Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Elizabeth Jackson

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

  • Elizabeth Jackson

    There are two conflicting sources of information concerning Elizabeth Jackson. One is from the book "Alias Jack the Ripper: Beyond the Usual Whitechapel Suspects " by R. Michael Gordon. I don't own the book but found a snippet from Google Books. It states that Elizabeth Jackson's mother was named "Catherine" and had a sister named "May" and another named "Annie". It also relates a few details about Elizabeth Jackson that I have never heard before. It discusses a meeting she had with her mother the day before her disappearance, a meeting with her sister in Chelsea, and details about the man she was traveling with before her death--specifically that he had been a member of the Grenadier guards.

    First of all does anyone know the source of this information? I can't find it in any of the newspapers listed on the Casebook. Does anyone own this book and does it state the sources of this information?

    The other source of information is from Chris Scott I believe. I have his 1881 census information listed below. It states that Elizabeth's mother was named "Hannah" and Elizabeth's sister's names are "Alice" and "Charlotte". Does anyone know how he established that this is indeed the correct "Elizabeth Jackson"? What was his reasoning? Chris?

    Name: Elizabeth Jackson
    Age: 16
    Estimated birth year: abt 1865
    Relation: Daughter
    Father's name: William H.
    Mother's name: Hannah
    Gender: Female
    Where born: Shadwell, Middlesex, England
    Civil parish: Mile End Old Town
    County/Island: London
    Country: England
    Street address: 11 St Dunstans Rd
    Education:
    Employment status:
    Occupation: Domestic Servant
    Registration district: Mile End Old Town
    Sub-registration district: Mile End Old Town, Eastern
    ED, institution, or vessel: 37
    Neighbors: View others on page
    Household Members:
    Name Age
    Alice Hannah Jackson 4
    Charlotte Jackson 1
    Elizabeth Jackson 16
    Hannah Jackson 32
    William H. Jackson 40

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    tom_wescott21st December 2006, 12:08 AM
    Pinkerton,

    Hi there. Gordon also published a book called 'The Thames Torso Murders of Victorian London' in which he goes into greater detail regarding the torso victims. His sources are almost entirely newspapers, though who's to say which ones he got these particular details from. Although Gordon must, out of necessity, be taken with a grain of salt at times, the Torso book was a very good read.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Debra A21st December 2006, 08:12 AM
    Hi Pinkerton
    I have recently been looking at Elizabeth Jackson again, prompted by something Tom posted a while back from the book by Gordon. I don't have the book so I am not sure of everything that's been presented in there.
    Most of the details you listed below do appear in The Times newspaper and were spread over several months.

    I can't speak for Chris on why he has chosen this particular Elizabeth Jackson, but I got to thinking also that this might not be the right one, given what's in the newspaper articles.
    Possibly finding an alternative that matches some of the details I found was on my 'to do' list.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Debra A21st December 2006, 05:29 PM
    I think I may have located Elizabeth Jackson in 1871 and 1881.
    From the times reports it states her mother is Catherine Jackson, and names sisters Mary and Annie, and although it doesn't give her fathers name it does say he was a stonemason.
    There is only one stonemason in the 1871 census named Jackson, a John Jackson b 1815 in Tipperary Ireland. he is listed with his wife C. Jackson also born in Ireland and then 3 children listed as J. Jackson, a son listed as E. jackson b 1863. 3 of the children were born in Chelsea.

    Using the birthplace of Chelsea I turned up a Lizzie Jackson b c 1865 working as a servant at Church Street, Chelsea. This fits with her mother Catherine's statement that Elizabeth had been in service since the age of 16 in Chelsea.

