Thomas Bowyer

[Chris]

By any chance, did you manage to decipher the reason for his discharge on medical grounds? I know his having Bright's disease was mentioned in the last two entries in his medical history but I couldn't make out the last line.

No, I didn't note anything on this. I don't have a copy of the images, but of course I'd be happy to have a try if you wanted to post or send me a copy of the relevant bit.

[Debra A]

Chris, thanks for the offer. I did eventually manage to decipher the end notation. It didn't actually mention a specific reason for his discharge on medical grounds, but was a comment that he had "appeared before an invaliding board at Colchester on 1st Nov 1886 and recommended for discharge." The last few entries in his medical notes show he was hospitalised with Bright's disease three times between Feb. 1885 and Nov. 86.

[Chris]

Thanks.

I've updated the Wiki article on Thomas Bowyer to include the Echo report you found, and also to clarify the issue of identification:

http://wiki.casebook.org/index.php/Thomas_Bowyer

[Debra A]

Thanks.
Here are the details of his burial. They don't really tell us anything more, apart from his address when he died.

Burials in the year 1889 in the South Metropolitan Cemetery under Stat. 6 & 7 William IV, cap.129
Thomas Bowyer No. a 3169
abode- 4 The Polygon Clapham
when buried-April 27 1889
age-Yrs 40

Parish or Poor Law Union: Norwood Cemetery, Norwood Road, Lambeth

[Chris]

Here are the details of his burial. They don't really tell us anything more, apart from his address when he died.

Burials in the year 1889 in the South Metropolitan Cemetery under Stat. 6 & 7 William IV, cap.129
Thomas Bowyer No. a 3169
abode- 4 The Polygon Clapham
when buried-April 27 1889
age-Yrs 40

Parish or Poor Law Union: Norwood Cemetery, Norwood Road, Lambeth

Thanks very much for this. The address might well have helped, but unfortunately there's no obvious link with the households at that address in 1891. Perhaps that was too much to hope for...

[Janner]

Going back to the Thomas Bowyer Debs looked at, I wonder whether he is worth further consideration. Although on one set of papers his intended place of residence is given as Stonehouse, Plymouth, on the other it seems to be "Not known."

He has a wife Jane Ann. FreeBMD contains no death registration for a Jane Ann Bowyer, but does have a marriage for one, in the first quarter of 1894, at East Stonehouse, Devon. If this is the remarriage of his widow, then he must have died between his discharge in 1886 and 1894. But the only death of a Thomas Bowyer in Devon or Cornwall during this period is at Chard (not very near Plymouth) in 1888, and the age is 3 years more than it should be for this Thomas. On the other hand, there is a death registered at Wandsworth in the first quarter of 1889, which is only 1 year away from the right age. Wandsworth included the parish of his birth, Clapham, and the army papers indicated that his father Thomas was still living there at the time of his discharge.

The upshot of all this is that this Thomas Bowyer just may have gone to London after being discharged in 1886. At any rate he was probably the only surviving army pensioner named Thomas or Henry Bowyer in 1888 who had served in India. Jane Ann's census records for 1891+ might well clarify things, but I've been unable to find anything, either in 1891 under the surname Bowyer, or later under either of her possible married names - Matthews and Perton.

Apologies for bumping this thread.

I was just wondering if anyone thought any of this worth chasing up. I have all the Devon (and Cornwall) census from 1841-1901 at home and am quite happy to have a look to save anyone using credits on Ancestry or FMP.

I'm from a Stonehouse family, and East Stonehouse, Devonport and Plymouth were three towns in their own right until 1914 when they joined together to form the modern day City of Plymouth.

It strikes me as unusual (though not impossible) that an ex-soldier might want to live in Stonehouse, very much the Royal Marine town. The army and, of course, the Royal Navy, are far more associated with Devonport.

The boundaries are blurred though, and there are a few streets in Stonehouse that might just as easily be thought of as being in Plymouth or Devonport (and vice-versa).

Just a thought.

Andy

[Debra A]

Hi Andy,

I think it's very much worth following up, yes.
I would be interested in the results anyway, as I haven't got around to looking at this Bowyer much further.
It would be interesting if you could find Jane Ann Bowyer, this particular soldier's wife and confirm if she is a widow or remarried in 1891. Or even them living as a couple in 1891, showing he didn't die in 1889.
Thanks! I look forward to the results.

Debs

[Janner]

Hello Debs,

A quick update, I've checked the 1891 census of what we would call East Stonehouse "proper", i.e. pieces RG12 1738 -1739.

No sign of Thomas or Jane Ann, (in fact, no Bowyers at all) so I'm moving on to the boundary areas of Plymouth & Devonport. Hope this helps.

Andy

[Debra A]

Many thanks for this, Andy. I missed it earlier.

[Bridewell]

India Connection

It strikes me as unusual (though not impossible) that an ex-soldier might want to live in Stonehouse, very much the Royal Marine town. The army and, of course, the Royal Navy, are far more associated with Devonport.

Hi Lynn, I think he is still a possible until Garry's identification is unearthed by someone.
Without finding a Bowyer with either a link to the army, a link to India or a link to Dorset St, Spitalfields, or McCarthy, just going by a guess at his age alone is difficult as there is nothing official to corroborate it. An army pensioner could be any age, even still in their 20s.
However, the Penny Illustrated sketch does seem to show an older man.

