidably in distress" who were in search of work, and the "habitual tramp or vagrant who simulates destitution". It was suggested that the former category be issued with a certificate, as in the old "pass" system, through which they might receive preferential admission or treatment at the workhouses along a particular route, while the latter might even be refused admission completely unless in immediate danger of starvation. In making this distinction, Buller suggested that local police officers be appointed as assistant relieving officers and take on the job of issuing casual ward admission tickets. In an overenthusiastic response to these proposals, some unions even went so far as close their casual wards. Overall, a 38% drop in casual ward admissions took place in the following year.

By 1863, it had become apparent that many unions were evading their responsibilities towards the casual poor. Poor Law Board President C.P. Villiers issued a circular reminding unions of their obligation to help the genuinely destitute. In London, this was encouraged by making the cost of casual relief chargeable to a common fund, provided for by the Metropolitan Board of Works then, from 1867, by the Common Poor Fund. The resulting resurgence of numbers applying for admission to the casual wards led to the re-introduction of certificates, or way-tickets, in order to identify honest wayfarers. Way-tickets, issued by the police or casual-ward superintendent, were for a specified duration along a particular route and would be endorsed at each workhouse visited. The ticket-holder would be entitled to favourable treatment, such as being exempt from work tasks or being allowed early release from the casual ward. Despite some initial enthusiasm, take-up of the scheme was uneven and its use declined. However, in the early 1900s, a revival of interest took place, helped by encouragement from the Local Government Board, and the creation of County Vagrancy Committees. By 1920, wayticket schemes were operating in 45 counties in England and Wales.

In conjunction with waytickets, many casual wards also issued vagrants with meal-tickets or bread-tickets which could be redeemed for food at a specific location en route. These were intended to try and ensure that casuals kept to their supposed destination, and also aimed to reduce begging.

http://www.workhouses.org.uk/vagrants/index.shtml

[Observer]

Thats the one Colin.



"The resulting resurgence of numbers applying for admission to the casual wards led to the re-introduction of certificates, or way-tickets, in order to identify honest wayfarers. Way-tickets, issued by the police or casual-ward superintendent, were for a specified duration along a particular route and would be endorsed at each workhouse visited. The ticket-holder would be entitled to favourable treatment, such as being exempt from work tasks or being allowed early release from the casual ward. Despite some initial enthusiasm, take-up of the scheme was uneven and its use declined."

Was the above procedure in use in 1888? For this is how I described the ticket I had in mind.

Regarding Eddowes and Mile End, are you saying that her attendance there on the night of the 28th September 1888 was her sole visit to that establishment?

I'd agree with you regarding Eddowes claim that she knew The Whitechapel Fiend. I'm sure she know of quite a few feinds, but not The Whitechapel Fiend. A fiend among fiends.

Regards

Observer

[Colin Roberts]

Was the above procedure in use in 1888?

My guess, Observer, is that it was not.

If the practice became fairly common by the mid-to-late 1860's, only to fizzle at some point, and then be rejuvenated by the early 1900's, then 1888 wouldn't seem to be a likelihood.

Regarding Eddowes and Mile End, are you saying that her attendance there on the night of the 28th September 1888 was her sole visit to that establishment?

I am inclined to believe that Eddowes didn't go to the casual ward – any casual ward – on the night in question.

Whether Kelly knew where she had actually gone is anybody's guess.

But above all else, I am inclined to believe that the following story, which was published by the East London Observer, 13 October 1888, is a complete fabrication, from start to finish:

A reporter gleaned some curious information from the Casual Ward Superintendent of Mile End, regarding Kate Eddowes, the Mitre-square victim. She was formerly well-known in the casual wards there, but had disappeared for a considerable time until the Friday preceding her murder. Asking the woman where she had been in the interval, the superintendent was met with the reply, that she had been in the country "hopping". "But," added the woman, "I have come back to earn the reward offered for the apprehension of the Whitechapel murderer. I think I know him." "Mind he doesn't murder you too" replied the superintendent jocularly. "Oh, no fear of that," was the remark made by Kate Eddowes as she left. Within four-and-twenty hours afterwards she was a mutilated corpse.

[Wickerman]

I appreciate the quote concerning Casual Wards, Colin, thankyou.

