the Rent arrears

[c.d.]

All good points, Sam but I was simply throwing out the idea as a possibility. But from McCarthy's perspective, he would seem to have the advantage. It was not a good time for a tenant who didn't pay their rent to be out on the street, what with cold weather on the way and the Ripper on the loose. In addition, look how the doss houses operated, you had to pay up front and be out at a certain time.

The point I was trying to make is that if McCarthy threatened to make an example out of Mary or had some sort of grudge against her (and these are reasonable possibilities, I think), then we can no longer say with absolute certainty that she did not fear eviction. She might have gone in search of clients in order to pay the rent.

c.d.

[Sam Flynn]

In addition, look how the doss houses operated, you had to pay up front.

Indeed, CD, and if you didn't there would be plenty of others with four pence to spare to take your place. Small wonder if the doss-house proprietors found it easier to throw people out than the owners of places like Miller's Court, where you'd need fifty-four pence at hand to pay the rent.

[perrymason]

Hi all,

I know youre looking for something that might have dragged her back out in the rain after she arrived home before midnight with Blotchy cd. Which impending eviction would do in most cases...although since Mary has been evicted before, she may not be very intimidated with the threat.

You would think at least one person interviewed would have mentioned hearing of that it she were in imminent danger of being locked out, either from other tenants, McCarthy, or Mary herself might have told others she was concerned.

But the facts are that no-one suggested that scenario existed at all, and Mary comes home happy, drunk and in a singing mood.The notion just doesn't fit the evidence that we know of, and again, theres no reason really to explore it other than for your own curiosity, because its a non-starter as a catalyst for Mary to have to have gone back out to work...theres just no evidence for it at all.

Neither is to raise money for drinking viable, as the pubs are closed, and by the sounds of it, she had her hat full already anyway.

It really comes down to your sense of her work ethic in general, does she work because she has no money and just wants some,.. was she working the past few days when her men are giving her money anyway, in Barnetts case almost daily,... did she use any of that to pay down the arrears,...does Mary Kelly seem an eager street prostitute, or is she just "accepting" the life,..is there anywhere that she could spend money that night, had she earned any, after 1:30am?

This is just one example of how Mary Kelly differed in circumstances from the other Canonicals,...she had a room in her own name. A lot of what is taken for granted about Jack the Ripper, specifically in this case that he hunted working women late at night/early morning, who had no home or money, must be set aside to look honesty at this murder. Mary didnt need to work to buy a bed that night, nor could she buy a drink.

Best regards cd.

[c.d.]

Hi Michael,

You've made that point before and while you have a good argument, I can't reach the point of 100% certainty that you do with regards to Mary going out. Yes, it would appear that she had her immediate needs met but what about the next day and the day after that and the day...well, you get the picture. Maybe she owed a friend money. Why pass up a weekend night one of the best times to make money? From my point of view, there are just too many posssibilities that we don't know about.

c.d.

[perrymason]

Hi Michael,

You've made that point before and while you have a good argument, I can't reach the point of 100% certainty that you do with regards to Mary going out. Yes, it would appear that she had her immediate needs met but what about the next day and the day after that and the day...well, you get the picture. Maybe she owed a friend money. Why pass up a weekend night one of the best times to make money? From my point of view, there are just too many posssibilities that we don't know about.

c.d.

Hey cd,

I think you can quite easily insert the desperation element here, and theres no-one that couldnt understand someone working just because they need money to live. Thats why although confident my position is meeting the needs of the evidence such as it is, Im not 100% certain on this issue.

My take on Ripperology is this....because there are always many possibilities that exist when looking at these cases, due to the fact that information is missing, or suspect, or inconclusive, many students stop at that "possibilities fence", concluding its too high to make any definate conclusions.

Im looking for the "probability fence", which is lower, and can be formed using the known data.

In this particular matter there is no credible evidence anywhere that Mary went out after her room went dark around 1:30am, nor is there a credible reason she would have, having her needs for the night taken care of and besides, theres nowhere to spend money thats open.

Based on the evidence, we cannot conclude that Mary Kelly had a need to go out and work. And she was drunk when she got home and it had since begun raining hard.

Might she anyway? Maybe...sure. But the "probabilty fence' says to me that if Mary was given enough money by a male lover or lovers, she would have never "worked" again. And in this case, she is being given money by two "Joes"... just for being Mary. The signs of Mary Kellys self image are there, you just have to remember that she was around 26 and pretty...and unlike the middle aged, frankly non-stunners that comprised the first four of the C5,..Mary still might attract a legitimate man. Mary spent time making sure her apron was clean and white, she wore her hair out frequently, suggesting it was also washed regularly. We know she had a tin bath, and might keep clean doing whats been called "whores baths", a wet washing cloth here, there and everywhere.

