Work among the fallen as seen in the prison cell

[PaulB]

True enough Paul,

Time to give up expecting him to abide by the usual rules of debate and discussion. The evidence is there for all to see. It’s a sad state of affairs though but what can you do? I’m just glad that everyone doesn’t adopt the same tactic or any fair discussion on any topic would be impossible. How can anyone want to maintain a discussion with someone who simply makes things up to defend an argument at any cost? Disappointing to say the least.

Very disappointing, but you can only hit your head against a brick wall for so long. Harry probably has a hurting head too. All either side can do is lay out the facts as best they can and leave it up to the good folk here to decide who is right. It is accepted that an unfortunate was a prostitute, and you and others have laid out supporting evidence. You cannot be required to do more. If Harry wants to dispute the accepted facts, then the ball is very firmly in his court to provide solid evidence and argument that the accepted facts are wrong. As far as I am aware, he has not done that. Until he does, there is no mileage to be gained by pursuing this. In fairness to Harry, he could be right, but the ball is in his court and it's up to him to prove it.

[Wickerman]

....... All either side can do is lay out the facts as best they can and leave it up to the good folk here to decide who is right...

I'd take issue with that Paul.
I don't view Casebook members as a Jury, to my mind it makes no difference what a majority believe, that still doesn't change what is right from what is wrong.
What Harry is asserting in my view is that the term "Unfortunate" can mean "down on their luck". Well, of course it can, but he is ignoring the context of the sentence. Harry is also intentionally or otherwise confusing an Adjective with a Noun.
When the context requires a noun, you can't change it to an adjective, which he is trying to do.
It must be admitted that the usage in some cases is ambiguous, it could be either an adjective or noun, but where the context requires the noun, which is in the majority of cases in the Whitechapel murder investigations, then it must be accepted, and move on.

[Debra A]

Simple answer to all the above.Ellen Fisher was my Great grandmother.A Daughter was my Grandmother.If Debra has followed Ellen up untill her death,then Debra should have known why she became an unfortunate.Should have known her relationship to myself and my family.Do you Debra?Also Debra should be able to tell us Ellen's married names and the names of her daughters.Can you Debra.
So Jon and Herlock ,Debra should have known whether Ellen Fisher prostituted herself.Does she? Ask her.
Everything you say Jon is true,'Unfortunate' can mean many things,which proves my arguement it doesn't neccessary mean prostitute.You question my great grandmother and my grandmother's mode of living.What if I questioned whether your mother was a prostitute based on the fact that some mothers prostituted themselves.Would you say I was justified.
I suppose you will now say can I prove the relationship to Ellen Fisher.Yes I can.It is in public records.Debra can seccond that if as she claims,she has followed Ellen's life up unto her death.

Harry, I'm willing to admit I may have traced the wrong Ellen Fisher as the one I traced was born c1846 (not 1840 as you mentioned) to a John and Sarah Fisher in Chiselden Wiltshire.
I can tell you that the one I followed had two marriages, one to a man named Waldren in 1869 and then to a man named Kingscott in 1886. I certainly did not see this Ellen Fisher described in any documents as an 'unfortunate, although I did see her described in the 1881 census as a 'pauper,' in the Gloucester Union workhouse with her two daughters. Just in case it's relevant- being recorded as a 'pauer' in official records is an entirely different thing from being classed as an 'unfortunate' - pauper was an official term used to describe someone without the means to support themselves due to things like being widowed, deserted or through ill health etc. who usually received parish relief for a time. It did strike me that perhaps you thought the two terms were interchangeable and this was the root of your objection but if I have the wrong woman my thoughts are irrelevant. But just in case - being a pauper has nothing to do with being an unfortunate.

I simply asked where the Ellen Fisher you were talking about (which turns out to be your relative) was described as an 'unforunate' as that would give those of us interested in the use of the term a context to the description that we can see for ourselves. Was it a census, a newspaper, or some other document? You must have got the specific description from somewhere and I asked where. It's a reasonable question isn't it?

