Tweet
Friday, November 9, 1888
WHITECHAPEL
ANOTHER APPALING ATROCITY
A Woman Literally Hacked to Pieces
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BODY
Bloodhounds Called in to the Assistance of the Police
At half-past 10 this morning the dead body of a woman, with her head almost severed from her body was found in an untenanted outhouse or shed in Dorset-court (sic), Dorset-street, Commercial-street, Spitalfields. It had evidently been there for some hours, but several scavengers who were in the court at nine o’clock this morning declare that the body was not there then. They might, however, have been mistaken, as the place is very dark. An alarm was immediately raised, and an inspector of police and a number of constables were soon on the spot. It is remarkable that Dorset-court is exactly opposite the house in Dorset-street in which the unfortunate woman, Annie Chapman, used to lodge. The discovery created the greatest excitement in the neighbourhood, and crowds quickly gathered at the scene.
SPECIAL ACCOUNT
The police, as on previous occasions, are very reticent concerning the details, but an EVENING POST reporter succeeded in discovering that it has transpired that the mutilation of the body is even worse than in the case of the Hanbury-street murder. The present crime differs from the others, insasmuch as the victims were all found in the open air, but the body of the woman discovered this morning was found in a room of a house of doubtful fame. The scene presented was described as surpassing all imagination in its sickening horror. The woman was lying on the floor. All the flesh of her face had been taken off, rendering identification by means of the face impossible. Her breasts had also been cut off and frightful to relate, had been placed on a table in the room. The flesh on the thigh bones had also been removed, and lay scattered about. The abdomen had been ripped up and laid completely open. Those who first made the discovery say they were all but overpowered by the revolting sight that met their gaze. Of course the locality was at once taken possession of by the police and no one but those in authority or having lodgings in the neighbourhood were permitted to pass down Dorset-street. Miller’s-court, the place in which the house is situated, is a narrow turning out of Dorset-street, on the right hand side. The spot of the latest murder is only about five minutes’ walk from Mitre-square and seven minutes’ walk from 29, Hanbury-street. There are crowds of people in Commercial-street, all excitedly discussing the crime. The civic procession in the City withdrew some of the constables from the district, and the local police found themselves very severely pressed. The detectives engaged in other cases however were immediately on the spot endeavouring to pick up some clue, which one of them states he is in the hopes of finding, as the crime being committed in the dwelling house the murderer may have left some trace by which the ends of justice will be served.
LATEST DETAILS
The crime was first discovered by a young man named McCarthy, who went to the house this morning with his mother to collect the rent. On opening the front door he saw a body lying in the passage, and he immediately closed the door and drew his mother away, saying, “Mother, there is another murder!” An alarm was soon raised, and the police at once took possession of the house and refused admittance to all except officials.
Morris Lewis, a tailor, states that he was playing “pitch and toss” in the court at nine o’clock this morning, and an hour before that he had seen the woman leave the house and return with some milk. There is no evidence as to who was in the house with her, and up to two o’clock there was no clue to the perpetrator of the murder. Bloodhounds were sent for by the police immediately they heard of the crime.
The murdered woman was about 21 years of age, and the neighbours say that she was of genteel appearance, but they do not know her name or anything about her, except that recently she lived with a man, from whom she is now separated. This man was sent for, and at once identified the body.
The Divisional Surgeon arrived at the scene of the murder at five minutes to two o’clock, accompanied by Mr. Dukes, another doctor, and they at once proceeded to view the body. It is confidently stated that the deceased was seen after 10 o’clock this morning in company with a paramour when they were both drinking at the public-house at the corner of Dorset-street. The deceased’s name is Mary Jane Kelly, and the man she lived with sells oranges in the streets. After speaking to her in the public house he left her there for the purpose of vending oranges, and he states that he did not see her again until her corpse was discovered.
A later despatch from Whitechapel at 2.40pm says the mutilation of the body reveal such a shocking state of things as has probably never been equalled in the annals of crime. The head was not lying apart from the body, but was hanging by a mere thread. Both ears and the nose were cut off. All the flesh was stripped completely off the thighs and the woman was not only disembowelled but the womb and other parts are missing similar to the previous murders in this locality. Mr. Bond of Westminster Hospital, was in the room with the other doctors and the body was photographed. A post mortem examination will be made. Dr. J.R. Gabe, of Mecklenberg-square, has seen the body, but in reply to questions put to him declined to give any details. He merely says that he has seen a great deal in dissecting rooms but that he never in his life saw such a horrible sight as the murdered woman presents. In addition to the mutilations already named it was afterward ascertained that the forehead and even the cheeks were skinned, and one hand pushed into the stomach.
Dorset-street, Spitalfields, is composed of registered lodging-houses, one or two small shops, and private houses. The entrance to Dorset-street is through an archway running under a private house two storeys high, and the houses in the court are of the same height. Within a few yards to the entrance of the court is a poster headed in large bold type “£100 Reward - Whitechapel Murder” – a gruesome reminiscence of the previous atrocities.
The most extraordinary rumours are about as to the hour when the woman was last seen alive. One man has informed our representative that he was in the court at eight o’clock this morning when he saw Kelly go out for the purpose of fetching some milk. Two women aver that they saw her in a public-house, drinking with a man. This was between ten and half-past, but the persons residing in the public house state that they have no recollection of her, and the point is rendered the more difficult through Kelly not being generally known.
THE LOCALITY OF THE MURDER
Another and later account says: - As the news of the murder spread, the greatest excitement prevailed in the neighbourhood, and late in the afternoon men, women, and children gathered at the end of Dorset-street, which leads out of Commercial-street, eager to view the scene of the tragedy, and to glean the latest intelligence with respect to the terrible occurrence. The police, however, on duty at the entrance to the thoroughfare blocked it to all save those living in the street or having official business. Miller’s-court, leading at right angles out of Dorset-street, is a miserable alley, forming a cul-de-sac. There are three or four houses of the meanest description, with whitewashed fronts, and approached by a narrow arched passage, not more than a yard and a half wide. At night it is lighted by three or four gas brackets standing out from one side of the wall; but at best the approach is evidently a terribly dangerous one. The surrounding district is very rough, and besides being in the close vicinity of Spitalfields Market, there are various concomitant elements, such as proximity to some of the roughest portions of the East-end of London, which all tend to make the locality a very dangerous one. The examination of the body had not been concluded when this report was written, Dr. Phillips, the divisional surgeon of police for the district, being still engaged upon the scene. The police-inspector on duty said he was instructed to admit no one to the scene of the murder, nor was he to give the Press any information with respect to what was being done. When the post-mortem has been concluded, it is understood that the remains will be removed to the mortuary in Old Montague-street to await the inquest.
Saturday, November 10, 1888
NUMBER SEVEN!
And the Whitechapel Assassin Still at Large
LATEST DETAILS THIS AFTERNOON
Last Night in the Slums of the Panic Stricken District
In spite of every effort of the police the Whitechapel murderer was still at large this afternoon, and the fearful crime committed at Dorset-street, Spitalfields, in the early hours of yesterday morning, still remains enshrouded in the veil of impenetrable mystery which has all along characterised the series of East-end tragedies. The police are utterly at fault. No clue, not even the slightest, has been found to the identity of the assassin, and he is still at liberty to go on with his nefarious deeds of blood and mutilation. An EVENING POST reporter has been on the scene of the crime last night and this morning, and the result of his inquiries are given below. It is true that two arrests were made last night and in the small hours of this morning, but with no result, both of the suspected persons, having been released. There is now no one in custody. One of the men was arrested on the information of some unfortunates and was taken to the Commercial-street Station, followed by an immense crowd.
PATROLLING THE STREETS
Last night, the strictest police regulations were observed, the streets were patrolled by large numbers of constables, both in uniform and plain clothes, while the detectives engaged were everywhere. No one up to 11 o’clock was allowed to loiter in Dorset-street; but after that time the vigilance of the police was somewhat relaxed. Only one constable was stationed at the head of Dorset-street, while two brother officers kept guard at the entrance to Miller’s-court. There was a number of rough characters gathered in knots round the locality, while, notwithstanding the feverish panic which undoubtedly prevails in the district, there were numbers of unfortunates in the streets. The night was fine and dry, a fact which doubtless caused so many people to be around at midnight.
THE POLICE AT THE LORD MAYOR’S SHOW
One significant fact has not been called attention to. At the hour it is suggested the crime was actually committed some of the extra police in the district were being withdrawn in order to allow them to perform duty in the City during the Lord Mayor’s Show. It is thought that the murderer being aware of the fact, ventured abroad, saw his opportunity, seized it, and again took the life of a fellow-creature. This may only be a mere coincidence, but, under the circumstances, it is not to be disregarded. That he is somewhere in the district is an opinion entertained by a large section, both of the officials and the community generally. Therefore, the house to house inspection which was commenced yesterday afternoon, and prosecuted with activity till late into the night, it is hoped will be productive of good results.
THE VIGILANCE COMMITTEE WAKES UP
The local organisation known as the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee are again bestirring themselves. It is now nearly five weeks since the Mitre-square and Berner-street crimes were committed, and the work of the Committee fell off considerably, not because of any lack of interest, but because there were no funds at their disposal. The money was coming in very slowly, and previous efforts of the Vigilants, which were entirely of a voluntary character, had been so exhausting as to render a period of rest absolutely necessary. Now, however, it has been decided to operate at night time, and Mr. Harris, the secretary, states that a meeting is to be held at the headquarters, “The Crown” public-house, in the Mile End-road, on Tuesday next.
THEORIES OF THE CRIME
As usual in such cases of crime as the present, there are many theories and rumours of the vaguest description current. When the first murder of the series was committed, simply because the word “bayonet” was used at the inquest suspicion fell on the soldiers, who sometimes visit the locality from the Tower. The idea, however, proved to be fallacious and was duly exploded. Next, because it was clear the murderer possessed skill in the use of his death—dealing instrument, at once the theory was evolved that he could be no other than a butcher. Inquiries, some of them of a very annoying character to individuals, were made, but nothing reliable was absolutely discovered. The idea of the “butcher murderer” is not altogether exploded, and some enterprising pressman has connected the arrival of cattle boats from the Continent on Thursdays with the tragedy. The theory is that the murderer was a drover or butcher, employed on these boats, and that he does not reside here at all, but returns with his boat on the Sunday or Monday. But what does he do with himself during the intervening period, when the utmost police and detective vigilance is being exercised? There has been great activity shown in interviewing neighbours of the deceased, who generally receives a good character. Some of the persons state that no more was heard, while this is contradicted by several, who avow they heard the cry of “Murder” between two and three in the morning, but such alarms being of common occurrence in the locality they attached no particular importance to it.
