P.C Smith and William West

[Canucco dei Mergi]

But there would have been "free margin" available for his wife, apparently?

No.
No free margin.

[Chris]

You speak about chivalry.
Here is a question of tradition and sticking to it without any free margin available.
Not any.

But there would have been "free margin" available for his wife, apparently?

Anyhow, on the pertinent point about whether people in the East End rented by the month, and people had to move on the last (or the first?) of the month, I'm quite happy to be corrected if you can provide some evidence for that idea. But it can be dangerous to say "It would have been like it is now" when speaking of the late Victorian period.

[Canucco dei Mergi]

Perhaps it's a language difficulty, but I don't quite understand what you're trying to say there.

You speak about chivalry.
Here is a question of tradition and sticking to it without any free margin available.
Not any.

[Chris]

a woman ?
an orthodox ?
please.

Perhaps it's a language difficulty, but I don't quite understand what you're trying to say there.

[Canucco dei Mergi]

And if they had been constrained to move on that day willy nilly, it would have been rather unchivalrous of Schwartz to disappear and leave his wife not only with all the work to do, but all the Sabbath-breaking as well.

a woman ?
an orthodox ?
please.

[Chris]

But they can't choose the moment the last day of the month fall.

As for renting flats at the time, contracts would have been very similar to the nowadays ones.
Rent are paid from the first to the last of the days.

That's also an interesting idea, but I suspect it would have been more common to rent by the week.

And if they had been constrained to move on that day willy nilly, it would have been rather unchivalrous of Schwartz to disappear and leave his wife not only with all the work to do, but all the Sabbath-breaking as well.

[Canucco dei Mergi]

Hi Canucco dei Mergi,

You have a mordant eye, and a wit to match.

[Canucco dei Mergi]

That could certainly explain an otherwise puzzling feature of the Star's account. Though I suppose the Sabbath-day move could alternatively be considered evidence against the family's orthodoxy - or at least against Mrs S's.

Opening a locked door is always a hard thing to do unless you got the key.
'Puzzling' many times is just an underestimation of the level of misunderstanding.

Are they offered to choose, a jewish orthodox family would certainly avoid moving on the day of Shabbat.
What the sense of doing it that day if...you can't ?

But they can't choose the moment the last day of the month fall.

As for renting flats at the time, contracts would have been very similar to the nowadays ones.
Rent are paid from the first to the last of the days, not beyond.

[Chris]

You mean if we know for sure that the guy seemingly dressed 'in the theatrical line' who Abberlines define as having strong jewish features and who leaves his wife alone not to get mixed up with the moving the day of the Shabbat while getting out of the way because the day of the Shabbat you can't even hint at working is an orthodox ?

Well, Schwartz's "strong Jewish appearance" would certainly be an indication that he was Jewish, but I don't think anyone has ever doubted that. And I'm not convinced a "theatrical" appearance would be an infallible indication that a Jew was orthodox, either.

But that's an interesting interpretation of the Star's statement "It seems that he had gone out for the day, and his wife had expected to move, during his absence, from their lodgings in Berner-street to others in Backchurch-lane".

If I understand correctly, the theory would be that Schwartz's wife had arranged to move lodgings on the Sabbath, when such a move would be strictly forbidden to orthodox Jews, and that he wished to dissociate himself from the proceeding, and therefore went out and left her to it.

That could certainly explain an otherwise puzzling feature of the Star's account. Though I suppose the Sabbath-day move could alternatively be considered evidence against the family's orthodoxy - or at least against Mrs S's.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Canucco dei Mergi,

You have a mordant eye, and a wit to match.

Regards,

Simon

[Canucco dei Mergi]

Do we know that for sure?

You mean if we know for sure that the guy seemingly dressed 'in the theatrical line' who Abberlines define as having strong jewish features and who leaves his wife alone not to get mixed up with the moving the day of the Shabbat while getting out of the way because the day of the Shabbat you can't even hint at working is an orthodox ?

No, I guess from those elements we can't know for sure.

But there are others to be looked for.

[Sam Flynn]

Goldstein was a club member, and had in his Gladstone like bag, empty cigarette cartons. He shows up at around 12:55am, and as it so happens, some cottagers opposite the club wall were still awake at that time, and some were cigarette makers.

There were hundreds of cigarette- and cigar-makers in that part of the world, Mike - it was a very popular "work-from-home" option at that time, as was making the boxes to hold them. I don't think we can read too much into the Leon Goldstein story on that score.

[Chris]

Schwarz was an orthodox. He could never have been a member of the club.

Do we know that for sure?

[Canucco dei Mergi]

-Why didnt Liz pay for her bed before leaving? She had the money from cleaning that day.
-Why would she say she did not know when she might return, after she had already given some velvet to a lodger to hold for her, which would lead one to surmise she had plans at least for that night. Did she mean she might not return to sleep there again, or just that night?
-Why is she wearing an ankle length skirt and a flower on her breast to solicit.....and why would cashous be something she would use when dealing with street people that smell horrible likely.
-Why didnt Eagle and Lave see each other, when their statements have them both in the yard at 12:40am?
-Why did Eagle, who is self described as "squeamish" about blood, tumble "pell-mell" down the stairs to see the murdered woman discovered by Diemshutz.
-Why didnt Police use Schwartz's statement at the Inquest?
-Why do Eagle, Diemshutz and Kozebrodski run out yelling "another" woman has been murdered?
-Why is Liz Stride, if a Ripper victim, unmutilated post mortem?
-Is there anything with respect to the known evidence regarding her murder that precludes someone else with a knife killing her, other than Jack?

1. Who knows ? So what ?
2. Maybe. Nice thought. So what ?

3. That she was soliciting that night is only another of those 'magic theory' advanced by the serial killer paladins. Nothing in it. Circumstances tend to show she was not at it.
But for the said paladins aknowledging she was not soliciting would mean cutting the grass under their own feet.
Some of them (the serial killer integrists) have chosen to go further: putting the woman Stride with the woman Smith: in the not-pertinence wastepaper basket.
It says a lot.

3bis. Cachous were found in her hand. Nobody can prove she was having them already while alive. The murderer(s) might be the one(s) who put them there.

4. Probably because they were off by some minutes in their testimony. I see nothing suspicious there.

5. But he didn't stay long anyway when he saw the body, going away from the yard looking for a PC. Again, nothing suspicious (IMO)

6. Interesting point. Likely because his testimony was considered of the utmost importance and they did want to keep it secret from the press as police do it often today. Just not to give out their clues to the miscreants.
Little problem: they seem to have kept it secret even to Dr Phillips (fear of leaks ?) who couldn't explain bluish marks on the victim chests other than by 'pushing pressure'.

7. It is my contention that you look too suspiciously to those guys of the club.

8. Not really a safe place to lose time at mutilating.

9. The answer deserves a chapter of a book.

[Canucco dei Mergi]

Hello all,
If.....Schwartz was leaving the club, and in the yard when a man accosts Liz near the wall by the gates, and hurries on out, maybe along with a Pipe smoking man also there, then his statement would be an accusatory one towards someone attending that meeting. That would have closed this club down.

Schwarz was an orthodox. He could never have been a member of the club.