Mary Kelly didnt see herself for what she in fact was...or would soon become. Thats the great thing about youth...you think you can pick and choose what to be worried about. When Polly, Annie, Liz and Kate worried...it was about where the next pillow was, how they were going to pay for it, and how could they get fed and sauced as well.

They had resigned themselves to whatever horror lay around the next corner, because if they didnt work....they didnt sleep, and they didnt eat or drink. And then theres Mary....who without money, ate, drank, yet we know of no clients that night,.. and she slept for a while in a bed that was hers, broke or not.

Best regards cd.

[Sam Flynn]

Kudzu alert!

Whatever the reason for McCarthy allowing his tenants (not just Kelly, I repeat) to accumulate rent arrears, the argument of whether Kelly stayed in or went out after 1AM has nothing to do with it.

[Stephen Thomas]

In this particular matter there is no credible evidence anywhere that Mary went out after her room went dark around 1:30am, nor is there a credible reason she would have, having her needs for the night taken care of and besides, theres nowhere to spend money thats open.

Hutch may not have been the only one to have seen Mary and Mr Astrakhan.

http://mateengreenway.com/steampunk/MurdersWhitechapel.htm

[Ben]

Who else may have seen them, Stephen?

[Brenda]

I have no doubt Mary was in arrears on her rent, but I've wondered if McCarthy might have greatly exaggerated the amount, maybe in hopes a relative with money might show up after news of Mary's death got out.

[Stephen Thomas]

Who else may have seen them, Stephen?

No idea, Ben, but that Times inquest report definitely states that others did.

[Ben]

Hi Stephen,

The only other descriptions of men seen with the deceased in relation to the Kelly murder derive from Mmes. Cox and Maxwell, but neither looked anything like "Mr. Astrakhan". There was some confused tittle-tattle doing the rounds very early on involving supposedly "respectable" men, but that had all been sifted through by police and presuambly rejected by them, since none of it appeared at the inquest.

Best regards,
Ben

[Khanada]

I have no doubt Mary was in arrears on her rent, but I've wondered if McCarthy might have greatly exaggerated the amount, maybe in hopes a relative with money might show up after news of Mary's death got out.

That possibility has occurred to me, but here's another one that I wonder about from time to time...

McCarthy naturally saw the mess the bed had become after the murder -- could he have padded the figure to take into account the cost of replacing the mattress and bedclothes, in hopes someone would pay it? (The woodwork would wash off, so the bedframe was presumably salvageable.)

OK, it's a random notion...

[perrymason]

I think I would side with Ben on the issue of other witnesses Stephen....confusion with stories, absolutely, a corroberated story for Hutchinson? If so only until the 16th, when the #1 suspect for the police is again Blotchy Face.

Like it or not, Mary Ann is believed to be the last person to see Mary Kelly...and the only one to have seen her with a man that night.

Sam....I perhaps did my usual too long on it, but the arrears story is the essential platform for suggestions that Mary Kelly would leave her room again that night, even if we have no evidence of it. I merely reminded that there is no evidence that Mary had any eviction fears, warnings, or immediate needs that required money that night. In fact it appears she was at home, perhaps in bed relatively early for a street whore, and looking forward to Mayors Day.

Best regards.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
Regarding rent arrears, I have always felt it strange that Mjk was responsible for the rent, at least up to Barnetts departure eight days previous.
According to the Times Nov 10th, McCarthy states that Mary Jane came originally to live with a man named Kelly[ name obviously wrong].
That give the impression that she moved in with the rent payer ie Barnett.
Surely , and the breadwinner, in this case Joseph would have been responsible for keeping the roof over there heads, and that being so would have been expected to keep his weekly payments up.
Why would he have initially have put the room in Kellys name, when without her common law working, would not have been in a position to pay.
I can understand that some rent arrears may have occured since Barnett lost his main occupation back in july, but surely he was responsible for that, and the reason why kelly was allowed to remain in that hovel since the 30th october was proberly out of compassion, and a deadline, which if Marys jolly antics are anything to go by, was not yet up.
Regards Richard.

[Sam Flynn]

Sam....I perhaps did my usual too long on it, but the arrears story is the essential platform for suggestions that Mary Kelly would leave her room again that night

It's not essential at all, Mike, but thanks for the explanation. Why McCarthy might have allowed Kelly and others to build up a head of arrears (the subject of this thread) is immaterial to whether she went out after 1AM. The fact of the matter is that she was in arrears - simple as that.