RETICENCE OF THE AUTHORITIES
The most arduous part of the operations fall on the police constables who patrol the streets. They have, of course, orders not to divulge anything they may know, yet they are plied with question after question. Last night there were several drunken men in Commercial-street who caused the police much trouble by their persistent endeavours to carry on a conversation respecting the murder. Much patience was exhibited by individual members of the staff in dealing with such characters. They of course have to obey orders. The superior officials still are very reticent and uncommunicative, and the greatest difficulty is experienced in obtaining from them any facts. The authorities are constantly in receipt of letters, some of them anonymous, throwing out hints and suggestions, which have all to be considered. Indeed, in one case a prominent tradesman in the district was accused by name directly in a letter of being the murderer himself. Upon inquires being made of him he expressed the greatest indignation, and offered £20 to know who it was that gave the hint to the police. These letters are doubtless the outcome of the police handbill which has been extensively circulated, asking householders and occupiers to give any information of suspicious characters that may come under their notice.
THE INQUEST
The inquest has not yet been fixed, but it is believed on good authority that it will be held on Monday.
LETTER FROM “JACK THE RIPPER”
Last night, in the pillar-box at the corner of Northumberland-street and Marylebone-road, was found a letter directed to the police, and its contents were as follows: “Dear Boss – I shall be busy tomorrow night in Marylebone. I have two booked for blood and guts. – Yours, JACK THE RIPPER. Look out about 10 o’clock, Marylebone-road.
FURTHER DETAILS
With the closing of the local taverns in Spitalfields last night, the excitement which prevailed throughout yesterday, consequent upon the murder of Mary Jane Kelly, in Dorset-street, abated, and the neighbourhood assumed its normal appearance. Between the hours of one and four nothing which may be termed unusual occurred. Women of the unfortunate class paraded the several highways with an unconcernedness which may be termed remarkable, considering the recent hideous crimes which have been committed, and of which these poor wretches have been the victims. The drafts of auxiliary detectives which have been requisitioned since the perpetration of the Mitre-square and Berner-street tragedies, from the suburban districts, performed their unenviable duties in the regulation manner; and to a casual pedestrian who may have passed through the district after midnight nothing whatever existed to denote the commission of a crime hitherto unknown in the annals of the police. It is generally admitted by the police that a murder attended by such hideous circumstances has never before been known. The deliberate manner on which the murderer has slain and mutilated his last victim has completely nonplussed the authorities. They state that they have adopted every possible precaution to entrap the fiend without success, and now that he has adopted the precaution of dissecting his unfortunate victims in their own homes, their ends are completely defeated.
THE TIME OF THE MURDER
Notwithstanding every effort, the police assert that they have failed to establish the time at or about which the crime was committed. Many persons who have been interviewed state that the unfortunate woman never left the house at 26, Dorset-street, after she entered it on Thursday midnight; while, on the other hand, numerous persons who declare that they were companions of the deceased, and knew her well, state that she came out of her home at eight o’clock on Friday morning for provisions, and furthermore that they were drinking with her in the Britannia, a local tavern, at 10 o’clock on the same morning as her mutilated body was found at 11. In view of these conflicting statements, the hour at which the murder was committed is, of course the all-important point in connection with the crime.
A CRY IN THE DEAD OF THE NIGHT
Our representative has interviewed a woman named Kennedy, who was on the night of the murder staying with her parents at a house situate in the court immediately opposite the room in which the body of Mary Kelly was found. This woman’s statement, if true (and there is very little reason for doubting its veracity) establishes the time at which the murderer commenced his operations upon his victim. She states that about three o’clock on Friday morning she entered Dorset-street on her way to her parents’ house, which is situate immediately opposite that in which the murder was committed. She noticed three persons at the corner of the street, near the Britannia public-house. There was a man - a young man, respectably dressed, and with a dark moustache – talking to a woman whom she did not know, and also a female, poorly clad and without any head-gear. The man and woman appeared to be the worse for liquor, and she heard the man ask, “Are you coming?” whereupon the woman, who appeared to be obstinate, turned in an opposite direction to which the man apparently wished her to go. Mrs. Kennedy went on her way, and nothing unusual occurred until about half an hour later. She states that she did not retire to rest immediately she reached her parents’ abode, but sat up, and between half-past three and a quarter to four she heard a cry of “Murder!” in a woman’s voice proceed from the direction which Mary Kelly’s room was situated. As the cry was not repeated, she took no further notice of the circumstances until this morning, when she found the police in possession of the small houses in this court. When questioned by the police as to what she had heard throughout the night has made a statement to the above effect.
STRANGE STORY BY A WOMAN
She has since supplemented that statement by the following; “On Wednesday evening, about eight o’clock, me and my sister were in the neighbourhood of the Bethnal Green-road, when we were accosted by a very suspicious man, about 40 years of age. He was about 5 feet 7 inches, and wore a short jacket, over which he had a long top coat. He had a black moustache, and wore a billyc0ck hat. He invited me to accompany him into a lonely spot “as he was known about here, and there was a policeman looking at him.” She asserts that no policeman was in sight. He made several strange remarks and appeared to be agitated. He was very white in the face and made every endeavour to prevent them “looking him straight in the face.” He carried a black bag. He avoided walking with them, and led the way into a very dark thoroughfare, “at the back of the workhouse,” inviting them to follow, which they did. He then pushed open a small door in a pair of large gates, and requested one of them to follow him, remarking, “I only want one of you,” whereupon the women became suspicious. He acted in a very strange and suspicious manner, and refused to leave his bag in the possession of one of the females. Both women became alarmed at his actions, and escaped, at the same time raising an alarm of “Jack the Ripper.” A gentleman who was passing is stated to have interrupted the man while the women made their escape. Mrs. Kennedy asserts that the man whom she saw on Friday morning with the woman at the corner of Dorset-street resembled very closely the individual who causes such alarm on the night in question, and that she would recognise him again if confronted with him.
The description of the man suspected of the murder tallies exactly with that in the possession of the police, and there is very little reason to doubt that the murderer entered the murdered woman’s home on Thursday night or early on Friday morning.
THE MAN UNDER ARREST
The police have made two arrests in connection with the murder. One man was accused by some woman late last night of being the murderer, but he was released after a short detention, his statements being satisfactorily verified. The second arrest was made in the small hours of the morning, when a man, apparently a foreigner, was brought to Commercial-street Station on suspicion. He was still detained at six o’clock but no importance is attached to the apprehension.
RELEASE OF SUSPECTS
The two men arrested during the night on suspicion of being concerned in the murder in Dorset-street yesterday have been released, and at half-past nine the police had no one in custody. They, however, continue to receive statements from persons who believe they can throw light upon the mysterious side of the murder, but investigations have proved them valueless.
THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER
Inquest to be held on Monday at Shoreditch Town Hall.
Monday, November 12, 1888
THE SEVENTH ATROCITY
Inquest on the Body of the Dorset Street Victim – Verdict
A SCRAMBLE FOR THE CORPSE
JURORS TAKE OBJECTION TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE CORONER
The inquest on the body of the Dorset-street victim, Mary Janet Kelly, was opened at the Shoreditch Town Hall at 11 o’clock this morning by Dr. R. Macdonald, the Coroner for the North-Eastern Division of Middlesex, the deputy coroner, Mr. A. Hodgkinson, being also present. Inspector Nairn and Inspector Abberline watched the case on behalf of the police. The court room, which was of very small dimensions, was inconveniently crowded. The Town Hall was undergoing repairs, or the inquiry would have been held there, and the Council Room was engaged.
Before the jurymen were sworn, one of the men who had been summoned said he did not understand why he had been summoned on a jury in Shoreditch when the murder occurred in Whitechapel.
The Coroner: Do you think we do not know what we are doing?
The Juryman: I object.
The Coroner: You have no right to object. You are summoned here and must do your duty. If any of the jurymen persist in objecting I shall know how to deal with them.
The Juryman: The murder occurred in the Whitechapel district. I am on the list for Shoreditch, and I do not see why I should be summoned about the matter.
The Coroner (impatiently): I shall not argue with the jury. If any juryman has any distinct objection let him say so.
Two other jurymen objected.
The Coroner: I may tell you that jurisdiction lies where the body lies, and not where the murder was committed; and the body lies in Shoreditch.
The Coroner’s officer than asked the jury to select a foreman, but several who were selected refused to fill the post, and some difficulty was experienced until a foreman could be sworn.
Ultimately, after some loss of time, the objection of the jurors was withdrawn and the usual preliminaries gone through. At the suggestion of the Coroner it was decided that the jurymen had better the view the locality where the murder was committed, as well as the body.
On the return of the jury.
The Coroner said the papers had been making a great fuss as to the jurisdiction and who should hold the inquest. As a matter of fact, there had not been any difficulty at all. He had had no communication at all with Mr. Baxter. The body was in his jurisdiction, it was moved to his mortuary, and there was an end of it. One of the previous murders was committed in his district, but the police moved the body to the Whitechapel mortuary, and therefore the inquest was held by Mr. Baxter. The question of jurisdiction was decided by the place in which the jury was lying, irrespective of where the murder was committed.
The first witness called was Joseph Barnett.