But above all else, I am inclined to believe that the following story, which was published by the East London Observer, 13 October 1888, is a complete fabrication, from start to finish:

A reporter gleaned some curious information from the Casual Ward Superintendent of Mile End, regarding Kate Eddowes, the Mitre-square victim. She was formerly well-known in the casual wards there, but had disappeared for a considerable time until the Friday preceding her murder. Asking the woman where she had been in the interval, the superintendent was met with the reply, that she had been in the country "hopping". "But," added the woman, "I have come back to earn the reward offered for the apprehension of the Whitechapel murderer. I think I know him." "Mind he doesn't murder you too" replied the superintendent jocularly. "Oh, no fear of that," was the remark made by Kate Eddowes as she left. Within four-and-twenty hours afterwards she was a mutilated corpse.

We do know from other press articles that the Hop-crop was particularly bad this year, pickers were tramping home early in droves. So we can guess the true reason for Eddowes coming home was the same reason as that for everyone else.
I don't know about the whole paragraph (above) being fabricated, but the subsequent exchange at the end is the apocryphal bit. Reminds us of the words spoken by Stride, supposedly heard by Dr Barnardo.

[lynn cates]

Hop to it.

Hello Jon. The hops harvest was SO bad that the "Londoners" were coming back during the first week of September--the work being done by the locals.

Snippet is from 5 September, or thereabouts.

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

The hops harvest was SO bad that the "Londoners" were coming back during the first week of September--the work being done by the locals.

Snippet is from 5 September, or thereabouts.

How do we know that wasn't just made up by an enterprising journalist? We hear such things all the time on this site.

Mike

[lynn cates]

in the news

Hello Michael. Thanks.

Are you seriously suggesting that a news item was deliberately made up? Surely such a deception would be easily verified?

I can accept mistakes in the news and embellishments, but wholesale creation? No.

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

Are you seriously suggesting that a news item was deliberately made up? Surely such a deception would be easily verified?

I can accept mistakes in the news and embellishments, but wholesale creation? No.

No. I am simply pointing out that if this snippet you posted were something that contradicted someone's "theory", it would be heavily scrutinized and discarded. Much like many witness accounts are discarded because there's only one account published, or a newspaper is disreputable, or for any number of reasons. I will just jump ahead of the pack and say that one snippet proves nothing and I am discarding your information...no offense intended.

Mike

[Wickerman]

.... Much like many witness accounts are discarded because there's only one account published, or a newspaper is disreputable, or for any number of reasons.

Here's a man who knows exactly what is going on, such is the deplorable state of Ripperology today.

[lynn cates]

brackets

Hello Michael. Thanks.

I can't speak for others, only myself. And I am NOT in favour of discarding stories--press, or otherwise--as I think most contain a kernel of truth.

I AM, however, in favour of criticising each one. If too much difficulty is found, it should be placed in brackets.

By the way, even Kelly himself claimed that the picking was bad. Didn't say why he stayed there an extra three weeks.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

By the way, even Kelly himself claimed that the picking was bad. Didn't say why he stayed there an extra three weeks.

Hi Lynn.
To that specific point, why do you think he needed to give a reason?

[Colin Roberts]

I am inclined to believe that Eddowes didn't go to the casual ward – any casual ward – on the night in question.

Whether Kelly knew where she had actually gone is anybody's guess.

But above all else, I am inclined to believe that the following story, which was published by the East London Observer, 13 October 1888, is a complete fabrication, from start to finish:

A reporter gleaned some curious information from the Casual Ward Superintendent of Mile End, regarding Kate Eddowes, the Mitre-square victim. She was formerly well-known in the casual wards there, but had disappeared for a considerable time until the Friday preceding her murder. Asking the woman where she had been in the interval, the superintendent was met with the reply, that she had been in the country "hopping". "But," added the woman, "I have come back to earn the reward offered for the apprehension of the Whitechapel murderer. I think I know him." "Mind he doesn't murder you too" replied the superintendent jocularly. "Oh, no fear of that," was the remark made by Kate Eddowes as she left. Within four-and-twenty hours afterwards she was a mutilated corpse.

If I am inclined to believe that Eddowes did not spend the night of 28 September 1888 in the Mile End Old Town Casual Ward, then why should I believe so much as a single word of this article?

I'm not peddling some theory regarding her actual (supposed) whereabouts that evening. I simply don't believe that they coincided with those which she claimed.

[lynn cates]

gone

Hello Jon. Thanks.

You mean for being gone? He claimed he was in Kent until 27 September. But I don't buy it.

Cheers.
LC