Jack McCarthy speech on Dorset Street

[Varqm]

There is a thread somewhere that says Steve was John. The marriage cert should say it. I do not know who was the esquire.
The ad said :
Messrs. Harry Lee and Jack McCarthy, jun.
will give their
NINTH GRAND BOXING ...

Tickets can be obtained at "Jack McCarthy,27,Dorset street"...

[MrBarnett]

The newspaper ad I saw was in around 1898.We'll Steve must be John then.

‘Steve’ was his stage name. As Dave says, he was born John.

[MrBarnett]

‘Steve’ was his stage name. As Dave says, he was born John.

And he named his son John. There is a photo of all three ‘Jacks’.

[Scott Nelson]

When I get a better copy of the press photo of JM Esq., I reserve the right to post it alongside the sketch of MJK’s landlord to see if there’s any resemblance. Of course, if there is, Scott will no doubt claim that all McCarthies look alike.

Take it away, Scotty…

Yeah, back for more and go ahead, knock yourself out. So what if they all may have looked alike? Post a picture of the Spitalfields-born John McCarthy if you can. He was probably related to McCarthy, Esq. and the one hired to collect the rents, and the one who knew Mary Kelly. After all, that's what this is all about.

[MrBarnett]

Yeah, back for more and go ahead, knock yourself out. So what if they all may have looked alike? Post a picture of the Spitalfields-born John McCarthy if you can. He was probably related to McCarthy, Esq. and the one hired to collect the rents, and the one who knew Mary Kelly. After all, that's what this is all about.

Why would a Spitalfields-born McCarthy ‘probably’ have been related to Esq? Have you traced the Esq genealogy to Spitalfields independently of Esq himself?

Kudos!

[Scott Nelson]

No. But the same name, same address, same age, one a "Grocer", the other a "General Shop Keeper" -- probably the same thing, but different people. Cousins?

[The Rookie Detective]

Bump up

Interesting discussion

[Scott Nelson]

Thanks for the bump up, I think (that is, if you mean anything I've been discussing).

My point was that the ground floor 27 Dorset Street was a grocer's business owned by John McCarthy, who operated the store selling wholesale goods to the inhabitants of the region for charitable purposes. He would have identified his residence there for purposes of establishing a lower tax base that wouldn't take such a bite out of his profit margin and for eligibility to vote as a resident for improvements in the Dorset Street region. McCarthy would have ensured records of his residence there would have included the census, all charitable activities, school registration for his kids, births, marriages, etc.

But I think he and his family would have actually lived elsewhere under a different name (possibly the wife's maiden name, Stevens?) to avoid voting conflicts, and to avoid the sporting mobs he was associated with. The main issue with his residence there is that it was such a bad place to bring up his daughters, and yet he supposedly still chose to live there for some years after the murder of Mary Kelly in a room only a few feet across from no. 27. If he actually raised his family there, his wife and daughters must have had nerves of steel. But McCarthy could afford to live in a better area and undoubtedly did.

Look at this description of Millers Court two years before the murder when McCarthy and family was supposed to be living there:

East London Advertiser February 13, 1886

The following letter, addressed to the Medical Officer of the Health, and signed by Mr. Jas. Greenlees, Mr. Bolton King, Mr. J.M. French, and the Rev. S. Barnett, as from the Mansion House Council on the Dwellings of the People, was read and referred to Dr. Loane for action: - “Sir, - We, the under-signed householders, living near to Millers-court and Dorset-street, represent to you that the houses situate and being Millers-Court, and 26 and 27 Dorset-street, are in a condition or state dangerous to health, so as to be unfit for human habitation, as request that you will forthwith inspect the said premises and report thereon as required by section 12 of the Artizans’ and Labourers’ Dwellings Act, 1868.”

One can only summarize that the conditions hadn't improved very much up to the time of the murder. The entrepreneurial McCarthy was fairly well off -- not wealthy by any means, but he could afford to have his family living in better surroundings and undoubtedly did. He may have occasionally appeared at no. 27 to deliver or check grocery supplies that he sold to the denizens among his other charitable activities. Most of the store's clerical work would have been done by another John McCarthy (likely a relative), his wife Mary and son, George and John's brother Daniel. Then who was the John McCarthy who testified at Mary Kelly's inquest? I believe it was the McCarthy who was described as a "General Shop Keeper" in the 1891 census, not the sportsman and charitable John McCarthy.