Joseph Barnett then deposed that he was a fish porter, lately living at 24, New-street, Bishopsgate. He had lived with the deceased near on eight months. Her name was Mary Janet Kelly by her maiden name, which she always went by. He had seen the body, and identified here (sic) as that of Kelly, but he identified her only by the hair and eyes. He was positive that it was the same woman. He was in Miller’s-court about eight months. On the Tuesday week before the murder, the 30th of last month, he and deceased separated because she had a person – a prostitute – whom she took in out of compassion. He objected to this woman being taken in. His being out of work had nothing whatever to do with it. When he left her it would be between five and six o’clock. He saw her last alive between half-past seven and a quarter to eight on the night previous to the murder, when he went to see how she was. She stayed there for a quarter of an hour. They were on friendly terms; but, as he was out of work, he told her he was sorry he could not give her anything. They did not have a drink together. Deceased was quite sober. Generally speaking, he always found her of sober habits. Occasionally she got drunk. There was a female who resided in the court with deceased when he last saw her. On several occasions he had talks with her about her parents, and how she was brought up. Deceased told him she was born in Limerick, and when very young went to live in Wales. She said it would be about four years ago when she came to London. Her fathers’ name, she said, was John Kelly, a ganger in some ironworks in Carnarvonshire. She said she had one sister, who was of a respectable character. He thought she said she had six or seven brothers, one of them being in the army. He never met any of these relatives. She had been married very young – about 16 in Wales, to a collier whose name, he thought, was Davies. She lived with him until he met with his death in an explosion. How long that was he did not know. She was living some time at Cardiff with her cousin, who, he thought, was the cause of deceased’s downfall. She went to France with a gentleman, but did not remain there long, because she did not like it. From there she came to Ratcliff-highway, where she lived opposite the gasworks with a man named Morganstone, as he thought she said, but witness had never seen the man. There was another man, named Joseph Plummer (sic), a mason’s plasterer whom she was very fond of, and whom she lived with in Pennington Street. Witness first picked up with deceased in Spitalfields. The first night they had a drink together, and he then made arrangements to see her on the following day (Saturday), when they agreed that they should live together. They took lodgings in George-street, Commercial-street. He lived with her all through until he left her the other day on very friendly terms. On several occasions he heard her ask when he brought home the evening paper about the murderer. She did not express fear of any one individual. They used to have little quarrels, which were always made up again.
The Coroner remarked that Barnett had given his evidence very well indeed.
On the suggestion of the Coroner, it was decided that Dr. Phillips should be asked to attend this afternoon, and state roughly what the cause of death was without going into the details.
Thomas Boyer, of 27, Dorset-street, Spitalfields, a servant to Mr. Carter, a general chandler, was next sworn. He deposed that at a quarter to eleven on Friday morning, he was ordered to go to Mary Jane’s – as she was known – room for the rent. He knocked at the door, but got no answer. He again knocked, but there was still no answer. He then went round by the gutter spout and looked through the window – the larger one, where there was a broken pane.
Here a plan of the premises was put in and sworn to.
Witness continuing, said he pulled the curtain on one side and looked in and saw two lumps of flesh lying on the table. This table was close against the bed. The second time he looked he saw a body or somebody lying on the bed and blood on the floor. He at once went very quietly back to Mr. McCarthy, his master. He then stood in the shop and witness told him what he had seen. They both then, directly went down to the police-station, but before going they went again to the window. No one in the neighbourhood knew of the matter before they went to the station. They returned with an inspector of police. Witness had often seen the deceased. He knew the previous witness “Joe” from seeing him go in and out. He had seen deceased once under the influence of drink.
By the Jury: He last saw deceased alive on Wednesday afternoon in the court.
The next witness, John McCarthy, a grocer and lodging-house keeper, of 27, Dorset-street, corroborated the evidence of the previous witness. He knew the deceased as Mary Janet Kelly, and he had no doubt as to her identity. At the police station he saw Inspector Beck, who came to the spot at once. Deceased had lived in the room in Miller’s-court about 10 months with the man Joe. He didn’t know whether they were married or not, but they lived on very comfortable terms together. Everything in the room belonged to witness. The rent of the room was 4s, 6d. a week. Deceased was about 29s in arrears. He was supposed to get his rent weekly. Witness very often saw the deceased the worse for drink. She was a very quiet woman when sober but directly she had a little drop she became noisy. Deceased was never helpless.
The next witness was Mary Ann Cox, who said she was a widow, but got her living in the streets. She lived in No. 5 room, Miller’s-court. Witness last saw deceased alive at a quarter to twelve midnight on Thursday in Dorset-street. She was very much intoxicated. There was a short stout man, shabbily dressed, with her. He had no overcoat on, but wore a longish dark coat. He had a pot of ale in his hand. He wore a round black felt hat. He had a broadish face, with full carotty moustache, and the chin was shaved a little. Witness saw them going into deceased’s room. The man had nothing in his hand but a can of beer. Deceased said “good night,” and remarked she was going to have a song. Witness then saw that she was intoxicated, and went into her own room. She heard deceased sing the first line, “A violet I plucked from my mother’s grave when a boy.” Witness remained a little while in her room, and then went out again. Deceased was still singing. At three o’clock she returned to her own room again. She did not undress at all that night, and heard no noise. She didn’t sleep a wink that night up to the time the murder was discovered, and she did not hear during the whole time any noise or cry. She heard someone go out of the court about a quarter past six. For all she knew he might have walked into the court and out again, or he might have been a policeman. She thought the age of the man she saw with deceased would be about 35 or 36. All his clothes were dark. His boots made no noise but she did not notice them very much. Deceased had no hat on, and was wearing a dark green shabby skirt.
By the Jury: She should know the man again if she saw him. There was a light in the room of deceased after she and the man went in.
By the Coroner: She was certain there was not the least sound of any noise during the night. Witness very often saw deceased the worse for drink.
Mrs. Elizabeth Prater, the wife of William Prater, a boot machinist, living at No. 20 room, Miller’s-court, said deceased lived in the room below hers. She left her room on the Thursday about five o’clock in the evening and returned close upon one on Friday morning. She stood in the corner of the court for a few minutes till about 20 past one. Witness spoke to no one except Mr. McCarthy. In going upstairs she could see a light – a glimmer – in deceased’s room if there was a light, but on this occasion, not taking particular notice, she could not remember whether there was a light in the room or not. As there was only a thin partition, it was possible to hear the slightest noise in deceased’s room. As soon as witness reached her room she went to bed and fell asleep at once, having had a “little something.” She slept very soundly. Her kitten, “Little tiddles,” disturbed her about half-past three or four o’clock. Just as she turned the kitten off the bed and turned round to go to sleep again she heard, in a faintish voice, “Oh, murder!” and it seemed to proceed from the court, and near where she was living. Being accustomed to hear such noise she took no notice. After that she heard no noise whatever, and went to sleep again. About five o’clock she went to have a look round, and saw several men harnessing horses in Dorset-street. After having a drink in the Ten Bells she went home again, and slept till 11 o’clock. She was certain there was no singing in the court when she when home first at half-past one.
Carline Maxwell, of 14, Dorset-street, the wife of Henry Maxwell, a lodging-house deputy, said she knew the deceased as Mary Jane, also Joe Barnett. She believed the former was an unfortunate girl. Witness only spoke to her twice.
The Coroner cautioned witness to be careful in giving her evidence.
Witness said she saw deceased standing at the corner of Miller’s-court on Friday morning from eight to half-past. She knew it was that time because at that time her husband came off duty. Witness spoke to her across the street, and said, “Why, Mary, what brings you out so early?” and she replied, “Oh Carrie, I feel so bad.” They knew one another by name very well. Witness asked her to have a drink, but she declined, as she had just had one, and from the motion of her head she imagined it was at the Britannia. Witness then left her, and went to Bishopsgate, and on returning saw deceased standing outside the Britannia, speaking to a man. This would be between eight-thirty and nine, or say a quarter to nine. She could not give any description of the man, as the two were some distance away, about 16 yards. The man was not tall, and rather stout.
Inspector Abberline said on second consideration he should think the distance was 25 yards.
Witness said the man wore dark clothes, and had a kind of plaid coat on. This was all she could say. Deceased had on a dark skirt, velvet body, and maroon shawl – a knitted one; no hat. Witness had seen her in drink, but she was not a notorious drunkard. Deceased did not associate with the people about there.
BY the Jury: Women walked about with all kinds of men, so that there was nothing particular in the circumstance she saw. If the man had worn a silk hat she thought she might have noticed it, but would not pledge herself to it.
Sarah Lewis, living at 24, Great Pearl-street, Spitalfields, a laundress, said she went to Miller’s court on Friday morning at 2.30 a.m. She went to a Mrs. Keller’s. Standing outside a lodging-house she saw a man on the pavement. He was by himself; he was not very tall but rather stout, and wore a black wideawake hat. He was looking up the court, as if waiting for someone to come out. She heard no noise in the court; there was no one there. On getting into Mrs. Keller’s room she sat in a chair and dozed. She woke up at half-past three. She heard the clock strike, and sat awake till nearly four, when she heard a female voice scream loudly – it seemed to be a young woman – “Murder!” It was only one scream. They often hear such screams and cries in the neighbourhood, but no notice is taken of them. In reply to a question from the coroner as to whether she had seen any suspicious person about, witness said she and a female friend were going down the Bethnal-Green-road, when they were accosted by a gentleman who wanted them to follow him; they refused to do so, and he offered to treat them. He did not seem to mind which one of the two went with him. He was not a tall man, but very pale, with a black moustache. He had a black shiny bag with him about six or nine inches long. He had a high round hat on. The man wore a brownish long overcoat, with a black short coat underneath. The two girls then ran away. On Friday morning, about half-past two, when she was going to Miller’s-court, she met the same man with a female in Commercial-street, near the Britannia public-house. They were standing talking together. She looked back at him, and he seemed to know her. Witness met no policeman at the time. She would know him again if she met him. The man was not then wearing any overcoat.
Dr. George Baxter Phillips, divisional surgeon of police, deposed that he is surgeon to the H Division of the police, and resides at 2, Spital-square. He was called to Miller’s-court on Friday morning about 11 o’clock. Having described the room – a photograph being handed round to the jurymen – he said he looked through the broken window and satisfied himself that the mutilated corpse lying on the bed was not in need of any immediate attention. He also came to the conclusion that there was no one else within view to whom he could render any professional assistance. About 1.30 the door leading into the room was broken open; he believed the direction was given by Superintendent Arnold, who had arrived on the scene. Dr. Phillips then stated how he found the furniture, and said the mutilated body of a female was lying two-thirds over towards the edge of the bedstead. She had only her under-garments upon her, and from his subsequent examination he was sure the body had been removed subsequent to the injury which caused her death from one side of the bedstead to the other. The large quantity of blood under the bedstead, the saturated condition of the palliasse, pillow and sheets, led to the conclusion that the severance of the right-carotid artery was the immediate cause of her death.
The Coroner then suggested that the remainder of the doctor’s evidence should remain till the post mortem examination had been concluded.
Upon reassembling after a short adjournment for luncheon.
The Coroner said that it had come to his ears that some jurymen had been making statements to the effect that they ought not to have been there that day. The Coroner asked if any jurymen had said such a thing.
There being no response, the Coroner remarked that he must have been misinformed, but if such a remark had been made, and he knew who it was, he should deal with it very severely.