    Following the rest of the 1871 family I find a Catherine Jackson listed in 1881 with a daughter Mary, and father John in the workhouse, both are still listed as married though. This fits with some information in the Times that gives the impression the family were not always living as one unit and that they had lived in workhouses at various times.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    tom_wescott21st December 2006, 05:36 PM
    Typically awesome work from you, Debs. It's cool to see you've taken an interest in the torso murders. I owned Gordon's book for a LONG time before I actually picked it up to read a bit. I didn't care at all for his first book and was aware that not everything he asserted as fact was such, or had even existed prior to his writing it. But his torso book was quite an exciting read (though I see no reason to suspect Chapman as the culprit). It's one of those areas I'd very much like to learn more about when I have the time.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    jdpegg21st December 2006, 05:39 PM
    Tom,

    I might well take that as a recomendation

    Jenni

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Debra A21st December 2006, 05:46 PM
    Tom
    I have been looking at the torso murders, Elizabeth in particular, for about two years on and off, mainly because I am fascinated by Dr. Hebbert and his work with identifying the unknown dead.
    I have been intending to pick up the torso book but not gotten around to it yet. I'm still looking forward to Stephen Ryan's work on these torso murders being published.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    tom_wescott21st December 2006, 05:54 PM
    Debs,

    Yes, I'm very anxious myself to see what Ryan's come up with. Hearing about his work is probably what prompted me to finally dust off Gordon's book and give it a read. But if I understand correctly, Ryan's done a lot of his work from official files and papers.
    May I ask what about Hebbert and his work fascinates you?

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott
    ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸, Debs ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,

    I am not DJA. He's called Dave.

  • #2
    Debra A21st December 2006, 06:27 PM
    Early forensic scientists and their methods are always interesting to someone studying the same thing Tom, even if he was rumoured to have kept a pair of severed hands in his desk drawer! What a great gift to be able to give someone though...an identity, instead of being another unknown victim.
    It's just a pity though that Hebbert's name itself is so often misreported, in the press and here on casebook.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    robert21st December 2006, 11:52 PM
    Debs, if you can't find Hebbert, just look for Orlac.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Debra A22nd December 2006, 06:26 AM
    The man with hands he can't control.....met a few of those in my time Robert

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    monty22nd December 2006, 01:23 PM
    The man with hands he can't control.....met a few of those in my time Robert
    Oi ! Watch it !!

    Monty


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Debra A22nd December 2006, 08:10 PM
    Oi ! Watch it !!

    Monty


    I'm sure you are in full control of your hands Monty!


    Tom, or anyone else with Gordon's book, Iwas just wondering if he managed to find out which Whitechapel lodging house Elizabeth stayed in for 5 weeks?

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Debra A23rd December 2006, 06:48 PM
    Ok, guess I will just have to buy Gordon's book then!

    I was looking at John Faircloth earlier, the man who lived with Elizabeth until shortly before her death and was said to have 'ill used her'. His real name was Smith Faircloth and he was born and lived in March Cambridgeshire for most of his life and so did his family, but interestingly, he did have one brother living in Horsleydown...the area where some of Elizabeth's remains were discovered.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pinkerton24th December 2006, 02:43 AM
    Most of the details you listed below do appear in The Times newspaper and were spread over several months.
    If they do they aren't listed on the Casebook unfortunately. The only Times article listed on the Casebook that discusses Elizabeth Jackson at length is on July 9, 1889 and it doesn't mention Elizabeth's mother's name or sister's names. It does mention that her mother lived in Chelsea. Could you please list a couple of the dates of the Times that you are referring to? Thanks.

    The address listed for Elizabeth Jackson in the article is 14 Turk's road. Another article lists the address as 14 Turks "Row". There is a Turks "Street" in the Whitechapel/Mile End area. Could this be what they are referring to? If so could this be why Chris Scott believed that Elizabeth's family lived in Mile End?

    I currently only have access to the free 1881 census. You're right Debra that IF Elizabeth Jackson lived in Chelsea in 1881 the only possible listing for her in the census is the one for "Lizzie Jackson" on 96 Church St. And the only listing I could find for Catherine Jackson in Chelsea was this:


    Name: Catherine Jackson
    Age: 54
    Estimated birth year: abt 1827
    Relation: Wife (Head) (Wife)
    Gender: Female
    Where born: Cork, Ireland
    Civil parish: Chelsea
    County/Island: London
    Country: England
    Street address: 23 Pond Terrace
    Condition as to marriage: Married
    Education:
    Employment status:
    Registration district: Chelsea
    Sub-registration district: Chelsea, North-West
    ED, institution, or vessel: 18
    Neighbors: View others on page

