Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Welsh speaker required!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Hi Jukka,

    Barnett said that Kelly moved from Ireland to Carmarthen or Caernarfon both in his inquest testimony and in his earlier (and separate) statement to the police. The Cardiff connection, as reported in the context of that article in Y Genedl Gymreig, appears almost certainly to have been a press error.

    Leave a comment:


  • j.r-ahde
    replied
    Hello you all!

    Sam, once again for the translation;

    Kiitoksia oikein paljon!

    One might think, that Joe wasn't certain, if MJK's Welsh hometown was Cardiff or Carmarthen. Obviously he hadn't heard the name of the town that often...

    All the best
    Jukka

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    You're more than welcome, Chris. Any time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chris Scott
    replied
    Hi Sam
    Many thanks again for all your help in this - much appreciated
    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Hi Chris,
    Originally posted by Chris Scott View Post
    And the last one is from 17 Nov 1888
    Many thanks again Sam
    The relevant part of this report is the same as the one I just translated from the 14th Nov - word for word. The little paragraph at the bottom (separated by a line from the account of the Kelly inquest) is a bit of news trivia totally unconnected to the Whitechapel murders.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Translation #3

    Originally posted by Chris Scott View Post
    Another one from 14 Nov
    THE LATEST OUTRAGE IN LONDON

    THE INQUEST

    The inquest on he body of Mary Jane Kelly, in Shoreditch town hall, was opened before Dr. Macdonald on Monday.

    James Barnet [sic], a former fish porter, aged about 26 years old, said that the deceased had lived with him about a year and eight months. He had not the slightest doubt that Mary Jane Kelly was the murdered woman. He last saw her alive about half-past seven on Thursday evening. At the moment, he (the witness) is out of work. When he was with her on Thursday night, she was sober.

    The deceased told him several times that Limerick, in Ireland, was her town of birth; but she had been taken to Cardiff [sic] when fairly young. Her father was an ironworker in Cardiff. She married a collier named Davies, who was killed in an explosion. After leaving Cardiff, she came to London. She lived in a "bad house" in the West End. He first met her in Commercial-street, Whitechapel.

    Thomas Bowyer, 37, Dorset-street, servant to Mr. Mc'Carthy, landlord of the house in which the deceased had lived, told of how he discovered the murder.

    Mary Ann Cox, of Miller's Court, testified that she had known the deceased for eight or nine months. Around a quarter to twelve on Thursday night, she saw her enter her room with a man. Afterwards, she heard her sing. Around a quarter past six, she heard a man leaving the court.

    Elizabeth Prater, living in the room above the deceased, stated that, sometime during the night, she had heard one cry of "murder"; but as such cries weren't unusual, she didn't take any notice of it. A similar cry was heard by another woman in the court.

    The jurymen returned a verdict of "Wilful murder against some person unknown;" and there is reason to fear that these will be the last definite words we shall hear about this terrible slaughter, just as in those that preceded it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Hi Mike,
    Originally posted by perrymason View Post
    7. One man? Hes not in the press or at inquest.
    He was probably Catherine Pickett's husband - the pair of them lived in Miller's Court, and both heard Kelly singing, although neither appeared at the inquest.

    Re. the "second house" - possibly a bit of confusion caused by Kelly's being the second door in from the street.

    Leave a comment:


  • j.r-ahde
    replied
    Hello Michael!

    I did notice some mistakes there too, but the following thing might explain the discrepancies;

    1. The news was written in a hurry!

    2. Since "Mary Kelly" was and still is a common Irish woman's name, there were probably more than one of them in the East End.

    However, I find the following thing interesting;

    Already at this stage there were people thinking Mary Kelly to be an adopted name!