Julia Venterney, of No. 1, Miller’s-court, a charwoman, deposed to the deceased and Barnet (sic) being on good terms. On the night of the murder she might have dozed off slightly; but she heard no screams of murder or singing; if there had been such sounds she must have heard them.
Maria Harvey, of No. 3, New-court, Dorset-street, a laundress, said she knew the deceased as Mary Jane Kelly, and had slept with her on Monday and Tuesday. She was at the house of deceased on Thursday when Joe Barnet came in. They were always on the best of terms. Witness and deceased were very good friends. She never heard Kelly speak as if she were afraid of anyone.
Inspector Beck, of the H Division of police, was next sworn. He could not say whether the deceased was known to the police in the neighbourhood. The witness also corroborated much of the evidence already given.
Inspector F.G. Abberline, of Scotland Yard, was next called, and he stated he was in charge of the case on behalf of the police. He appeared on the scene of the murder about 11.30 a.m. on Friday morning. He was informed that the bloodhounds were on the way, so it was thought advisable not to force the door of the rooms at once. At 1.30 Superintendent Arnold arrived, and stated that the orders respecting the dogs had been countermanded, and directions were given for the door to be opened. He agreed with the doctor’s evidence. There were traces of a large fire in the grate of the deceased’s room, and since the ashes had been analysed, and the remains of various articles had been found; his own opinion was that they had been burnt to give the murderer light to see what he was about. The key of the room had been missing for some time, according to a statement from Barnet. There was nothing further that it was necessary for the jury to know.
This concluded the evidence.
The coroner said he thought it was quite unnecessary for two courts to deal with these cases twice, and go over the same evidence. It was for the jury to decide as to the cause of death, and they have heard the doctor’s evidence that it was through the severance of the carotid artery by her throat being cut. For himself he was perfectly satisfied to leave the matter in the hands of the police.
After consultation the jury returned a verdict of wilful murder against some person or persons unknown.
ANOTHER ARREST
The police at Commercial-street Station made another arrest at three o’clock this morning in Dorset-street, at the scene of the murder. The man, who does not answer the description of the supposed murderer, was acting very suspiciously, and refused to satisfy the officers as to his recent movements. Inquiries are being made.
WHERE WERE THE BLOODHOUNDS?
The non-appearance of the bloodhounds in connection with this murder is the subject of much comment locally, and the prevailing opinion appears to be that some explanation should be forthcoming after the cry which was made for them after the last two murders, and in view of a recent instruction given by the Commissioner of Police. It is stated that the officer was waiting at Leman-street Police-station for six or seven hours on Friday for the hounds, which had been telegraphed for, but which did not arrive, and apparently no satisfactory reply.
LETTER FROM THE MURDERER
It is reported this morning from Spitalfields that Mrs. McCarthy, the wife of the landlord of No. 26, Dorset-street, this morning received by post a letter signed, “Jack the Ripper,” saying they were not to worry themselves, because he meant to do two more in the neighbourhood, a mother and daughter. The letter was taken immediately to Commercial-street Police-station and handed to the inspector on duty.
The text of the letter was as follows: - “Don’t alarm yourself. I am going to do another, but this time it was be a mother and daughter.” The letter, which was signed “Jack the Ripper,” was at once handed to the police.
Wednesday, November 14, 1888
THE MILLER’S-COURT MURDER
Three Arrests During the Night – Description of the Supposed Assassin
Between midnight and four o’clock this morning three arrests were made in the Eastern district in connection with the recent terrible murder. About one o’clock some young men had their suspicions aroused by the peculiar behaviour of a man in the vicinity of Spitalfields Flower Market. He assisted two women, and, after remaining considering (sic) with them for a considerable time tried to persuade them to accompany him into one of the small streets adjoining the market. These thoroughfares are in general gloomy and badly lighted, and the woman, being suspicious, refused to go with the man. He was followed for some distance by the watchers and ultimately handed over to a policeman who took him to Commercial-street Police-station. Here the man refused to give an account of himself or where he lived, on the ground that he did not wish his parents to be alarmed by police inquiries regarding him. Questioned as to his whereabouts on Thursday night and Friday morning last, the man gave various explanations and contradicted himself as frequently that it was considered advisable to detain him until his identity and antecedents were thoroughly investigated.
The two men taken into custody at Leman-street Station were alleged to bear some resemblance to the recently-published description of the man last seen in the company of the deceased woman Kelly. They were able, however, to give satisfactory accounts of themselves, and after these had been verified by the police the men were set at liberty. One result of the publication of the description of Kelly’s assassin has been to augment the staff of private and amateur detectives, who are on the look-out for the murderer. The streets in the East-end are now patrolled all night through by members of vigilance committees and others, one result of their zeal being almost hourly reports to the police of suspicious movements by various individuals on what the parties consider likely clues. Various reports as to rewards are also about, and have fired the imagination of a considerable number of people. The latest is that the Baroness Burdett-Coatts has offered any person, police official or civilian, who may capture or enable the authorities to capture the perpetrator of the murders, a sum of £1 per week for life, or in lieu thereof a large amount of money down. In view of the recent detailed description of the murderer communicated to the police, the prospects of being able to bring him to justice are spoken of more hopefully by the men of the force.
THE PROBABLE MURDERER
A fuller description of the man last seen in the company of the deceased woman Kelly, is published this morning. It has been furnished by George Hutchinson, formerly a groom but now a labourer. On Thursday last (said Hutchinson) I had been in Romford, in Essex and I returned from there almost two o’clock on Friday morning, having walked all the way. I came down Whitechapel-road late Commercial-street. As I passed Thrawl-street I passed a man standing at the corner of the street, and as I went towards Flower and Dean-street I met the woman Kelly, whom I knew very well, having been in her company a number of times. She said, “Mr Hutchinson, can you lend me sixpence?” I said, “I cannot, as I am spent out going down to Romford”. She then walked on towards Thrawl-street, saying, “I must go and look for some money.” The man who was standing at the corner of Thrawl-street then came towards her and put his hand on her shoulder and said something to her which I did not hear, and they both burst out laughing. He put his hand again on her shoulder, and they both walked slowly towards me. I walked on to the corner of Fashion-street, near the public-house. As they came by me his arm was still on her shoulder. He had a
SOFT FELT HAT
On, and this was drawn down somewhat over his eyes. I put down my head to look him in the face, and he turned and looked at me very slowly, and they walked across the road to Dorset-street. I followed them across, and stood at the corner of Dorset-street. They stood at the corner of Miller’s-court for about three minutes. Kelly spoke to the man in a loud voice, saying, “I have lost my handkerchief.” He pulled a red handkerchief out of his pocket, and gave it to Kelly, and they both went up the court together. I went to look up the court to see if I could see them but could not. I stood there for three-quarters of an hour to see if they came down again, but they did not, and so I went away. My suspicions were aroused by seeing the man was well-dressed; but I had no suspicion that he was the murderer. The man was about 5ft. 6in. in height, and 34 or 35 years of age, with dark complexion and dark moustache turned up at the ends. He was wearing a long dark coat, trimmed with astrachan (sic), a white collar with black necktie, in which was affixed a horseshoe pin. He wore a pair of dark spats, with light buttons, over button boots, and displayed from his waistcoat a massive gold chain. His watch chain had a big seal with a red stone hanging from it. He had a heavy moustache, curled up, and dark eyes and bushy eyebrows. He had no side whiskers, and his chin was clean shaven. He
LOOKED LIKE A FOREIGNER
I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes, but did not see any light in the house or hear any noise. I was out last night until three o’clock looking for him. I could swear to the man anywhere. I told one policeman on Sunday morning who I had seen, but did not go to the police station. I told one of the lodgers here about it yesterday, and he advised me to go to the police-station, which I did last night. The man I saw did not look as though he would attack another man. He carried a small parcel in his hand, about eight inches long, and it had a strap round it. He had it tightly grasped in his left hand. It looked as though it was covered with dark American cloth. He carried in his right hand, which he laid upon the woman’s shoulder, a pair of brown kid gloves. One thing I noticed, and that was that he
WALKED VERY SOFTLY
I believe that he lives in the neighbourhood, and I fancied that I saw him in Petticoat-lane on Sunday morning, but I was not certain. I went down to the Shoreditch mortuary today, and recognised the body as being that of the woman Kelly, where I saw it two o’clock on Friday morning. Kelly did not seem to be to be drunk, but was a little bit “spreeish.” I was quite sober, not having had anything to drink all day. After I left the court I walked about all night, as the place where I usually sleep was closed. I came in as soon as it opened in the morning. I am able to fix this time, as it was between ten and five minutes to two o’clock as I came by Whitechapel Church. When I left the corner of Miller’s-court the clock struck three o’clock. One policeman went by the Commercial-street end of Dorset-street while I was standing there, but not one came down Dorset-street. I saw one man go into a lodging house in Dorset-street, and no one else. I have been looking for the man all day.
Monday, November 19, 1888
THE DORSET STREET MURDER
Funeral of the Victim at Leytonstone this Morning
At noon to-day the remains of the unfortunate woman, Mary Janet Kelly, who was murdered on Friday week last, were removed from the Shoreditch Mortuary and interred in the Roman Catholic cemetery at Leytonstone. The funeral arrangements were carried out by Mr. Wilson, the parish mortuary-keeper and undertaker of Shoreditch, by order of Mr. Coroner Macdonald. The start was witnessed by a crowd consisting chiefly of working class people, but among them were a large number of women with whom the deceased had associated. A strong body of police were in attendance, but their services were not specially called for. The crowd was orderly, and the chief topic of conversation was the circumstances of the murder and others that had preceded it. The coffin was of elm and polished oak, and on the lid was a simple plate with the name of deceased, following which were the words – Died November 9, 1888. The hearse was drawn up at the front gate of the churchyard, and the coffin was carried from the mortuary to the hearse. The man, Barrett (sic), who formerly lived with deceased, and the landlord of the room in which she lived, Mr. McCarthy, followed; also three females who had known the deceased during her lifetime – Harriet Bowdry, Elizabeth Allbrook, and Eliza Fleming. Two floral crowns and a cross were placed on the coffin, which was carried from the mortuary to the front gate and placed in an open funeral car. Two mourning carriages followed, and the cortege proceeded at a slow pace up the Hackney-road, and through Lea-bridge-road to the cemetery. Thousands of people followed. Mr. H. Wilton, we are informed, has undertaken the entire expenses of the funeral out of sympathy for the deceased.