    Household Members:
    Catherine Jackson 54
    Mary Jackson 22

    Thanks for pointing me towards the Torso murder book guys. I'll definitely check it out. I can't seem to find the details of Elizabeth Jackson's inquest. Are they available in any of the newspapers? I must say that I have always been surprised by the paucity of information on Elizabeth Jackson. IF she was in fact a victim of the Ripper (and I know that's a BIG if) she could be the key to the mystery. The torso victims were most likely cut apart to disguise their identity FOR A REASON. And Elizabeth Jackson is the only one of the four torso victims whose identity was postively established.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Debra A24th December 2006, 09:02 AM
    If they do they aren't listed on the Casebook unfortunately. The only Times article listed on the Casebook that discusses Elizabeth Jackson at length is on July 9, 1889 and it doesn't mention Elizabeth's mother's name or sister's names. It does mention that her mother lived in Chelsea. Could you please list a couple of the dates of the Times that you are referring to? Thanks.


    Pinkerton,
    There are about 12 or so articles in the Times that deal with Elizabeth Jackson's case, running early June through to June 26. If you are interested in them and don't have access to the Times email me and I will send them to you.


    I can't seem to find the details of Elizabeth Jackson's inquest. Are they available in any of the newspapers? I must say that I have always been surprised by the paucity of information on Elizabeth Jackson.

    I don't have details of her inquest either, but detailed medical notes on Elizabeth's remains and how she was identified did appear in the book A System of Legal Medicine, c 1900. The details were supplied to the American authors by Dr Hebbert I believe. There is too much of it to post on here though. The medical findings reported in this book, to my mind, seem to rule out the abortion gone wrong theory.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Debra A24th December 2006, 09:32 AM
    I currently only have access to the free 1881 census. You're right Debra that IF Elizabeth Jackson lived in Chelsea in 1881 the only possible listing for her in the census is the one for "Lizzie Jackson" on 96 Church St. And the only listing I could find for Catherine Jackson in Chelsea was this:


    I forgot to add Pinkerton, Elizabeth's actual date of birth is given in The Times as 18th March 1865, she had turned 24 at the time of her death. There is a birth registered in the June qtr of 1865 in Chelsea (probably April), which I think is hers.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pinkerton24th December 2006, 09:54 PM
    Thanks for the info Debra, it sounds like you've done quite a bit of research in this area!

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Debra A2nd January 2007, 11:18 PM
    Yes Pinkerton, Elizabeth is a little interest of mine!

    I don't suppose there is anyone on here who is an expert on Thames tides??? Low water and stuff like that?...I won't hold my breath, but you never know...

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Debra A13th January 2007, 06:42 PM
    I am having trouble locating a source for the information that Elizabeth's last known address was Sloane Square. Does anyone know where this comes from? Thanks

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸, Debs ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,

    I am not DJA. He's called Dave.

    Comment


    • #3
      I had been meaning to post this article from an 1889 Ipswich newspaper for a long time. Due to the size limitations on file attachments I couldn't post the original, but I have finally got around to transcribing it.
      It gives some details on Elizabeth Jackson and John Fairclough's [aka Smith or John Faircloth] life in Ipswich shortly before Elizabeth's murder and also gives more details on how the police came into possession of the photograph of Faircloth that was used to track him down after the murder.



      THE THAMES MYSTERY
      IMPORTANT CLUES-THE VICTIM AT IPSWICH

      The police are acting very promptly upon “ information received” in the matter of the Thames Mystery. The circumstances connected with finding of various parts of the body of the supposed victim, Elizabeth Jackson, in the Thames, and in and near Battersea, are now familiar to the public. The victim, who belonged to the class of “unfortunates” was born in Chelsea and was known in the surrounding districts. The last lodging house at which she stayed was 10, Turk’s-row, Chelsea, which she left on the 31st ult. She was seen two days later by a person known as “Ginger Nell” Jackson told the latter that she had nowhere to go, and had been promenading near Battersea Bridge and Albert Palace, and sleeping on seats on Chelsea Embankment. She was warned against a dangerous class of boatmen, who infest that locality. On the 4th June, which would be two days later, the first portion of her mutilated body was picked up. Other portions of the body were picked up at different times, and were subjected to close examination, which showed that dissection was unskilfully performed. The man Fairclough, who cohabited with the unfortunate woman, has not yet made his whereabouts known.