[PaulB]

I'd take issue with that Paul.
I don't view Casebook members as a Jury, to my mind it makes no difference what a majority believe, that still doesn't change what is right from what is wrong.
What Harry is asserting in my view is that the term "Unfortunate" can mean "down on their luck". Well, of course it can, but he is ignoring the context of the sentence. Harry is also intentionally or otherwise confusing an Adjective with a Noun.
When the context requires a noun, you can't change it to an adjective, which he is trying to do.
It must be admitted that the usage in some cases is ambiguous, it could be either an adjective or noun, but where the context requires the noun, which is in the majority of cases in the Whitechapel murder investigations, then it must be accepted, and move on.

I didn't mean to suggest that the Casebook members were a jury, just that past experience has shown that Harry won't give up his stance whatever he's told, and Herlock has nothing to prove because he's right. he knows he's right, you know he's right, and, as far I know, the man in the moon knows he's right. There's nothing to be gained from banging one's head against a brick wall.

[Debra A]

Just to add-I can't find any other woman named Ellen Fisher born c 1840 in Chisleden Wiltshire, daughter of a John and Sarah as described by Harry, apart from the woman I have followed and gave details of to Harry in my last post, including the description of her as a 'pauper' in the Gloucester workhouse with her two daughters in 1881.

Perhaps this is all a big misunderstanding. Harry arguing that someone described as an 'unfortunate' wasn't always a prostitute because he is confusing it with the word 'pauper,' used to describe his great grandmother (if this is her) and in that case he would be perfectly correct.
Anyway, Harry should be able to show us the context of the use of the term 'unfortunate' applied to his great grandmother if he believes it was.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Just to add-I can't find any other woman named Ellen Fisher born c 1840 in Chisleden Wiltshire, daughter of a John and Sarah as described by Harry, apart from the woman I have followed and gave details of to Harry in my last post, including the description of her as a 'pauper' in the Gloucester workhouse with her two daughters in 1881.

Perhaps this is all a big misunderstanding. Harry arguing that someone described as an 'unfortunate' wasn't always a prostitute because he is confusing it with the word 'pauper,' used to describe his great grandmother (if this is her) and in that case he would be perfectly correct.
Anyway, Harry should be able to show us the context of the use of the term 'unfortunate' applied to his great grandmother if he believes it was.

I may be wrong Debra but I tend to think that the ‘benefit of the doubt’ possibility is that Harry is simply not seeing the difference in the use of ‘Unfortunate’ the noun, and ‘unfortunate’ the adjective. I reckon that he’s seen or heard her called an unfortunate person somewhere or something like that. It’s still difficult to believe this though because it’s been explained to him so many times.

If the term ‘an Unfortunate’ simply meant someone down on their luck then of course it would apply to man, woman and child. But it never is. This is why I’ve said to Harry - Provide a quote where a man is called An Unfortunate.’

[Debra A]

I may be wrong Debra but I tend to think that the ‘benefit of the doubt’ possibility is that Harry is simply not seeing the difference in the use of ‘Unfortunate’ the noun, and ‘unfortunate’ the adjective. I reckon that he’s seen or heard her called an unfortunate person somewhere or something like that. It’s still difficult to believe this though because it’s been explained to him so many times.

If the term ‘an Unfortunate’ simply meant someone down on their luck then of course it would apply to man, woman and child. But it never is. This is why I’ve said to Harry - Provide a quote where a man is called An Unfortunate.’

Yes, Herlock, I think I was the person who mentioned the application as a noun and the fact there are no men or children being referred to as an 'unfortunate' myself in previous posts on the other thread but didn't continue trying to hammer that home myself because that approach obviously wasn't going anywhere. I've tried to understand why Harry would argue so passionately about this and there's no harm in giving Harry the benefit of the doubt to see if he has an example that goes against what we think we know.