WHITECHAPEL
ANOTHER APPALING ATROCITY
A Woman Literally Hacked to Pieces
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BODY
Bloodhounds Called in to the Assistance of the Police
At half-past 10 this morning the dead body of a woman, with her head almost severed from her body was found in an untenanted outhouse or shed in Dorset-court (sic), Dorset-street, Commercial-street, Spitalfields. It had evidently been there for some hours, but several scavengers who were in the court at nine o’clock this morning declare that the body was not there then. They might, however, have been mistaken, as the place is very dark. An alarm was immediately raised, and an inspector of police and a number of constables were soon on the spot. It is remarkable that Dorset-court is exactly opposite the house in Dorset-street in which the unfortunate woman, Annie Chapman, used to lodge. The discovery created the greatest excitement in the neighbourhood, and crowds quickly gathered at the scene.
SPECIAL ACCOUNT
The police, as on previous occasions, are very reticent concerning the details, but an EVENING POST reporter succeeded in discovering that it has transpired that the mutilation of the body is even worse than in the case of the Hanbury-street murder. The present crime differs from the others, insasmuch as the victims were all found in the open air, but the body of the woman discovered this morning was found in a room of a house of doubtful fame. The scene presented was described as surpassing all imagination in its sickening horror. The woman was lying on the floor. All the flesh of her face had been taken off, rendering identification by means of the face impossible. Her breasts had also been cut off and frightful to relate, had been placed on a table in the room. The flesh on the thigh bones had also been removed, and lay scattered about. The abdomen had been ripped up and laid completely open. Those who first made the discovery say they were all but overpowered by the revolting sight that met their gaze. Of course the locality was at once taken possession of by the police and no one but those in authority or having lodgings in the neighbourhood were permitted to pass down Dorset-street. Miller’s-court, the place in which the house is situated, is a narrow turning out of Dorset-street, on the right hand side. The spot of the latest murder is only about five minutes’ walk from Mitre-square and seven minutes’ walk from 29, Hanbury-street. There are crowds of people in Commercial-street, all excitedly discussing the crime. The civic procession in the City withdrew some of the constables from the district, and the local police found themselves very severely pressed. The detectives engaged in other cases however were immediately on the spot endeavouring to pick up some clue, which one of them states he is in the hopes of finding, as the crime being committed in the dwelling house the murderer may have left some trace by which the ends of justice will be served.
LATEST DETAILS
The crime was first discovered by a young man named McCarthy, who went to the house this morning with his mother to collect the rent. On opening the front door he saw a body lying in the passage, and he immediately closed the door and drew his mother away, saying, “Mother, there is another murder!” An alarm was soon raised, and the police at once took possession of the house and refused admittance to all except officials.
Morris Lewis, a tailor, states that he was playing “pitch and toss” in the court at nine o’clock this morning, and an hour before that he had seen the woman leave the house and return with some milk. There is no evidence as to who was in the house with her, and up to two o’clock there was no clue to the perpetrator of the murder. Bloodhounds were sent for by the police immediately they heard of the crime.
The murdered woman was about 21 years of age, and the neighbours say that she was of genteel appearance, but they do not know her name or anything about her, except that recently she lived with a man, from whom she is now separated. This man was sent for, and at once identified the body.
The Divisional Surgeon arrived at the scene of the murder at five minutes to two o’clock, accompanied by Mr. Dukes, another doctor, and they at once proceeded to view the body. It is confidently stated that the deceased was seen after 10 o’clock this morning in company with a paramour when they were both drinking at the public-house at the corner of Dorset-street. The deceased’s name is Mary Jane Kelly, and the man she lived with sells oranges in the streets. After speaking to her in the public house he left her there for the purpose of vending oranges, and he states that he did not see her again until her corpse was discovered.
A later despatch from Whitechapel at 2.40pm says the mutilation of the body reveal such a shocking state of things as has probably never been equalled in the annals of crime. The head was not lying apart from the body, but was hanging by a mere thread. Both ears and the nose were cut off. All the flesh was stripped completely off the thighs and the woman was not only disembowelled but the womb and other parts are missing similar to the previous murders in this locality. Mr. Bond of Westminster Hospital, was in the room with the other doctors and the body was photographed. A post mortem examination will be made. Dr. J.R. Gabe, of Mecklenberg-square, has seen the body, but in reply to questions put to him declined to give any details. He merely says that he has seen a great deal in dissecting rooms but that he never in his life saw such a horrible sight as the murdered woman presents. In addition to the mutilations already named it was afterward ascertained that the forehead and even the cheeks were skinned, and one hand pushed into the stomach.
Dorset-street, Spitalfields, is composed of registered lodging-houses, one or two small shops, and private houses. The entrance to Dorset-street is through an archway running under a private house two storeys high, and the houses in the court are of the same height. Within a few yards to the entrance of the court is a poster headed in large bold type “£100 Reward - Whitechapel Murder” – a gruesome reminiscence of the previous atrocities.
The most extraordinary rumours are about as to the hour when the woman was last seen alive. One man has informed our representative that he was in the court at eight o’clock this morning when he saw Kelly go out for the purpose of fetching some milk. Two women aver that they saw her in a public-house, drinking with a man. This was between ten and half-past, but the persons residing in the public house state that they have no recollection of her, and the point is rendered the more difficult through Kelly not being generally known.
THE LOCALITY OF THE MURDER
Another and later account says: - As the news of the murder spread, the greatest excitement prevailed in the neighbourhood, and late in the afternoon men, women, and children gathered at the end of Dorset-street, which leads out of Commercial-street, eager to view the scene of the tragedy, and to glean the latest intelligence with respect to the terrible occurrence. The police, however, on duty at the entrance to the thoroughfare blocked it to all save those living in the street or having official business. Miller’s-court, leading at right angles out of Dorset-street, is a miserable alley, forming a cul-de-sac. There are three or four houses of the meanest description, with whitewashed fronts, and approached by a narrow arched passage, not more than a yard and a half wide. At night it is lighted by three or four gas brackets standing out from one side of the wall; but at best the approach is evidently a terribly dangerous one. The surrounding district is very rough, and besides being in the close vicinity of Spitalfields Market, there are various concomitant elements, such as proximity to some of the roughest portions of the East-end of London, which all tend to make the locality a very dangerous one. The examination of the body had not been concluded when this report was written, Dr. Phillips, the divisional surgeon of police for the district, being still engaged upon the scene. The police-inspector on duty said he was instructed to admit no one to the scene of the murder, nor was he to give the Press any information with respect to what was being done. When the post-mortem has been concluded, it is understood that the remains will be removed to the mortuary in Old Montague-street to await the inquest.
Saturday, November 10, 1888
NUMBER SEVEN!
And the Whitechapel Assassin Still at Large
LATEST DETAILS THIS AFTERNOON
Last Night in the Slums of the Panic Stricken District
In spite of every effort of the police the Whitechapel murderer was still at large this afternoon, and the fearful crime committed at Dorset-street, Spitalfields, in the early hours of yesterday morning, still remains enshrouded in the veil of impenetrable mystery which has all along characterised the series of East-end tragedies. The police are utterly at fault. No clue, not even the slightest, has been found to the identity of the assassin, and he is still at liberty to go on with his nefarious deeds of blood and mutilation. An EVENING POST reporter has been on the scene of the crime last night and this morning, and the result of his inquiries are given below. It is true that two arrests were made last night and in the small hours of this morning, but with no result, both of the suspected persons, having been released. There is now no one in custody. One of the men was arrested on the information of some unfortunates and was taken to the Commercial-street Station, followed by an immense crowd.
PATROLLING THE STREETS
Last night, the strictest police regulations were observed, the streets were patrolled by large numbers of constables, both in uniform and plain clothes, while the detectives engaged were everywhere. No one up to 11 o’clock was allowed to loiter in Dorset-street; but after that time the vigilance of the police was somewhat relaxed. Only one constable was stationed at the head of Dorset-street, while two brother officers kept guard at the entrance to Miller’s-court. There was a number of rough characters gathered in knots round the locality, while, notwithstanding the feverish panic which undoubtedly prevails in the district, there were numbers of unfortunates in the streets. The night was fine and dry, a fact which doubtless caused so many people to be around at midnight.
THE POLICE AT THE LORD MAYOR’S SHOW
One significant fact has not been called attention to. At the hour it is suggested the crime was actually committed some of the extra police in the district were being withdrawn in order to allow them to perform duty in the City during the Lord Mayor’s Show. It is thought that the murderer being aware of the fact, ventured abroad, saw his opportunity, seized it, and again took the life of a fellow-creature. This may only be a mere coincidence, but, under the circumstances, it is not to be disregarded. That he is somewhere in the district is an opinion entertained by a large section, both of the officials and the community generally. Therefore, the house to house inspection which was commenced yesterday afternoon, and prosecuted with activity till late into the night, it is hoped will be productive of good results.
THE VIGILANCE COMMITTEE WAKES UP
The local organisation known as the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee are again bestirring themselves. It is now nearly five weeks since the Mitre-square and Berner-street crimes were committed, and the work of the Committee fell off considerably, not because of any lack of interest, but because there were no funds at their disposal. The money was coming in very slowly, and previous efforts of the Vigilants, which were entirely of a voluntary character, had been so exhausting as to render a period of rest absolutely necessary. Now, however, it has been decided to operate at night time, and Mr. Harris, the secretary, states that a meeting is to be held at the headquarters, “The Crown” public-house, in the Mile End-road, on Tuesday next.
THEORIES OF THE CRIME
As usual in such cases of crime as the present, there are many theories and rumours of the vaguest description current. When the first murder of the series was committed, simply because the word “bayonet” was used at the inquest suspicion fell on the soldiers, who sometimes visit the locality from the Tower. The idea, however, proved to be fallacious and was duly exploded. Next, because it was clear the murderer possessed skill in the use of his death—dealing instrument, at once the theory was evolved that he could be no other than a butcher. Inquiries, some of them of a very annoying character to individuals, were made, but nothing reliable was absolutely discovered. The idea of the “butcher murderer” is not altogether exploded, and some enterprising pressman has connected the arrival of cattle boats from the Continent on Thursdays with the tragedy. The theory is that the murderer was a drover or butcher, employed on these boats, and that he does not reside here at all, but returns with his boat on the Sunday or Monday. But what does he do with himself during the intervening period, when the utmost police and detective vigilance is being exercised? There has been great activity shown in interviewing neighbours of the deceased, who generally receives a good character. Some of the persons state that no more was heard, while this is contradicted by several, who avow they heard the cry of “Murder” between two and three in the morning, but such alarms being of common occurrence in the locality they attached no particular importance to it.