    All the best
    Jukka

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    "1. In the second house in the court, sometime after Thursday midnight, this latest atrocity was committed. The murdered woman was barely known to her neighbours. "Mary Jane", some called her, and "Fair Emma" by others; but her full name was Mary Jane Kelly. 2. She had been married, or at least she had lived for years with a man named Kelly, but he knew that she sustained herself by walking the streets. 3. He parted with her because she was a quarrelsome drunkard. The only "friend" she had, as it is believed, was a woman named Harvey, who used to sleep with her on occasion. She [Kelly] went out as ususal on Thursday night, and she was seen in the neighbourhood around ten o'clock with a man, of whom there is no description. 4. She was last seen at around half-past eleven, in Commercial Street; she was alone, and heading home. It is thought that she met the man [murderer] there in the street, and was persuaded into allowing him to return to the lodging with her, without her having drunk any more liquor. 5. The pair reached the court around midnight; but nobody saw them enter the house. The 6. ...door leading to the street was closed, but she had a latch-key; and as she was, possibly, reasonably sober, they were able to reach her room almost noiselessly. Light was seen in the window of her room for some time after the pair of them must have entered; and 7......one man said that he was sure that he'd heard the woman singing a popular song around one in the morning - this is doubtful, however."

    Thanks Gareth for the translations and Chris for another great find. I emboldened some erroneous and contentious items from the Nov 14th article above, to me its interesting that this is 5 days later, after the inquest, yet much of whats claimed isnt accurate.

    1. Mary wasnt in the second house, she was in the first room inside the courtyard, to the right.
    2. Confusing her marital status and Barnett's actual name.
    3. This was not the reason given by Barnett, it was Maria Harvey and Mary's working the streets.
    4. I dont recall any acknowledged sighting of her on the way home other than that of Mary Ann Cox and Blotchy Face. Or her being picked up and seen by someone. This is likely a confused timing on George Hutchinsons statements Monday night....2 days earlier.
    5. As stated, Mary Ann saw them enter the 1st room.
    6. I believe this refers to a door that latched either inside the archway, or on the street from Dorset, accessing the courtyard and Marys room. To my knowledge there was no door or gate there, and it would be odd since Elizabeth Prater still barricades her door after 1:30am.
    7. One man? Hes not in the press or at inquest.

    All in just one paragraph. Regarding the press its easy to see why Caveat Emptor is an appropriate phrase.

    Best regards all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Covell
    replied
    Chris,
    nice finds, just makes you wonder how much is still out there!

    Gareth,
    'n glws hun Gareth , namyn mae na arwydda chan an FM " acha 'r furia i mewn unrhyw chan 'r erthyglau!

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    Thanks, Chris, for taking these articles to the boards. And thank you, Sam, for translating them. One thing that strikes me, reading the last one presented, is that if it is anything to go by, it much strengthens Sams wiew that the whole scene was one of great disorder, more than one of a "staged" scene. Pieces dropped and thrown about... Yuck! Then again, there was that placing of organs as a "cushion" under her head. Tough call, as usual!

    Once again thanks, gentlemen!

    Fisherman

    Leave a comment:


  • Mitch Rowe
    replied
    Thanx Guys..

    The massacre was discovered by a young man [sic] who had gone to the house to ask for the rent. The corpse presented a terrible spectacle, and lay naked upon a pitifully poor bed. The ears and the nose had been cut off, the flesh had been sliced from one of the cheeks, and the neck cut through to the bone. In addition, one of the breasts had been cut off, and the flesh roughly hacked from the thigh until the bone was visible, whilst the bowels had been ripped out, as as in the previous murders, and internal organs taken and placed on the table near the bed. Apart from the above, a number of cuts had been made on other parts of the body.

    Wow! I know thats not accurate but when I read that it sort of gave me a closer connection with Mary as a victim. She is so mutilated in the photos and her face is so unrecognizable I guess I just wasnt making the proper bond with her. Wich leads me to understand more clearly of how Jack must have wanted that for Mary.

    But thats off the subject. But it lead me to a theory about Druitt. Ill post it in the proper place.

    Anyway thanks. Its an interesting read so far. And I know its a rather unique language from a unique area of the World that I really should study up on. Especially when I know it will be loads of fun!

    Leave a comment:


  • j.r-ahde
    replied
    Hello Chris!

    Very interesting stuff, thank you a lot!

    Since I don't know, what "thank you very much" is in Welsh, Sam, I'll write it in Finnish :

    Kiitoksia oikein paljon!

    All the best
    Jukka

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Nae probs, Chris - I'll do the rest tomorrow.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chris Scott
    replied
    Jeez you're a fast worker Sam!
    Many many thanks for that - you're a diamond!
    Chris

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X