William Friday - a sketch made on the spot

[Chris Scott]

I hadn't seen this sketch before. William "Jumbo" Friday took two staff from Lloyd's Weekly to the spot where he had seen the couple and the sketch was done on the spot till he was happy with the result.

Lloyds Weekly
15 February 1891

[Robert]

Good find, Chris - even if it does appear that JTR was a three-legged man.

[Sam Flynn]

Good find, Chris - even if it does appear that JTR was a three-legged man.

Where's Rolf when you need him?

Thanks, Chris, for sharing that great fi(e)nd with us.

[Dan Norder]

Thanks for that -- I'd never seen a sketch of Kate McCarthy and Thomas Fowles before. I wonder if anyone compared the illustration to them later to see how good of a job the artist did?

[Stephen Thomas]

Where's Rolf when you need him?

Right 'ere...

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KJleJbn9G6Y

[Monty]

Hey Chris,

Jake forwarded me a copy of this last year...I didnt realise it was a rare one.

Dan,

I should think Jumbo got the couple right, seeing as they knew him and spoke to him. Of course Friday was half cut which would explain it!

Monty

[Chris Scott]

The text accompanying the sketch starts:
During "Jumbo's" visit to Lloyd's office (an account of which appears in the fourth page)...

This account is below. I found it interesting to read a witness's experiences in much more detail than we normally get.
Chris

Jumbo's Evidence
In consequence of the importance which the detectives attached to the evidence of the young man Friday, known as Jumbo, we yesterday morning secured his attendance at Lloyd's offices, when he made the following statement:-
I have been engaged at the G.N. Railway Good depot about 11 years. They used to call me "Fourfoot" and another boy there was called "Sixfoot," but when we got bigger they called me Jumbo, and it has stuck to me ever since; in fact, I am better known by that name than I am by my right name, William Friday. My work calls me out early in the morning. We have to meet the fish trains, and the first one that gets there gets the best job. I generally get to the yard early, but that night I had been to the Foresters' music hall, so I did not go home to bed. I went round to the goods yard, and I went through the archway home (83 Chamber Street) and I called up my two pals, John and Joe Knapton. It was about half past twelve o'clock then. We all walked along to the station, and finding the gates were not open, we thought we'd have a little walk, so we went down the Minories, along Aldgate, and into the Whitechapel Road. When we got to the corner of Great Garden Street we found there was a row going on between a gentleman and a chap, and the gentleman wanted to lock the man up. I went across the road and stopped to listen, but my pals went back, and I missed them, so I walked back to the station by myself. I went back through Union Street, across Commercial Road, into Backchurch Lane, along Cable Street, and down Royal Mint Street. As I was passing the Seven Stars public house, in Royal Mint Street (some people call it Rosemary Lane), I noticed a man and a young woman standing near a street door just a little way off the public house. It must have been just about a quarter to two o'clock. I did not take much notice, because a lot of young chaps and girls stand there, and I thought it was a young fellow bidding his young woman goodbye. I was on the opposite side of the way to them, and I went straight on up Mint Street into the yard, and looked on. After this I walked on the same side of the Seven Stars, and the same side as they were. They were still standing there; in fact, just the same - they hadn't shifted a bit. When I got close up to them I caught sight of her face, and I thought I knew her. She was dressed in black; the man's back was to me, and they were talking, but, of course, I could not hear what they said. As I passed the woman bent her head down. It was then between ten minutes and five minutes to two, or it might have been a little more. I only saw the man's back. He was taller than the girl, and looked down a little at her. He wasn't standing right in front of her; he was just a little on the left side of her. When she bent her head I saw she had a black crape hat on, and some black beads in front of it; they were sticking out in front. She was dressed in black. I then looked at the man. He was taller than me, and had a brown overcoat on, with a velvet collar. He had a muffler or scarf round his neck. I can't say if it was a silk or woollen one. I know it was a plaid or a check. His hat was at the back of his head, but not right at the back, and what made me notice him more was his ears - they came out, like. I should know him if I saw his back and he had the same coat on. I spotted his ears in a moment, and what made me notice them more was the brim of his hat, which was broader than mine. He was dark, and I just caught sight as I passed of enough of the side of his face to see he did not have a beard. I went on to the stable and harnessed my horses, but when I came by then they were gone. It must have been then about five minutes past two - it could not have been more. I took the horses into the yard, and stood talking for some time - I should think a good 20 minutes or half an hour - perhaps more; and as I went to the gate I saw a policeman run. My pal Joe came up then, and said to me, "Jumbo, have you seen the woman what's under the arch with her throat cut?" I said, "No," and asked him what sort of woman she was. He said, "A young woman, not an old 'un." So I said then, "Was she dressed in black?" When he said, "Yes," I said, "Well, I'll bet a wager it's the young woman I saw speaking to a man when I went along to get my horses." So I ran up to the archway, but a policeman stopped me and told me I couldn't have a look at her. I told him I thought I knew her, and so he says, "Well, go to the mortuary." By this time there was a lot of gentlemen up the archway, doctors and policemen and detectives. While I stood there several came up in cabs. I heard the inspector say she had a black hat with crape on it, and I said to him, "Well if that's so I can bet any money it's the one I saw near the pub, talking to a man." Then the inspector asked me what she was like, and I told him; and then he put a lot of questions to me about the man, and after I told him, he said, "Jumbo, it's a pity you didn't have a better look at him," and I said, "Yes, I wish I had." I went back to the yard and done two loads of fish to Billingsgate, and then I went home, and feeling a bit tired, I fell asleep. Joe comes up to me and says, "Wake up, here's a policeman wants you;" and then I was taken to Leman Street, and I told them just what I have told you. They asked me how the girl was dressed, and I told them that she was in deep black, and had a light black jacket on. They asked me how tall the man was, and I said about three inches taller than I am, so they put me in the dock and measured me against the rule on the wall; they said I was 5ft 5 in, and then I said the man must have been 5ft 8in, or at any rate half a head taller than I am. I told them I could recognise the hat she had on, so the inspector says, "There you are, then, there's two hats over there; which one did she have on?" I picked it out. Then the inspector picked the other one up, and said, "Didn't she have this one on?" and I said, "No," and he said, "Yes, that's quite right; that's the hat she had on." I think it was was someone from Scotland Yard who said to me, "It's a pity you did not have a better look at him; you would not have had to have done any work for a little while." I was then taken to the mortuary, and shown the body. It was a sight, and I don't want to see it any more; the great big gash in her throat makes you feel awful. Well, I never eat any dinner or tea. Yes, it was the same woman I saw speaking to the man; if I hadn't seen her face I could have told her by her clothes. She was lying on a table, and while I was there one of the big people from Scotland Yard lifted her head up with a stick, and then parted the hair away from the back of her head, and he said, "They can say what they like - that's a clean cut, and must have been done with the same knife. It was never done with the fall." Then he said to someone, "If she fell on the back of her head how is it the side of her face is all bruises?" And then they both looked at the cut and said it must have been done with the knife. I was very glad to get out of the place. I can tell you it looks a bit horrible. I don't think her face has changed much; she ain't good looking, but the cut made her look horrible. The cut starts just under her left ear and goes right round her neck. How far is it from where I saw them standing to the archway where she was found? Why, not more than 40 yards, and, what's more, I know very well that they did not go into the archway when I passed with my horses, because one of our chaps came through the arch about 10 minutes past two with two horses, and if she had been there he would have seen her. It is impossible for two persons to stand against the fence while two horses and a man pass.