RETICENCE OF THE AUTHORITIES
The most arduous part of the operations fall on the police constables who patrol the streets. They have, of course, orders not to divulge anything they may know, yet they are plied with question after question. Last night there were several drunken men in Commercial-street who caused the police much trouble by their persistent endeavours to carry on a conversation respecting the murder. Much patience was exhibited by individual members of the staff in dealing with such characters. They of course have to obey orders. The superior officials still are very reticent and uncommunicative, and the greatest difficulty is experienced in obtaining from them any facts. The authorities are constantly in receipt of letters, some of them anonymous, throwing out hints and suggestions, which have all to be considered. Indeed, in one case a prominent tradesman in the district was accused by name directly in a letter of being the murderer himself. Upon inquires being made of him he expressed the greatest indignation, and offered £20 to know who it was that gave the hint to the police. These letters are doubtless the outcome of the police handbill which has been extensively circulated, asking householders and occupiers to give any information of suspicious characters that may come under their notice.
THE INQUEST
The inquest has not yet been fixed, but it is believed on good authority that it will be held on Monday.
LETTER FROM “JACK THE RIPPER”
Last night, in the pillar-box at the corner of Northumberland-street and Marylebone-road, was found a letter directed to the police, and its contents were as follows: “Dear Boss – I shall be busy tomorrow night in Marylebone. I have two booked for blood and guts. – Yours, JACK THE RIPPER. Look out about 10 o’clock, Marylebone-road.
FURTHER DETAILS
With the closing of the local taverns in Spitalfields last night, the excitement which prevailed throughout yesterday, consequent upon the murder of Mary Jane Kelly, in Dorset-street, abated, and the neighbourhood assumed its normal appearance. Between the hours of one and four nothing which may be termed unusual occurred. Women of the unfortunate class paraded the several highways with an unconcernedness which may be termed remarkable, considering the recent hideous crimes which have been committed, and of which these poor wretches have been the victims. The drafts of auxiliary detectives which have been requisitioned since the perpetration of the Mitre-square and Berner-street tragedies, from the suburban districts, performed their unenviable duties in the regulation manner; and to a casual pedestrian who may have passed through the district after midnight nothing whatever existed to denote the commission of a crime hitherto unknown in the annals of the police. It is generally admitted by the police that a murder attended by such hideous circumstances has never before been known. The deliberate manner on which the murderer has slain and mutilated his last victim has completely nonplussed the authorities. They state that they have adopted every possible precaution to entrap the fiend without success, and now that he has adopted the precaution of dissecting his unfortunate victims in their own homes, their ends are completely defeated.
THE TIME OF THE MURDER
Notwithstanding every effort, the police assert that they have failed to establish the time at or about which the crime was committed. Many persons who have been interviewed state that the unfortunate woman never left the house at 26, Dorset-street, after she entered it on Thursday midnight; while, on the other hand, numerous persons who declare that they were companions of the deceased, and knew her well, state that she came out of her home at eight o’clock on Friday morning for provisions, and furthermore that they were drinking with her in the Britannia, a local tavern, at 10 o’clock on the same morning as her mutilated body was found at 11. In view of these conflicting statements, the hour at which the murder was committed is, of course the all-important point in connection with the crime.
A CRY IN THE DEAD OF THE NIGHT
Our representative has interviewed a woman named Kennedy, who was on the night of the murder staying with her parents at a house situate in the court immediately opposite the room in which the body of Mary Kelly was found. This woman’s statement, if true (and there is very little reason for doubting its veracity) establishes the time at which the murderer commenced his operations upon his victim. She states that about three o’clock on Friday morning she entered Dorset-street on her way to her parents’ house, which is situate immediately opposite that in which the murder was committed. She noticed three persons at the corner of the street, near the Britannia public-house. There was a man - a young man, respectably dressed, and with a dark moustache – talking to a woman whom she did not know, and also a female, poorly clad and without any head-gear. The man and woman appeared to be the worse for liquor, and she heard the man ask, “Are you coming?” whereupon the woman, who appeared to be obstinate, turned in an opposite direction to which the man apparently wished her to go. Mrs. Kennedy went on her way, and nothing unusual occurred until about half an hour later. She states that she did not retire to rest immediately she reached her parents’ abode, but sat up, and between half-past three and a quarter to four she heard a cry of “Murder!” in a woman’s voice proceed from the direction which Mary Kelly’s room was situated. As the cry was not repeated, she took no further notice of the circumstances until this morning, when she found the police in possession of the small houses in this court. When questioned by the police as to what she had heard throughout the night has made a statement to the above effect.
STRANGE STORY BY A WOMAN
She has since supplemented that statement by the following; “On Wednesday evening, about eight o’clock, me and my sister were in the neighbourhood of the Bethnal Green-road, when we were accosted by a very suspicious man, about 40 years of age. He was about 5 feet 7 inches, and wore a short jacket, over which he had a long top coat. He had a black moustache, and wore a billyc0ck hat. He invited me to accompany him into a lonely spot “as he was known about here, and there was a policeman looking at him.” She asserts that no policeman was in sight. He made several strange remarks and appeared to be agitated. He was very white in the face and made every endeavour to prevent them “looking him straight in the face.” He carried a black bag. He avoided walking with them, and led the way into a very dark thoroughfare, “at the back of the workhouse,” inviting them to follow, which they did. He then pushed open a small door in a pair of large gates, and requested one of them to follow him, remarking, “I only want one of you,” whereupon the women became suspicious. He acted in a very strange and suspicious manner, and refused to leave his bag in the possession of one of the females. Both women became alarmed at his actions, and escaped, at the same time raising an alarm of “Jack the Ripper.” A gentleman who was passing is stated to have interrupted the man while the women made their escape. Mrs. Kennedy asserts that the man whom she saw on Friday morning with the woman at the corner of Dorset-street resembled very closely the individual who causes such alarm on the night in question, and that she would recognise him again if confronted with him.
The description of the man suspected of the murder tallies exactly with that in the possession of the police, and there is very little reason to doubt that the murderer entered the murdered woman’s home on Thursday night or early on Friday morning.
THE MAN UNDER ARREST
The police have made two arrests in connection with the murder. One man was accused by some woman late last night of being the murderer, but he was released after a short detention, his statements being satisfactorily verified. The second arrest was made in the small hours of the morning, when a man, apparently a foreigner, was brought to Commercial-street Station on suspicion. He was still detained at six o’clock but no importance is attached to the apprehension.
RELEASE OF SUSPECTS
The two men arrested during the night on suspicion of being concerned in the murder in Dorset-street yesterday have been released, and at half-past nine the police had no one in custody. They, however, continue to receive statements from persons who believe they can throw light upon the mysterious side of the murder, but investigations have proved them valueless.
THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER
Inquest to be held on Monday at Shoreditch Town Hall.
Monday, November 12, 1888
THE SEVENTH ATROCITY
Inquest on the Body of the Dorset Street Victim – Verdict
A SCRAMBLE FOR THE CORPSE
JURORS TAKE OBJECTION TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE CORONER
The inquest on the body of the Dorset-street victim, Mary Janet Kelly, was opened at the Shoreditch Town Hall at 11 o’clock this morning by Dr. R. Macdonald, the Coroner for the North-Eastern Division of Middlesex, the deputy coroner, Mr. A. Hodgkinson, being also present. Inspector Nairn and Inspector Abberline watched the case on behalf of the police. The court room, which was of very small dimensions, was inconveniently crowded. The Town Hall was undergoing repairs, or the inquiry would have been held there, and the Council Room was engaged.
Before the jurymen were sworn, one of the men who had been summoned said he did not understand why he had been summoned on a jury in Shoreditch when the murder occurred in Whitechapel.
The Coroner: Do you think we do not know what we are doing?
The Juryman: I object.
The Coroner: You have no right to object. You are summoned here and must do your duty. If any of the jurymen persist in objecting I shall know how to deal with them.
The Juryman: The murder occurred in the Whitechapel district. I am on the list for Shoreditch, and I do not see why I should be summoned about the matter.
The Coroner (impatiently): I shall not argue with the jury. If any juryman has any distinct objection let him say so.
Two other jurymen objected.
The Coroner: I may tell you that jurisdiction lies where the body lies, and not where the murder was committed; and the body lies in Shoreditch.
The Coroner’s officer than asked the jury to select a foreman, but several who were selected refused to fill the post, and some difficulty was experienced until a foreman could be sworn.
Ultimately, after some loss of time, the objection of the jurors was withdrawn and the usual preliminaries gone through. At the suggestion of the Coroner it was decided that the jurymen had better the view the locality where the murder was committed, as well as the body.
On the return of the jury.
The Coroner said the papers had been making a great fuss as to the jurisdiction and who should hold the inquest. As a matter of fact, there had not been any difficulty at all. He had had no communication at all with Mr. Baxter. The body was in his jurisdiction, it was moved to his mortuary, and there was an end of it. One of the previous murders was committed in his district, but the police moved the body to the Whitechapel mortuary, and therefore the inquest was held by Mr. Baxter. The question of jurisdiction was decided by the place in which the jury was lying, irrespective of where the murder was committed.
The first witness called was Joseph Barnett.