      It has lately transpired that Fairclough and Jackson lived together at 115 Princes-street, Ipswich, in which Mrs. Penn and Mrs. Connolly also lived, the man being employed as a stone-dresser at St. Peter’s Foundry. Fairclough and Jackson were both very reticent as to their history previous to coming to Ipswich but the man upon one occasion stated that he joined the 2nd battalion Grenadier Guards at Windsor, afterwards deserted, and was punished for the offence. Though he was looked upon by his fellow-wormen as a quiet, harmless fellow, he seemed to have quarrelled a good deal with the woman with whom he cohabitated, and to have been jealous of her, though she seldom went out even when she had neither fire nor food in the house. They left very suddenly on the last day of March, and have not since been seen in Ipswich, the sheets and other portable property belonging to the landlady having been disposed of.

      Mr. alderman Spencer, the landlord of St Mathew’s Ale Stores, and a stone dresser employed at St Peter’s Foundry, has furnished one of the reporters of our daily contemporary with the following details respecting Fairclough. He says;-”The man we knew as “Lancashire Jack,” but whose real name was Fairclough, came to the Grey friars works about three weeks before last Christmas. He had tramped from Lowestoft in company with the woman who passed as his wife. She was a tall fairly developed woman, weighing about nine stone-fair complexion, with what we call ‘hay’ coloured hair, done up in a knot behind. She wore a plaid shawl, and a boat shaped close fitting hat. (These details were filled in by Mrs. Spencer) The man had a repulsive face, and looked like a pugilist-his nose was flattened, his cheek bones were very prominent, and he was clean shaven except for a dark moustache. He looked like a man who had lived a very fast life, and had been rather a rough character. He worked in the same shop with me, and on one occasion he called my attention to the peculiarity of his hair-I passed my hand over it, and it felt like the bristles of a brush. I recollect on one occasion he did not turn up at his work as usual, and a man who lived close by him came into the shop and said “Fairclough will not be here this week, his sister is dead, and he has gone to march to the funeral.” His home was at March but he lived a great many years in Lancashire. The fact of it was that he had deserted from the Grenadier Guards, and dared not go home for fear of being arrested. He was caught at last and did 84 days, and then he was clear of the army. When he was supposed to have gone to March to bury his sister, he unexpectedly turned up at the works with a couple of black eyes. I jokingly exclaimed, “Two lovely black eyes.” He took no notice at the time, but subsequently we were walking together near the Three Swans, and I remarked that the bruises were turning green. Fairclough replied “Yes, that is my old woman-she threw the hand brush at me and hit me fairly on the bridge of the nose. I made the excuse that my sister was dead, because I didn’t like to come to the shop with two black eyes.” In answer to some questions with regard to the photograph which the police have in their possession. Mr. Spencer said “I recollect the occasion very well. Some photographer came down to the works, and he said, “Would any of you gentlemen like to get on that rolley to show the machinery off as workmen?” Fairclough and some others jumped up, and the photograph was taken. Fairclough was the most prominent of the group, and he took well because he was dark. When he saw the photographs he wanted to destroy them, and made use of the expression “I must have been a -----fool to have shoved myself forward like that; I am the principal one of the group.” He was a very peculiar man and exceedingly reserved. He said he could neither read nor write, and that his wife did all his writing for him. I noticed he carried a pocket book which had some writing in it, and often, when we were reading, he has corrected the pronunciation of some word in a way which led me to believe that he was better educated than he pretended. However, he never would sign his time sheets, but always made the excuse that he could not write. He had a peculiar habit of suddenly leaving off work and burying his head in his hands for five or six minutes at a time. When I asked him what he was thinking about, he replied sullenly: “It’s nothing to do with you.” On a Saturday afternoon, about a month before he left, I gave him a light dust coat and a light hat. Up to that time he had worn a second-hand tennis coat with broad stripes, which he had bought off a clothes’ dealer on the Cattle-market. He left Messrs. Turner’s through no fault of his own but because the work happened to be slack. He told me that he had received a letter from Mr. Dob, millstone and general millwright, of London, promising him work as soon as he had it, and when he left I understood that he was going to make his way there. I have since heard that he was seen in Nottingham. I once went to his house in Princes-street, and saw his wife-she seemed rather a timid, shy sort of a woman. Fairclough told me that her parents lived in the East End of London. He also told me that he had two brothers at March, one was a baker, and the other was employed on the railway. I have not anything of him since he left Ipswich.”

