The signature of Polly Nichols

[Steven Russell]

Dear Neal,

I don't see how "Nichols" being crossed out and substituted by "Walker" indicates that Polly was beyond doubt the scribe. She could have been dictating and made exactly the same mistake as you suggest she did while writing.

I really do admire and respect the research done here, which is beyond anything I have ever done, but please, look at those two signatures! If they were not written by the same person then I'm Fred Abberline (and I'm not).

Best wishes,

Steve.

[Jenni Shelden]

Hi Frederick,

I think you will find its Nichols hand. We know she could write, it matches her other known signiture pretty well, she signed it in a room full of people including Church officials. Also there is no reason whatsoever for anyone to have needed to sign it in her stead, as it has been said, she could have left her mark if necessary.

All in all, there's no need to look for conspiracy everywhere.


Jenni

[Steven Russell]

Hello Jenni,

Again, I have no idea who wrote the signature. Maybe it was Polly and maybe it wasn't. I'm just trying to point out the, to me at least, extraordinary similarity of the writing shown in the two signatures. Whether they were written by Polly, her husband, or someone else, I still maintain that it is almost inconceivable that they were were written by two different people. And I don't for one moment suggest any kind of conspiracy.

It just seems so obvious. Still, no one seems to share my opinion so far so there you go.

Best wishes,

Fred.

[Supe]

Steven,

Do look closely as there are four or five distinct differences among the lowercase letters.

However, there is one good reason why the two signatures would look similar on a superficial level. That is, while young all students were taught the same, somewhat rococco style of penmanship. And if someone wrote rarely, if at all, after they left school, personal nuances of style would not have much chance to develop and thus signatures modelled on the template all were taught would be quite similar at first glance. But do look more closely.

Don.

[Steven Russell]

Supe.

Dear Don,

I take your points but I am afraid we will have to agree to differ on this. Either way, it is fascinating to see posts like this of original documents.

Best wishes,

Steve.

[The Grave Maurice]

If it makes you feel any better, Steven, I agree with you. To the untrained eye (i.e., mine) the two signatures definitely appear to be written by the same hand.

[Steven Russell]

If it makes you feel any better, Steven, I agree with you. To the untrained eye (i.e., mine) the two signatures definitely appear to be written by the same hand.

It certainly does, Maurice. Perhaps I haven't gone nuts after all.

Cheers,

Steve.

[GRISTLE]

I count myself amongst the untrained - they look the same to me also. I also concur that this is in no way a disparagement of the incredible research done on this site by its members.

[Supe]

Gentlemen,
Do look at the two signatures and note:
h: The height of the letter is much greater for Mary Ann than for William.
l: Again, Mary Ann's is much higher--twice--and lack's a loop. That both h and l are consistently higher is strongly suggestive of two hands.
o: William's is quite oval and Mary Ann's open. Moreover, the linkage is dissimilar.
s: William's is full and rounded while Mary Ann's is a mere upward stroke.
i: Hint of a loop to William's whereas Mary Ann's has an up and down ^ aspect.
c: Quite open in William's and the opening is canted toward 2 o'clock. Mary Ann's is more fully formed and the opening canted toward 4 o'clock.
a: Different in both slant and formation.
Seven lower-case letters in common and each shows differences.

Similar at first glance, perhaps for the reason I suggested earlier, but not at all by the same hand.

Don.

[The Grave Maurice]

Very detailed analysis, Don. Thanks. But, like I say, they still look to me as though they were written by the same person. Maybe I should get out my magnifying glass.

[The Grave Maurice]

Oh, I've just had a thought. Is there an extant copy of the letter that Polly wrote to her father? You know, the one that says "they're teetotallers and very religious, so I ought to get on". That would help us here.

[Chris Scott]

For comparison, below is the signature mentioned by Neal when Mary acted as witness at the wedding of her brother Edward Walker on 25 December 1869:

[Chris Scott]

And here are the two together...

[Hunter]

Maybe the "Toppy" folks could help out here. LOL

[Neal Shelden]

Oh, I've just had a thought. Is there an extant copy of the letter that Polly wrote to her father? You know, the one that says "they're teetotallers and very religious, so I ought to get on". That would help us here.

It's not very likely that the letter survived. I'm still holding out that the missing Nichols line down from her daughter Eliza Sarah Nichols may have something, but it's probably unlikely? Considering her father Edward Walker originally had the letter, I would have thought it would have been passed down to Edward John Nichols who's descendants have all been traced.