Joseph Barnett then deposed that he was a fish porter, lately living at 24, New-street, Bishopsgate. He had lived with the deceased near on eight months. Her name was Mary Janet Kelly by her maiden name, which she always went by. He had seen the body, and identified here (sic) as that of Kelly, but he identified her only by the hair and eyes. He was positive that it was the same woman. He was in Miller’s-court about eight months. On the Tuesday week before the murder, the 30th of last month, he and deceased separated because she had a person – a prostitute – whom she took in out of compassion. He objected to this woman being taken in. His being out of work had nothing whatever to do with it. When he left her it would be between five and six o’clock. He saw her last alive between half-past seven and a quarter to eight on the night previous to the murder, when he went to see how she was. She stayed there for a quarter of an hour. They were on friendly terms; but, as he was out of work, he told her he was sorry he could not give her anything. They did not have a drink together. Deceased was quite sober. Generally speaking, he always found her of sober habits. Occasionally she got drunk. There was a female who resided in the court with deceased when he last saw her. On several occasions he had talks with her about her parents, and how she was brought up. Deceased told him she was born in Limerick, and when very young went to live in Wales. She said it would be about four years ago when she came to London. Her fathers’ name, she said, was John Kelly, a ganger in some ironworks in Carnarvonshire. She said she had one sister, who was of a respectable character. He thought she said she had six or seven brothers, one of them being in the army. He never met any of these relatives. She had been married very young – about 16 in Wales, to a collier whose name, he thought, was Davies. She lived with him until he met with his death in an explosion. How long that was he did not know. She was living some time at Cardiff with her cousin, who, he thought, was the cause of deceased’s downfall. She went to France with a gentleman, but did not remain there long, because she did not like it. From there she came to Ratcliff-highway, where she lived opposite the gasworks with a man named Morganstone, as he thought she said, but witness had never seen the man. There was another man, named Joseph Plummer (sic), a mason’s plasterer whom she was very fond of, and whom she lived with in Pennington Street. Witness first picked up with deceased in Spitalfields. The first night they had a drink together, and he then made arrangements to see her on the following day (Saturday), when they agreed that they should live together. They took lodgings in George-street, Commercial-street. He lived with her all through until he left her the other day on very friendly terms. On several occasions he heard her ask when he brought home the evening paper about the murderer. She did not express fear of any one individual. They used to have little quarrels, which were always made up again.
The Coroner remarked that Barnett had given his evidence very well indeed.
On the suggestion of the Coroner, it was decided that Dr. Phillips should be asked to attend this afternoon, and state roughly what the cause of death was without going into the details.
Thomas Boyer, of 27, Dorset-street, Spitalfields, a servant to Mr. Carter, a general chandler, was next sworn. He deposed that at a quarter to eleven on Friday morning, he was ordered to go to Mary Jane’s – as she was known – room for the rent. He knocked at the door, but got no answer. He again knocked, but there was still no answer. He then went round by the gutter spout and looked through the window – the larger one, where there was a broken pane.
Here a plan of the premises was put in and sworn to.
Witness continuing, said he pulled the curtain on one side and looked in and saw two lumps of flesh lying on the table. This table was close against the bed. The second time he looked he saw a body or somebody lying on the bed and blood on the floor. He at once went very quietly back to Mr. McCarthy, his master. He then stood in the shop and witness told him what he had seen. They both then, directly went down to the police-station, but before going they went again to the window. No one in the neighbourhood knew of the matter before they went to the station. They returned with an inspector of police. Witness had often seen the deceased. He knew the previous witness “Joe” from seeing him go in and out. He had seen deceased once under the influence of drink.
By the Jury: He last saw deceased alive on Wednesday afternoon in the court.
The next witness, John McCarthy, a grocer and lodging-house keeper, of 27, Dorset-street, corroborated the evidence of the previous witness. He knew the deceased as Mary Janet Kelly, and he had no doubt as to her identity. At the police station he saw Inspector Beck, who came to the spot at once. Deceased had lived in the room in Miller’s-court about 10 months with the man Joe. He didn’t know whether they were married or not, but they lived on very comfortable terms together. Everything in the room belonged to witness. The rent of the room was 4s, 6d. a week. Deceased was about 29s in arrears. He was supposed to get his rent weekly. Witness very often saw the deceased the worse for drink. She was a very quiet woman when sober but directly she had a little drop she became noisy. Deceased was never helpless.
The next witness was Mary Ann Cox, who said she was a widow, but got her living in the streets. She lived in No. 5 room, Miller’s-court. Witness last saw deceased alive at a quarter to twelve midnight on Thursday in Dorset-street. She was very much intoxicated. There was a short stout man, shabbily dressed, with her. He had no overcoat on, but wore a longish dark coat. He had a pot of ale in his hand. He wore a round black felt hat. He had a broadish face, with full carotty moustache, and the chin was shaved a little. Witness saw them going into deceased’s room. The man had nothing in his hand but a can of beer. Deceased said “good night,” and remarked she was going to have a song. Witness then saw that she was intoxicated, and went into her own room. She heard deceased sing the first line, “A violet I plucked from my mother’s grave when a boy.” Witness remained a little while in her room, and then went out again. Deceased was still singing. At three o’clock she returned to her own room again. She did not undress at all that night, and heard no noise. She didn’t sleep a wink that night up to the time the murder was discovered, and she did not hear during the whole time any noise or cry. She heard someone go out of the court about a quarter past six. For all she knew he might have walked into the court and out again, or he might have been a policeman. She thought the age of the man she saw with deceased would be about 35 or 36. All his clothes were dark. His boots made no noise but she did not notice them very much. Deceased had no hat on, and was wearing a dark green shabby skirt.
By the Jury: She should know the man again if she saw him. There was a light in the room of deceased after she and the man went in.
By the Coroner: She was certain there was not the least sound of any noise during the night. Witness very often saw deceased the worse for drink.
Mrs. Elizabeth Prater, the wife of William Prater, a boot machinist, living at No. 20 room, Miller’s-court, said deceased lived in the room below hers. She left her room on the Thursday about five o’clock in the evening and returned close upon one on Friday morning. She stood in the corner of the court for a few minutes till about 20 past one. Witness spoke to no one except Mr. McCarthy. In going upstairs she could see a light – a glimmer – in deceased’s room if there was a light, but on this occasion, not taking particular notice, she could not remember whether there was a light in the room or not. As there was only a thin partition, it was possible to hear the slightest noise in deceased’s room. As soon as witness reached her room she went to bed and fell asleep at once, having had a “little something.” She slept very soundly. Her kitten, “Little tiddles,” disturbed her about half-past three or four o’clock. Just as she turned the kitten off the bed and turned round to go to sleep again she heard, in a faintish voice, “Oh, murder!” and it seemed to proceed from the court, and near where she was living. Being accustomed to hear such noise she took no notice. After that she heard no noise whatever, and went to sleep again. About five o’clock she went to have a look round, and saw several men harnessing horses in Dorset-street. After having a drink in the Ten Bells she went home again, and slept till 11 o’clock. She was certain there was no singing in the court when she when home first at half-past one.
Carline Maxwell, of 14, Dorset-street, the wife of Henry Maxwell, a lodging-house deputy, said she knew the deceased as Mary Jane, also Joe Barnett. She believed the former was an unfortunate girl. Witness only spoke to her twice.
The Coroner cautioned witness to be careful in giving her evidence.
Witness said she saw deceased standing at the corner of Miller’s-court on Friday morning from eight to half-past. She knew it was that time because at that time her husband came off duty. Witness spoke to her across the street, and said, “Why, Mary, what brings you out so early?” and she replied, “Oh Carrie, I feel so bad.” They knew one another by name very well. Witness asked her to have a drink, but she declined, as she had just had one, and from the motion of her head she imagined it was at the Britannia. Witness then left her, and went to Bishopsgate, and on returning saw deceased standing outside the Britannia, speaking to a man. This would be between eight-thirty and nine, or say a quarter to nine. She could not give any description of the man, as the two were some distance away, about 16 yards. The man was not tall, and rather stout.
Inspector Abberline said on second consideration he should think the distance was 25 yards.
Witness said the man wore dark clothes, and had a kind of plaid coat on. This was all she could say. Deceased had on a dark skirt, velvet body, and maroon shawl – a knitted one; no hat. Witness had seen her in drink, but she was not a notorious drunkard. Deceased did not associate with the people about there.
BY the Jury: Women walked about with all kinds of men, so that there was nothing particular in the circumstance she saw. If the man had worn a silk hat she thought she might have noticed it, but would not pledge herself to it.
Sarah Lewis, living at 24, Great Pearl-street, Spitalfields, a laundress, said she went to Miller’s court on Friday morning at 2.30 a.m. She went to a Mrs. Keller’s. Standing outside a lodging-house she saw a man on the pavement. He was by himself; he was not very tall but rather stout, and wore a black wideawake hat. He was looking up the court, as if waiting for someone to come out. She heard no noise in the court; there was no one there. On getting into Mrs. Keller’s room she sat in a chair and dozed. She woke up at half-past three. She heard the clock strike, and sat awake till nearly four, when she heard a female voice scream loudly – it seemed to be a young woman – “Murder!” It was only one scream. They often hear such screams and cries in the neighbourhood, but no notice is taken of them. In reply to a question from the coroner as to whether she had seen any suspicious person about, witness said she and a female friend were going down the Bethnal-Green-road, when they were accosted by a gentleman who wanted them to follow him; they refused to do so, and he offered to treat them. He did not seem to mind which one of the two went with him. He was not a tall man, but very pale, with a black moustache. He had a black shiny bag with him about six or nine inches long. He had a high round hat on. The man wore a brownish long overcoat, with a black short coat underneath. The two girls then ran away. On Friday morning, about half-past two, when she was going to Miller’s-court, she met the same man with a female in Commercial-street, near the Britannia public-house. They were standing talking together. She looked back at him, and he seemed to know her. Witness met no policeman at the time. She would know him again if she met him. The man was not then wearing any overcoat.
Dr. George Baxter Phillips, divisional surgeon of police, deposed that he is surgeon to the H Division of the police, and resides at 2, Spital-square. He was called to Miller’s-court on Friday morning about 11 o’clock. Having described the room – a photograph being handed round to the jurymen – he said he looked through the broken window and satisfied himself that the mutilated corpse lying on the bed was not in need of any immediate attention. He also came to the conclusion that there was no one else within view to whom he could render any professional assistance. About 1.30 the door leading into the room was broken open; he believed the direction was given by Superintendent Arnold, who had arrived on the scene. Dr. Phillips then stated how he found the furniture, and said the mutilated body of a female was lying two-thirds over towards the edge of the bedstead. She had only her under-garments upon her, and from his subsequent examination he was sure the body had been removed subsequent to the injury which caused her death from one side of the bedstead to the other. The large quantity of blood under the bedstead, the saturated condition of the palliasse, pillow and sheets, led to the conclusion that the severance of the right-carotid artery was the immediate cause of her death.
The Coroner then suggested that the remainder of the doctor’s evidence should remain till the post mortem examination had been concluded.
Upon reassembling after a short adjournment for luncheon.
The Coroner said that it had come to his ears that some jurymen had been making statements to the effect that they ought not to have been there that day. The Coroner asked if any jurymen had said such a thing.
There being no response, the Coroner remarked that he must have been misinformed, but if such a remark had been made, and he knew who it was, he should deal with it very severely.