Harry can settle it, simply by showing the context of the word as used to describe his great grandmother. Who was it who described her as an 'unfortunate? ' So far only Harry has.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes, Herlock, I think I was the person who mentioned the application as a noun and the fact there are no men or children being referred to as an 'unfortunate' myself in previous posts on the other thread but didn't continue trying to hammer that home myself because that approach obviously wasn't going anywhere. I've tried to understand why Harry would argue so passionately about this and there's no harm in giving Harry the benefit of the doubt to see if he has an example that goes against what we think we know.

Harry can settle it, simply by showing the context of the word as used to describe his great grandmother. Who was it who described her as an 'unfortunate? ' So far only Harry has.

Another issue is how do you prove that someone wasn’t a prostitute? She might even have been falsely accused of course which wouldn’t help with the overall point. But you’re right of course that it’s down to Harry to provide evidence.

[harry]

My dictionary describes 'Unfortunate' as a noun and an adjective.It does not describe them as prostitutes.I have yet to see Herlock produce any official source that states an 'Unfortunate' is the same as prostitute.Yes Paul and others,an unfortunate could also be a prostitute,but Herlock's claim is that unfortunate referred solely to prostitute,that all unfortunates were prostitutes.Jon,in one of his posts has stated otherwise.I have proved mathematically that the number of unfortunates vastly exceeded the number of officialy stated prostitutes(1200).Still Herlock will not accept that.
Nichols for example has been described as both an unfortunate and a prostitute.She was an inmate of several workhouses,and a reading of any newspaper,or even these boards,will show that an inmate of a working-house were ,in the main,called unfortunates.So Debra,I have answered your question about Ellen Fisher.You do have the right person.Do you know why she was an inmate of a working-house?Why she was an unfortunate?
Now Herlock questions whether I know the difference between a noun and an adjective.He also challenged me(post 46) to name a man who was described as an unfortunate.Henry McMahon was a man who was an unfortunate.He was described as such.He was a real person.He was bllind.
Over to you Herlock.

[rjpalmer]

There's a one-day old male child listed as an 'unfortunate' in the Westminster Union Workhouse in 1881, but the enumerator seemed to have thought better of it and scratched it out gain. I'll call it a draw.






If I might inject some lame, off-the-wall humor into the discussion, I happened across the following in 1911, for Charles Henry Pearce of Hampstead, and thought it was mildly amusing.





This is what he lists under Occupation: “LOSING MY MONEY, NOW AS AN UNFORTUNATE WINE and SPIRIT MERCHANT OWING TO THE IDIOTIC AND UNJUST TAXATION IMPOSED BY A DISHONEST RADICAL GOVERNMENT WHO ARE UNDER THE THUMB OF GRADE-BRAINED IRISHMEN WHO THINK THEY ARE PATRIOTIC”

(Quite rudely, he leaves no room for the next three members of the household to list their own occupations)

As Asquith was the Prime Minister, and Churchill the Home Secretary, it is unclear why Mr. Pearce is yammering on about the Irish, but my heart goes out to the enumerator who had to deal with him.

[bolo]

Hi all,

can't we just say... ...that all East End prostitutes were unfortunates but not all unfortunates were East End prostitutes?

Grüße,

Boris

[Debra A]

My dictionary describes 'Unfortunate' as a noun and an adjective.It does not describe them as prostitutes.I have yet to see Herlock produce any official source that states an 'Unfortunate' is the same as prostitute.Yes Paul and others,an unfortunate could also be a prostitute,but Herlock's claim is that unfortunate referred solely to prostitute,that all unfortunates were prostitutes.Jon,in one of his posts has stated otherwise.I have proved mathematically that the number of unfortunates vastly exceeded the number of officialy stated prostitutes(1200).Still Herlock will not accept that.
Nichols for example has been described as both an unfortunate and a prostitute.She was an inmate of several workhouses,and a reading of any newspaper,or even these boards,will show that an inmate of a working-house were ,in the main,called unfortunates.So Debra,I have answered your question about Ellen Fisher.You do have the right person.Do you know why she was an inmate of a working-house?Why she was an unfortunate?
Now Herlock questions whether I know the difference between a noun and an adjective.He also challenged me(post 46) to name a man who was described as an unfortunate.Henry McMahon was a man who was an unfortunate.He was described as such.He was a real person.He was bllind.
Over to you Herlock.