      A detective from Scotland-yard has visited Ipswich for the purpose of instituting further inquiries, and it is needless to say that Colonel Russell, the Chief Constable of the Ipswich Police Force, rendered him every assistance, and with the aid of P.C. Catchpole, the officer obtained evidence which may prove of the utmost value in the elucidation of the mystery which surrounds the death and horrible mutilation…[last section of article missing]
      ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸, Debs ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,

      I am not DJA. He's called Dave.

      Comment


      • #4
        Great work, Debs!

        Yours truly,

        Tom Wescott

        Comment


        • #5
          Agree

          Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
          Great work, Debs!
          Yours truly,
          Tom Wescott
          I agree Tom, as usual very impressive work from Debs.
          SPE

          Treat me gently I'm a newbie.

          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks very much, gents.
            ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸, Debs ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,

            I am not DJA. He's called Dave.

            Comment


            • #7
              Hi Debra, I just wanted to say how much I appreciate the effort you went to in posting all this information on the Torso Murders. I find them particularly fascinating, but detailed & accurate information on these cases seems rather elusive... especially from "across the pond"!
              < And i mean WAY across! >

              In the post above you mentioned a new book on the Torso Murders by a man named Stephen Ryan- do you know if it has come out, or when it might?

              And please do keep posting! Thanks so much! -B.

              Comment


              • #8
                Hi B,
                Thanks very much for the kind and positive comments, it's always nice to hear from someone who also has a fascination with these torso cases and their place (or not) withinh the whole JTR case.

                Re Stephen Ryan's writings , the piece I was talking about earlier in the thread was a series of articles that were supposed to be appearing in Ripper notes about 3 years ago but never got to print, unfortunately. Ryan used to be a member of the old casebook forums but I am not sure if he is still around or not. Hopefully he will publish something on the cases in the future.

                I am still researching the torso murders...I can't help myself to be honest but rather than post lots and lots of the usual repeated press reports etc I prefer to post the ones that might give us new detail, and I will continue to do this as long as there's an interest.
                Due to certain circumstances I have to take it easy for the next 6 weeks and rest as much as possible but it may give me the much needed time I want to write something more substantial myself too.
                ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸, Debs ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,

                I am not DJA. He's called Dave.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I wish you well, Debs, and send you a thousand happy smiling buddhas for your six weeks.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    This week is the centivigintennial of the time Elizabeth Jackson was first being found. I guess she must have died in late May.
                    Last edited by sdreid; 06-02-2009, 07:39 PM.
                    This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

                    Stan Reid

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hi, Stan. You must play Scrabble to even know a word like 'centivigintennial'!

                      Regards, Archaic

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I believe that this coming Monday June 2 is the 125th anniversary of the finding of the first piece of Elizabeth Jackson in the Thames.
                        This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

                        Stan Reid

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          How common was mohair in 1888? I noticed that one parcel was tied with mohair laces while eddowes also had in her possession a pair of men's boots w mohair laces. I assume this means mohair was very common? I also remembering reading that one of the torso parcels was tied with a specific type of marine knot although I can't seem to find it now. What does this knot indicate? Also about the plugging...was this ever in practice in any professions? Did the torso killer learn to plug the anus from working with animals or is it a trick he learned from the previous torsos?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by RockySullivan View Post
                            How common was mohair in 1888?
                            England was the leading producer of mohair in the LVP, so they'd presumably be easier to obtain there than elsewhere. While mohair fabric was considered a luxury item, I believe I have read (I can't find a cite) that there was demand for mohair and mohair blend shoelaces for workmen, as they wouldn't bind up like cotton or leather when they got wet.
                            - Ginger

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hi Ginger, what do u hear what do u say! Thanks. I guess the plugging remains a mystery. I wonder if cleveland torso learned this
                              Method from reading about this case or if it's a part of some type of butchering/hunting/medical method that's not well known.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X