The Grisly

[Cogidubnus]

Two guineas

No clue whatsoever how much 2 guineas are in relation to the British pound and to today. But it doesn't sound like much.

Hi Maria

Two pounds two shillings...a reasonable amount in 1888...how can I put it...ok a good quarryman earned about £1.50 per week all-in...

Or another way of putting it...120 non-romantic episodes with your favourite East End unfortunate...

I think it was a pretty good fee Maria!

All the best

Dave

[curious]

And how did she get the money to get blind drunk ealier in the day?

Now THAT is the $64,000 question. Any ideas?

[lynn cates]

old age

Hello Greg. Old as dirt?

I RESEMBLE THAT REMARK! (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

discussing

Hello Roy. Thanks.

"Since we know detectives questioned each slaughterman individually, then, are you, Lynn saying that:

(1) That was a lie, the police didn't question any of the slaughtermen but wrote a false police report instead."

Not at all. Perhaps I was not clear. I don't believe Tompkins involved in Polly's death. Full stop. But I DO think Polly was headed there, as a default, possibly recalling a former occasion of success.

"(2) If not, your answer for why this matters and you mention it now."

It matters ONLY as an explanation for Polly's movements AFTER not doing so well in her "business venture."

"Were the police lying?"

Don't think so.

"Did they not question the slaughtermen individually?"

Well, I should think so. But, perhaps I mistake?

"That's the whole point of this thread, right?"

Can't properly say.

"Were the police lying about questioning the slaughtermen?"

See above.

"Because the article Simon posted seemed to be written oblivious to that fact."

Not sure, but seems the writer had a different opinion about the men.

"Lynn, you knowing logic and all, that would be the first thing I would want to know in discussing it with you. Where you stand on that. Then we can go from there."

Sounds promising. Delighted to discuss. Of course, I covered this in my article, but it was speculative.

Cheers.
LC

[GregBaron]

Old as dirt...

Greg Baron:

"Gentlemen"

Agreed!

"You’re trying to argue rationally about a murky and subjective category; i.e., middle-age."

Agreed!

"My personal definition would be one that has seen his or her better days but is not yet old.

Based on that I’d offer the following suppositions:

Middle Age

Whitechapel 1888 – 30+"

Agreed!

"Today – 45+"

Sorry - I´d move that down to 35, perhaps even 30. But since I like the rest of your post so much, I´m willing to accept your bid just the same.

"Ripperologists – 60+"

...making me a young lad! Agreed, of course!

The best,
Fisherman

Thanks Mr. Fisherman, glad I could bring a small dose of levity.

I do think we have some ancient codgers out here who probably coexisted with the ripper......perhaps someone holds the secret and is just toying with us...?

It would be most amusing if we required a recent photo and date-of-birth here so we could all know who we're yelling at..........!


Greg

[Simon Wood]

Hi Roy,

Please read my article in Ripperologist No. 90.

Regards,

Simon

[Simon Wood]

Hi Stephen,

Further reading.

Catherine Walters is rumoured to have shagged Britain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_Walters

Regards,

Simon

[Roy Corduroy]

Tompkins

Thank you Lynn,

Finally we are back to the original thread topic. The Nichols murder and the article Simon posted that wondered about the slaughtermen around the corner.

Since we know detectives questioned each slaughterman individually, then, are you, Lynn saying that:

(1) That was a lie, the police didn't question any of the slaughtermen but wrote a false police report instead.

(2) If not, your answer for why this matters and you mention it now.

Or anybody. Were the police lying? Did they not question the slaughtermen individually? That's the whole point of this thread, right? Were the police lying about questioning the slaughtermen? Because the article Simon posted seemed to be written oblivious to that fact.

Lynn, you knowing logic and all, that would be the first thing I would want to know in discussing it with you. Where you stand on that. Then we can go from there.

Roy

[Simon Wood]

Hi Stephen,

By all accounts Catherine Walters, a veritable queen amongst whores, was fully worth the investment of a guinea or three.

I suspect Catherine would have only deigned to travel down Bucks Row in a carriage.

She's worth looking up, if you'll pardon the expression. A most interesting woman.

Regards,

Simon

[mariab]

Hi Maria,
Mr. Phillips' report is can be sourced at the National Archives at Kew: MEPO 3/140, ff. 263-71.
You might want to peruse Evans & Skinner's 'The Ultimate Sourcebook' a little more carefully as this report is reprinted there starting on page 505 in the Murder of Alice McKenzie chapter. It is a very detailed report and is textbook on how this very meticulous surgeon performed all of the autopsies coming under his authorization; which was done by the coroner's office. I believe he was paid 2 guineas for the procedure as warranted by the Coroner's Act of 1887.

Thanks so much and a thousand apologies, Hunter. Perused it too quick and mised p. 508, where the section about evidence for veneral disease is. Yes, a very detailed report and gives an accurate impression of how Victorian coroners proceeded with a post mortem examination.
No clue whatsoever how much 2 guineas are in relation to the British pound and to today. But it doesn't sound like much.

[Stephen Thomas]

And Nichols wasn't exactly Catherine Walters.

Hi Simon

Who on earth is Catherine Walters? Her babeness seems to have impressed you.

[lynn cates]

slipped out

Hello Lechmere. Tompkins let slip that women came up to the gates, but that, "I don't like them."

And what is that except to say that:

1. A wandering tart or two had resorted there out of desperation for 4d.

2. Tompkins (or a mate), like the monk in the Boccacio tale, had fallen a victim of carnal concupiscence, and spent some change.

3. Oops, well I hope you don't think WE would have any thing to do with them?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Vielen Dank.

Hello Christer. Say, thanks old chap!

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

respondeo quod

Hello Lechmere. Thanks.

"Was she dragged into Mitre Square by her hair (or apron) while walking down the road minding her own business?"

Well, if Lawende is to to be believed, it looks like someone she knew had met her. Look at the body english.

"Or had she gone there to sleep and was attacked while slumbering?"

No, I think she was headed for Flower and Dean (to avoid a hiding) and met someone.

"And how did she get the money to get blind drunk ealier in the day?"

Now you're talking! Whom indeed? Well, probably NOT Charlie Kane. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Simon Wood]

Hi Lechmere,

" . . . why would a prostitute (any of the victims not just Polly) be attracted to a gang of roadworkers?"

Fourpence is fourpence on a chilly night in Whitechapel.

And Nichols wasn't exactly Catherine Walters.

Regards,

Simon