[seanr]

Then who was the John McCarthy who testified at Mary Kelly's inquest? I believe it was the McCarthy who was described as a "General Shop Keeper" in the 1891 census, not the sportsman and charitable John McCarthy

It was undoubtedly the sportsman and 'charitable' John McCarthy, and he was identified as such to the press probably by Abberline, with whom he was personally familiar, as he was with many of the senior officers of H Division. He was actively involved with the local community, organising testimonials and substantial financial gifts from local businessmen such as J.Joel and Frederick Gehringer, when officers retired. There is no evidence whatsoever that he sought avoid the 'sporting mobs' he was associated with. On the contrary, his interest in boxing appears to have been driven from enjoying being a spectator, when he staged a charity boxing celebration for the Victoria Park hospital in 1886 he staged it at the St James Tavern in Duke's Place, his son's birthday in 1888 was celebrated at the Blue Anchor in Shoreditch and the Masonic Lodge he belonged to met at the Three Nuns Hotel. He didn't just occasionally visit, he was a key member of the community.
In later life when he was a co-owner of the Ring boxing club, he could often be found at the club itself watching the boxing events and was on friendly terms with the regularly boxers on their books such as the young Fred Handley. Together with his co-owner Dick Burge, he would even meet and dine with MPs there. Far from avoiding the 'sporting mobs', he seems to have enjoyed their company and thrived among them.

No-one knows for sure if John McCarthy had a second (or even a third home) elsewhere before 1911. His associate John Cooney undoubtedly had a second home in Hastings, but he only stayed there some of the time and when the Cooney family ran the Weaver's Arms in Hanbury Street they could be found there.

There is plenty of evidence to support John McCarthy's regular presence both in Spitalfields and in Dorset Street itself up until around 1911. There's every reason to believe he was wealthier than generally supposed, and he certainly had extremely wealthy friends.

[The Rookie Detective]

It was undoubtedly the sportsman and 'charitable' John McCarthy, and he was identified as such to the press probably by Abberline, with whom he was personally familiar, as he was with many of the senior officers of H Division. He was actively involved with the local community, organising testimonials and substantial financial gifts from local businessmen such as J.Joel and Frederick Gehringer, when officers retired. There is no evidence whatsoever that he sought avoid the 'sporting mobs' he was associated with. On the contrary, his interest in boxing appears to have been driven from enjoying being a spectator, when he staged a charity boxing celebration for the Victoria Park hospital in 1886 he staged it at the St James Tavern in Duke's Place, his son's birthday in 1888 was celebrated at the Blue Anchor in Shoreditch and the Masonic Lodge he belonged to met at the Three Nuns Hotel. He didn't just occasionally visit, he was a key member of the community.
In later life when he was a co-owner of the Ring boxing club, he could often be found at the club itself watching the boxing events and was on friendly terms with the regularly boxers on their books such as the young Fred Handley. Together with his co-owner Dick Burge, he would even meet and dine with MPs there. Far from avoiding the 'sporting mobs', he seems to have enjoyed their company and thrived among them.

No-one knows for sure if John McCarthy had a second (or even a third home) elsewhere before 1911. His associate John Cooney undoubtedly had a second home in Hastings, but he only stayed there some of the time and when the Cooney family ran the Weaver's Arms in Hanbury Street they could be found there.

There is plenty of evidence to support John McCarthy's regular presence both in Spitalfields and in Dorset Street itself up until around 1911. There's every reason to believe he was wealthier than generally supposed, and he certainly had extremely wealthy friends.

Excellent post.


in those days, East End boxing, Theatre, and running lodging and public houses, all went hand in hand with organised crime.

This was an era before the Krays, but essentially McCarthy was one of the top Irish mobsters in the East End at the time.

Kelly was likely used as an asset and it would seem possible that she was used to entertain higher end clients; Mccarthy acting as a facilitator to those who wanted the seediness but without the publicity.

Some Police, judges, barristers, doctors etc... all used prostitutes, and so the use of a room run by McCarthy, enabled those men seeking extra-marital relations to have their way without getting caught.

McCarthy used the Dorset street shop as a front for his other more lucrative businesses that involved gambling, prostitution, opiates, extortion etc...

Astrakhan man appears to have been one of those higher end clients, or someone from the theatre and/or boxing world, that knew Kelly from her West End days.

Mccarthy had a lot of influence within his local community, and no doubt had powerful friends, as well as powerful enemies.

The slaughter of one of his assets in room 13 may have been as much a statement by the killer to the likes of Mccarthy, as it was towards Kelly herself.

Murdering Kelly on Mccarthy's turf was a bold move indeed by the killer.

[c.d.]

Kelly was likely used as an asset and it would seem possible that she was used to entertain higher end clients; Mccarthy acting as a facilitator to those who wanted the seediness but without the publicity.

An interesting idea, R.D but without a shred of evidence to back it up.

And if Kelly were entertaining high rollers what did she do with the money she received? Turn it all over to McCarthy? You would think she would have said hey I want a nicer place and a much more extensive wardrobe and life style.

It would appear that she was not much of a business woman.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Here's one for you, R.d.

What if McCarthy found out that Kelly was holding out on him and not reporting all of her earnings? So he kills her in revenge and as a warning to anyone who might be thinking of doing the same.

Feel free to take it and run with it.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Murdering Kelly on Mccarthy's turf was a bold move indeed by the killer.

Unless the killer didn't know who McCarthy was and had no connection to him. And if there was no connection, how could McCarthy retaliate? He would have nowhere to start just like the police.

c.d.