Thanks for confirming I picked up the right woman, Harry.
As I mentioned, I looked at several records for Ellen and not one of the census or other records I came across referred to Ellen as an 'unfortunate.' Although she was described as a 'pauper' in 1881 in the Gloucester workhouse.
As I understand it now, you seem to be suggesting that being officially described as a 'pauper' by the Board of Guardians, is the same thing as being described as 'an unfortunate?'
A huge number of the female, homeless, destitute, deserted and sick population of Whitechapel and surrounding areas passed through the relief system. Not trying to bore everyone but I do spend a huge amount of time looking through the poor law records for London. A system of classification existed that officially recognised a class of person, not made a moral judgement. I read countless settlement judgements where a woman has to give full details of her circumstances to be examined for the correct relief in the correct poor law union and I can honestly say that I have never come across anyone officially categorised as an 'unfortunate' simply for being poor and destitute, unless the woman has stated that she was 'an unfortunate' in the context of working the streets, in her own evidence.
Paupers were sometimes referred to as 'vagrants' because of the use of the casual ward (also called vagrancy wards) but neither of those terms are interchangeable with the noun 'unfortunate.' Unfortunates were often prosecuted under the vagrancy act but the word 'vagrant' is not interchangeable with the noun 'unfortunate' either.

[harry]

Whether or not,Debra,there was an official classification of 'Unfortunate',we know that the term was widely used,before,during and after the Whitechpell killings,and was used to descibe persons like Ellen Fisher,and Henry McMahon.Ellen was widowed and left destitute,with two daughters.She however,had the good fortune to meet and marry a good man.
Mary Anne Cox,witness ,is reported to have been a self confessed 'Unfortunate',so I am sure the term was used and understood by the citizens of Whitechapel.
We cold say it Bolo,but Herlock writes otherwise.He insists that every 'Unfortunate' was a prostitute.

[Debra A]

Whether or not,Debra,there was an official classification of 'Unfortunate',we know that the term was widely used,before,during and after the Whitechpell killings,and was used to descibe persons like Ellen Fisher,and Henry McMahon.Ellen was widowed and left destitute,with two daughters.She however,had the good fortune to meet and marry a good man.
Mary Anne Cox,witness ,is reported to have been a self confessed 'Unfortunate',so I am sure the term was used and understood by the citizens of Whitechapel.
We cold say it Bolo,but Herlock writes otherwise.He insists that every 'Unfortunate' was a prostitute.

I'm not sure that is correct, Harry.
As far as I can tell, it is only you yourself who has described your great grandmother as an 'unfortunate' because you believe the term pauper, (vagrant etc.) to be interchangeable and mean the same thing and naturally that has lead to you passionately disagreeing with anyone who suggest otherwise. If someone had suggested all 'paupers' were prostitutes then we'd all agree with you on this, but no one has suggested that. I believe the noun 'unfortunate' to officially describe a woman, was used to indicate she was engaged in the exchange of sexual services for some sort of reward, be it money, food, drink or a shared doss house bed for the night.

[Debra A]

Whether or not,Debra,there was an official classification of 'Unfortunate',we know that the term was widely used,before,during and after the Whitechpell killings,and was used to descibe persons like Ellen Fisher,and Henry McMahon.Ellen was widowed and left destitute,with two daughters.She however,had the good fortune to meet and marry a good man.
.

Your great grandmother, Ellen Fisher, was also a very hard working woman in her own right and worked in the vinegar bottling plant earning herself a living for many years.