Hi Janner & Debs,

Apologies for resurrecting an old thread, but it seemed the most appropriate venue. I've found a Thomas Bowyer with an Indian military connection, but it's someone from "Naval Brigade Personnel" who was awarded a clasp for the Defence of Lucknow in 1858. He's rated as "AB", so presumably Able-Bodied Seaman. That would fit with the notion of a man in his "mid 50's" at the time of the murders, but not with the "young man" of some press reports. The final column includes what looks like a fraction (1/40) and "Sent to Vulcan" followed by a date - 8/11/61. There have been several Vulcans but, in 1861 (according to Wikipedia admittedly):

HMS Vulcan was an iron screw frigate launched in 1849. She was converted to a troopship in 1851 and was sold in 1867 as the barque Jorawur.

Perhaps (only perhaps admittedly) Bowyer was a navy man whose main claim to fame was a land action which gave rise to an assumption that he had served in the army.

[Cogidubnus]

Hi Colin

He certainly wasn't RN by 1878, as my Navy List for that year doesn't include him

All the best

Dave

[Cogidubnus]

Mind you, although it's not entirely clear, it may well be that nobody lower than Boatswain is listed...

Dave

[Wickerman]

Sugden suggests that this might have been a reference to Bowyer's reported sighting on Wednesday, but notes the discrepancy with his inquest testimony that he had last seen Kelly on Wednesday afternoon, not Wednesday night.

This is reaching back a little, but the inconsistency in Bowyer's claim has been voiced elsewhere.

Sugden must not be aware that the early evening was also termed afternoon, so there is no need to concern ourselves with any apparent inconsistency.

Even taking a brief perusal through the papers of the time we read:

...She left him at 4 o'clock on Friday afternoon...

...on Saturday afternoon, at twenty minutes past five,...

...She last saw the deceased alive at half past six o'clock on Saturday afternoon...

As we can see, the afternoon was a general term which included the early evening.

Also, if you recall the words of John Kelly after hearing that Kate Eddowes had been locked up Saturday night.

John Kelly: I heard she had been locked up at Bishopsgate-street on Saturday afternoon. An old woman who works in then lane told me she saw her in the hands of the police.

Yet the words of P.C. Robinson at the inquest provides the actual time.

City-constable Lewis Robinson, 931, deposed: At half-past eight, on the night of Saturday, Sept. 29, while on duty in High-street, Aldgate, I saw a crowd of persons outside No. 29, surrounding a woman whom I have since recognised as the deceased........With the aid of a fellow-constable I took her to Bishopsgate Police-station.

Even 8:30 at night was still regarded as afternoon.

The basis for disputing Bowyer's claim on the grounds that afternoon is not night, is therefore removed.

What we need to do is refrain from judging witnesses on the basis of how our language has evolved today. And instead, familiarize ourselves with the terminology used at the time the statement was made.

Regards, Jon S.

[Debra A]

Hi Janner & Debs,

Apologies for resurrecting an old thread, but it seemed the most appropriate venue. I've found a Thomas Bowyer with an Indian military connection, but it's someone from "Naval Brigade Personnel" who was awarded a clasp for the Defence of Lucknow in 1858. He's rated as "AB", so presumably Able-Bodied Seaman. That would fit with the notion of a man in his "mid 50's" at the time of the murders, but not with the "young man" of some press reports. The final column includes what looks like a fraction (1/40) and "Sent to Vulcan" followed by a date - 8/11/61. There have been several Vulcans but, in 1861 (according to Wikipedia admittedly):

HMS Vulcan was an iron screw frigate launched in 1849. She was converted to a troopship in 1851 and was sold in 1867 as the barque Jorawur.

Perhaps (only perhaps admittedly) Bowyer was a navy man whose main claim to fame was a land action which gave rise to an assumption that he had served in the army.

Hi Colin,
Thanks for posting this information.
One thing I would point out though, the mention of Stonehouse comes from the army records I found of a Chelsea pensioner named Thomas Bowyer who did serve in India too. I posted some details on this thread. The only thing I couldn't do was tie him to Whitechapel or the area. I think it is a similar situation with your man too? Very frustrating.

[MysterySinger]

Thought this thread was worth a bump because there are some avenues which could be explored further with regard to Thomas Bowyer. Referring to the man who was discharged in 1886, having served in India and Afghanistan (and as well as deserting also gained promotion).

The army records show him as having married Jane Ann Brent in Newcastle Upon Tyne in 1874 (on leave during his service). In fact Thomas Bowyer did marry a Jane Ann Bunt in Newcastle in that year. Therefore it would be worth future searching for George and/or Jane Ann.

I believe this Thomas Bowyer is the same one who was a bricklayer at the age of 13 in 1861. He was shown as a grandson - of Mary Bowyer (a widow).

Thomas Bowyer joined up in 1866 (aged 18 yrs 8 months) and was discharged at the end of 1886 - so in fact 20 years in. Now to establish a Whitechapel connection (since the Army papers did show him going to Plymouth on discharge - but did he?).

Aside from the anomalies with his statements to papers, Police and Kelly's inquest, one thing he did say there (according to Facebook) was that he did not know the deceased by the name of Kelly.