Julia Venterney, of No. 1, Miller’s-court, a charwoman, deposed to the deceased and Barnet (sic) being on good terms. On the night of the murder she might have dozed off slightly; but she heard no screams of murder or singing; if there had been such sounds she must have heard them.
Maria Harvey, of No. 3, New-court, Dorset-street, a laundress, said she knew the deceased as Mary Jane Kelly, and had slept with her on Monday and Tuesday. She was at the house of deceased on Thursday when Joe Barnet came in. They were always on the best of terms. Witness and deceased were very good friends. She never heard Kelly speak as if she were afraid of anyone.
Inspector Beck, of the H Division of police, was next sworn. He could not say whether the deceased was known to the police in the neighbourhood. The witness also corroborated much of the evidence already given.
Inspector F.G. Abberline, of Scotland Yard, was next called, and he stated he was in charge of the case on behalf of the police. He appeared on the scene of the murder about 11.30 a.m. on Friday morning. He was informed that the bloodhounds were on the way, so it was thought advisable not to force the door of the rooms at once. At 1.30 Superintendent Arnold arrived, and stated that the orders respecting the dogs had been countermanded, and directions were given for the door to be opened. He agreed with the doctor’s evidence. There were traces of a large fire in the grate of the deceased’s room, and since the ashes had been analysed, and the remains of various articles had been found; his own opinion was that they had been burnt to give the murderer light to see what he was about. The key of the room had been missing for some time, according to a statement from Barnet. There was nothing further that it was necessary for the jury to know.
This concluded the evidence.
The coroner said he thought it was quite unnecessary for two courts to deal with these cases twice, and go over the same evidence. It was for the jury to decide as to the cause of death, and they have heard the doctor’s evidence that it was through the severance of the carotid artery by her throat being cut. For himself he was perfectly satisfied to leave the matter in the hands of the police.
After consultation the jury returned a verdict of wilful murder against some person or persons unknown.
ANOTHER ARREST
The police at Commercial-street Station made another arrest at three o’clock this morning in Dorset-street, at the scene of the murder. The man, who does not answer the description of the supposed murderer, was acting very suspiciously, and refused to satisfy the officers as to his recent movements. Inquiries are being made.
WHERE WERE THE BLOODHOUNDS?
The non-appearance of the bloodhounds in connection with this murder is the subject of much comment locally, and the prevailing opinion appears to be that some explanation should be forthcoming after the cry which was made for them after the last two murders, and in view of a recent instruction given by the Commissioner of Police. It is stated that the officer was waiting at Leman-street Police-station for six or seven hours on Friday for the hounds, which had been telegraphed for, but which did not arrive, and apparently no satisfactory reply.
LETTER FROM THE MURDERER
It is reported this morning from Spitalfields that Mrs. McCarthy, the wife of the landlord of No. 26, Dorset-street, this morning received by post a letter signed, “Jack the Ripper,” saying they were not to worry themselves, because he meant to do two more in the neighbourhood, a mother and daughter. The letter was taken immediately to Commercial-street Police-station and handed to the inspector on duty.
The text of the letter was as follows: - “Don’t alarm yourself. I am going to do another, but this time it was be a mother and daughter.” The letter, which was signed “Jack the Ripper,” was at once handed to the police.
Wednesday, November 14, 1888
THE MILLER’S-COURT MURDER
Three Arrests During the Night – Description of the Supposed Assassin
Between midnight and four o’clock this morning three arrests were made in the Eastern district in connection with the recent terrible murder. About one o’clock some young men had their suspicions aroused by the peculiar behaviour of a man in the vicinity of Spitalfields Flower Market. He assisted two women, and, after remaining considering (sic) with them for a considerable time tried to persuade them to accompany him into one of the small streets adjoining the market. These thoroughfares are in general gloomy and badly lighted, and the woman, being suspicious, refused to go with the man. He was followed for some distance by the watchers and ultimately handed over to a policeman who took him to Commercial-street Police-station. Here the man refused to give an account of himself or where he lived, on the ground that he did not wish his parents to be alarmed by police inquiries regarding him. Questioned as to his whereabouts on Thursday night and Friday morning last, the man gave various explanations and contradicted himself as frequently that it was considered advisable to detain him until his identity and antecedents were thoroughly investigated.
The two men taken into custody at Leman-street Station were alleged to bear some resemblance to the recently-published description of the man last seen in the company of the deceased woman Kelly. They were able, however, to give satisfactory accounts of themselves, and after these had been verified by the police the men were set at liberty. One result of the publication of the description of Kelly’s assassin has been to augment the staff of private and amateur detectives, who are on the look-out for the murderer. The streets in the East-end are now patrolled all night through by members of vigilance committees and others, one result of their zeal being almost hourly reports to the police of suspicious movements by various individuals on what the parties consider likely clues. Various reports as to rewards are also about, and have fired the imagination of a considerable number of people. The latest is that the Baroness Burdett-Coatts has offered any person, police official or civilian, who may capture or enable the authorities to capture the perpetrator of the murders, a sum of £1 per week for life, or in lieu thereof a large amount of money down. In view of the recent detailed description of the murderer communicated to the police, the prospects of being able to bring him to justice are spoken of more hopefully by the men of the force.
THE PROBABLE MURDERER
A fuller description of the man last seen in the company of the deceased woman Kelly, is published this morning. It has been furnished by George Hutchinson, formerly a groom but now a labourer. On Thursday last (said Hutchinson) I had been in Romford, in Essex and I returned from there almost two o’clock on Friday morning, having walked all the way. I came down Whitechapel-road late Commercial-street. As I passed Thrawl-street I passed a man standing at the corner of the street, and as I went towards Flower and Dean-street I met the woman Kelly, whom I knew very well, having been in her company a number of times. She said, “Mr Hutchinson, can you lend me sixpence?” I said, “I cannot, as I am spent out going down to Romford”. She then walked on towards Thrawl-street, saying, “I must go and look for some money.” The man who was standing at the corner of Thrawl-street then came towards her and put his hand on her shoulder and said something to her which I did not hear, and they both burst out laughing. He put his hand again on her shoulder, and they both walked slowly towards me. I walked on to the corner of Fashion-street, near the public-house. As they came by me his arm was still on her shoulder. He had a
SOFT FELT HAT
On, and this was drawn down somewhat over his eyes. I put down my head to look him in the face, and he turned and looked at me very slowly, and they walked across the road to Dorset-street. I followed them across, and stood at the corner of Dorset-street. They stood at the corner of Miller’s-court for about three minutes. Kelly spoke to the man in a loud voice, saying, “I have lost my handkerchief.” He pulled a red handkerchief out of his pocket, and gave it to Kelly, and they both went up the court together. I went to look up the court to see if I could see them but could not. I stood there for three-quarters of an hour to see if they came down again, but they did not, and so I went away. My suspicions were aroused by seeing the man was well-dressed; but I had no suspicion that he was the murderer. The man was about 5ft. 6in. in height, and 34 or 35 years of age, with dark complexion and dark moustache turned up at the ends. He was wearing a long dark coat, trimmed with astrachan (sic), a white collar with black necktie, in which was affixed a horseshoe pin. He wore a pair of dark spats, with light buttons, over button boots, and displayed from his waistcoat a massive gold chain. His watch chain had a big seal with a red stone hanging from it. He had a heavy moustache, curled up, and dark eyes and bushy eyebrows. He had no side whiskers, and his chin was clean shaven. He
LOOKED LIKE A FOREIGNER
I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes, but did not see any light in the house or hear any noise. I was out last night until three o’clock looking for him. I could swear to the man anywhere. I told one policeman on Sunday morning who I had seen, but did not go to the police station. I told one of the lodgers here about it yesterday, and he advised me to go to the police-station, which I did last night. The man I saw did not look as though he would attack another man. He carried a small parcel in his hand, about eight inches long, and it had a strap round it. He had it tightly grasped in his left hand. It looked as though it was covered with dark American cloth. He carried in his right hand, which he laid upon the woman’s shoulder, a pair of brown kid gloves. One thing I noticed, and that was that he
WALKED VERY SOFTLY
I believe that he lives in the neighbourhood, and I fancied that I saw him in Petticoat-lane on Sunday morning, but I was not certain. I went down to the Shoreditch mortuary today, and recognised the body as being that of the woman Kelly, where I saw it two o’clock on Friday morning. Kelly did not seem to be to be drunk, but was a little bit “spreeish.” I was quite sober, not having had anything to drink all day. After I left the court I walked about all night, as the place where I usually sleep was closed. I came in as soon as it opened in the morning. I am able to fix this time, as it was between ten and five minutes to two o’clock as I came by Whitechapel Church. When I left the corner of Miller’s-court the clock struck three o’clock. One policeman went by the Commercial-street end of Dorset-street while I was standing there, but not one came down Dorset-street. I saw one man go into a lodging house in Dorset-street, and no one else. I have been looking for the man all day.
Monday, November 19, 1888
THE DORSET STREET MURDER
Funeral of the Victim at Leytonstone this Morning
At noon to-day the remains of the unfortunate woman, Mary Janet Kelly, who was murdered on Friday week last, were removed from the Shoreditch Mortuary and interred in the Roman Catholic cemetery at Leytonstone. The funeral arrangements were carried out by Mr. Wilson, the parish mortuary-keeper and undertaker of Shoreditch, by order of Mr. Coroner Macdonald. The start was witnessed by a crowd consisting chiefly of working class people, but among them were a large number of women with whom the deceased had associated. A strong body of police were in attendance, but their services were not specially called for. The crowd was orderly, and the chief topic of conversation was the circumstances of the murder and others that had preceded it. The coffin was of elm and polished oak, and on the lid was a simple plate with the name of deceased, following which were the words – Died November 9, 1888. The hearse was drawn up at the front gate of the churchyard, and the coffin was carried from the mortuary to the hearse. The man, Barrett (sic), who formerly lived with deceased, and the landlord of the room in which she lived, Mr. McCarthy, followed; also three females who had known the deceased during her lifetime – Harriet Bowdry, Elizabeth Allbrook, and Eliza Fleming. Two floral crowns and a cross were placed on the coffin, which was carried from the mortuary to the front gate and placed in an open funeral car. Two mourning carriages followed, and the cortege proceeded at a slow pace up the Hackney-road, and through Lea-bridge-road to the cemetery. Thousands of people followed. Mr. H. Wilton, we are informed, has undertaken the entire expenses of the funeral out of sympathy for the deceased.
Comment