No announcement yet.


  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Lawrence

    I came across the following on a web-site "Not long after Mary Jane Kelly's death, Mrs. McCarthy stated that a man named Lawrence came to see her to make enquiries about Mary Jane Davies".

    I can find no mention of this in any of the documents that I have and nothing to suggest where it might have originated.

    Does anyone have any thoughts?

  • #2
    Hi Ajawr,
    This is new to me, the name Lawrence originated from a report in the ''Star '' November 9th [ Press reports], where a Mrs Hewitt stated that the man Lawrence was a drover, who she believed was the victims husband.
    I have never seen it referred to from Mrs McCarthy, can you point out the web site you viewed it?
    Regards Richard.


    • #3
      This could be interesting.


      • #4
        Update on Lawrence

        Since making enquiries the web site got back to me saying that they had made a mistake and that the entry should read "Mrs. Hewitt" and not Mrs. Carthy or Mc'Carthy.

        I guess it's yet another false hope !!


        • #5
          Also, I believe the source may be Karen Trenouth:

          Some interesting stuff, but beware - there's also a Maybrick connection.


          • #6
            Well I guess that's sorted.. but even so, the man Lawrence seems to have existed in Mrs Hewitt's eyes.
            One would assume that as Millers court had only a few dwellings , that mistakes would not be in abundance, but that does not appear so.
            Take Mrs Maxwell..unless Mary Kelly frequented the lodging house/houses in Dorset street, then it is likely she mistook young Miss Albrook as her .[ who worked in one]
            As for Lawrence would appear that as none of her account corresponds with that of the victim , she was referring to someone completely different.
            Even years later, people in the area , believed the Millers court location was different to where it was.
            I guess we have to take into account that the area in 1888 was so vastly populated that mistakes were inevitable.
            Regards Richard.


            • #7
              All the same , has anyone tried running [Mary Davies] through the mill alongside the very little we supposedly know about our Mary ?


              moonbegger .


              • #8
                Many many times. Under all the spellings I could think of for 'Davies'. Chris Scott has spent years on this. But I'm someone who doesn't believe one word of her story. If she was operating under anything close to her own name, and if she had any kind of close or extended family, then I would expect someone would come forward to claim her even though she had gone to the bad. Apart from any other consideration they could have made money on it by selling her story to whichever newspaper paid them the most for it. It's not as if her murder wasn't very widely publicized all over the place. It wasn't exactly a secret. But no one came forward. Not even 'Jonto' her 'brother in the army' or her cousin who helped in her downfall at Cardiff after she came out of the sanitarium--where other people may have known her and could have profited by it.


                • #9
                  Hi Chris

                  Yes and Debra Ariff too has raked over the much if not possibly more so than Chris Scott (and I'm sure he won't mind me saying that)...For example Debs went through the regimental records of the Guards Regiments looking out every possible Ianto, Jonto, John too, you name it, who could've been a possible relative (surname regardless)...and when two researchers of this calibre fail, then one has to conclude we're missing something this case I suspect it's a single word of truth, regarding her name at least, from MJK...

                  All the best



                  • #10

                    Hello Dave. Well spoke. Goes double for me.



                    • #11

                      Thanks everyone - I guess this was just a simple mistake on a web-site but it's good to know someone is out there to help.


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by ajayr View Post
                        Thanks everyone - I guess this was just a simple mistake on a web-site but it's good to know someone is out there to help.
                        In the 1881 census, at 15, Holt Road in the West Derby area of Liverpool, there's a Lawrence Davies (19) who's a "Servant Dairyman" to a "Cow Keeper". Just above him in the list is Bridget O'Connor (21) who is a "Dom Serv. Dairymaid" born in Ireland.

                        "Lawrence" "Davies" "Cattle" "Ireland" match but "21" "Liverpool" "Bridget" & "O'Connor" don't of course!

                        Regards, Bridewell.
                        Regards, Bridewell.


                        • #13
                          Did MJK have a relationship with a man who was a drover? The suggestion surfaces in a number of reports, most notably in the interview with Mrs Hewitt.

                          I find it hard to accept that Joe Barnett was ever a drover. An orange seller, yes, the Cockney Irish were heavily involved in that trade; a Billingsgate porter, yes, humping boxes and baskets of fish about. But a drover? How would an East End boy have got into that game?

                          Unless I'm misunderstanding the occupation being described, we are talking about experienced men bringing valuable livestock from the provinces into London to be sold at market or shipped to the continent. How would Joe have got a job like that? What farmer would have entrusted his stock to a Cockney lodging house dweller?

                          It would make more sense if MJK had one relationship with a man who was an orange seller and market porter and another with a drover, rather than a single relationship with a man who had all three occupations.


                          • #14
                            So many questions about MJK's life and I think it safe to assume her accounts were embellished or included lies. But many who lie have a kernel of truth within the lie. I wonder if MJK did.

                            For instance she claimed to have married someone called Davies in 1879 who was killed in a coal mine explosion a couple of years later. There was a coal mine explosion in Wales in July 1880 where 120 souls were lost. Two with the name Davies, one born in 1846 (William) and one born in 1862 (James). James would likely be the best bet for a husband - however he was single. William was married but I have yet to check to whom and her age. William would have been 33 when MJK says she married, she would have been about 17.
                            Last edited by etenguy; 11-18-2018, 05:27 AM.