[Stewart P Evans]

Nick Connell

Just as an indicator of the thoroughness of Nick Connell he found this article about ten years ago - long before digital searching. And there are many more that have never been used.

[Chris Scott]

Just to clarify on the articles etc. that I post on Casebook. If I find something in my reading which piques my curiosity and which I haven't seen before I work on the premise that it may be new to some others as well. In view of how many researchers have gone over this field and for how long, it is unsurprising that some, if not many, of these articles will have been seen before.
I have absolutely no interest in claiming any kind of precedence in any of these postings, as they may well have been seen or even posted before. If anything that I find which is new to me and which I post has been found by others before, I can only apologise if it seems that I am somehow claiming that my posting of it is a "new discovery" when other researchers have come upon them before me. That is not my intention and never has been. All I ever claim is that they are new to me, and I would prefer something to be on Casebook twice (or more!) than not at all.
Hope this clarifies things
Chris

[Stewart P Evans]

A Dig

Chris this wasn't a dig at you as I realise that you have done a huge amount of work and have certainly made some important finds. You are also very generous with your work and freely post it up for others.

However, Nick and I have done a huge amount of research over the past twelve years and spent a lot of money. We have a stack of unpublished material. Most of the work that Nick did was the hard way. Many visits to Colindale checking though hundreds of old newspapers and then paying for hard copy. His work resulted in many significant finds some of which he has shared with others and many of which have been posted over past years. I often feel that he does not get the credit he deserves and this is especially noticeable when I see something that is old (to me) being posted and hailed by others as a 'great new find.'

None of this, of course, detracts from your own sterling work, but I just try to put things into a proper perspective for anyone who may not understand the ramifications of this research business.

[Chris Scott]

Hi Stewart
I didn't take your comments as a dig - I know your generosity too well and have been the grateful recipient of your help in the past
I agree with all your sentiments and it was in that spirit that I wanted to acknowledge all researchers in the field - past and present - and clarify about what and why I post
Thanks for your comments and, believe me, I took your comments in the spirit in which they were intended
Best regards
Chris

[Monty]

Chris,

I wish to echo Stewarts post and apologise for my own ill thought out post. It was a product of tiredness and a cold.

Your work is awesome...long may it continue.

Sorry Monty

[Chris Scott]

Hi Monty
Please don't apologise - your post was not in any way ill thought out.
The bottom line is, what matters to me is not my ego but the information!

Now, chaps, let's leave it there and get on with hunting Jack!
Chris

[Monty]

Chris,

Hear hear, spoken like the respected true Gent that you are.

Onward.

Monty

[Dan Norder]

In view of how many researchers have gone over this field and for how long, it is unsurprising that some, if not many, of these articles will have been seen before.
I have absolutely no interest in claiming any kind of precedence in any of these postings, as they may well have been seen or even posted before.

Hi Chris,

You've always been quite professional in how you present the articles you find. There are a lot of people searching through old news articles now, and a number of us are finding some of the same things as each other. It's just the nature of research. I do think it's important to credit anyone who had previously published the material, because, just as it's important to highlight something other people may have overlooked, if they've overlooked a previous publication they should know that too so the people who want to see what was written previously can go look it up.

I've never seen you try to take credit you didn't deserve, and, rather, you seem to regularly understate your own contributions to the field.