Ep. #28- Kosminski Was The Suspect

[Chris]

There is a Leavesden Imbecile Asylum near Caterham, Surrey, and I wonder sometimes if Cox confused this with Leavesden Asylum, Hertfordshire.

Are you sure there was another Leavesden Asylum near Caterham? As far as I can see from online sources Leavesden and Caterham asylums were built about the same time, so I wonder if they have been confused somewhere.

[dougie]

There is a Leavesden Imbecile Asylum near

I also tried to see if I could find some admission books for Stone Asylum, which if I am not mistaken was a City of London Asylum. I only saw some charge sheets (which parish an inmate was chargeable) and the ref was CLA/047/LR/06/027 but I couldn't see anything relating to Stone there, although

Rob

I dont believe Stone assylum would have been within the london boundaries at that time.Dartford in the 1960s ,if my memory serves me right wasnt part of outer london,it is now though. However,as is known, dartford,the hop fields of kent and allhallows in particular were a favourite destination for east-enders at the time for several different reasons. If for some reason kosminski had been "apprehended" in that locality ,maybe the local authorities would have had jurisdiction.?.....an alternative assylum in the area would have been Darenth park hospital, a relative stones throw from stone. But as i said, for what its worth, Stone assylum has /hadthat oral legend attached to it .
regards

[Chris]

I dont believe Stone assylum would have been within the london boundaries at that time. ... But as i said, for what its worth, Stone assylum has /hadthat oral legend attached to it .
regards

Stone is outside London, but Rob C is correct in saying it was a City of London asylum.

It's interesting that you mention an oral tradition about Jack the Ripper, because of course a claim was made that Lady Anderson remarked that the Ripper had been an inmate in an asylum near a Stone. The claim was made by Steward Hicks, now deceased, and the source seems to be untraceable [A-Z, 1996 edn, p. 162].

[dougie]

Stone is outside London, but Rob C is correct in saying it was a City of London asylum.

It's interesting that you mention an oral tradition about Jack the Ripper, because of course a claim was made that Lady Anderson remarked that the Ripper had been an inmate in an asylum near a Stone. The claim was made by Steward Hicks, now deceased, and the source seems to be untraceable [A-Z, 1996 edn, p. 162].

Chris,
Ill stand corrected, I wasnt certain ...thanks
I didnt know of Lady andersons remark,thats interesting.Would her remark have been generally known outside of ripper circles?Maybe the "oral legend" could have originated from that remark,but if it originated independently it might give food for thought.
regards
dougie

[Jeff Leahy]

I dont believe Stone assylum would have been within the london boundaries at that time.Dartford in the 1960s ,if my memory serves me right wasnt part of outer london,it is now though. However,as is known, dartford,the hop fields of kent and allhallows in particular were a favourite destination for east-enders at the time for several different reasons. If for some reason kosminski had been "apprehended" in that locality ,maybe the local authorities would have had jurisdiction.?.....an alternative assylum in the area would have been Darenth park hospital, a relative stones throw from stone. But as i said, for what its worth, Stone assylum has /hadthat oral legend attached to it .
regards

Hi Dougie

I know that Giles at Maidstone Museum is placing all the Kent prison records on computer data basis but I never asked about asylum records. (Although I know Ostrog was in a kent asylum).

Its a bit of a long shot. Anyway he might have something on Stone, I will ask when I next see him.

Pirate

PS Hi Rob, dont wish to teach my Grandmother etc etc..but are you checking the name Abraham as well as Kosminski?

[dougie]

Jack,
Ostrog was in a Kent assylum? I wasnt aware of that,so the Stone oral tradition could equally have applied to him........Id be interested to hear anything your research unearths.
regards
dougie

[Rob Clack]

Are you sure there was another Leavesden Asylum near Caterham? As far as I can see from online sources Leavesden and Caterham asylums were built about the same time, so I wonder if they have been confused somewhere.

Hi Chris,

Yes, I think your right. When I've been reading about Leavesden/Caterham Imbecile Asylum it sounds like the same place is being described, also I think they were both built to the same design.

Regards

Rob

[Rob Clack]

PS Hi Rob, dont wish to teach my Grandmother etc etc..but are you checking the name Abraham as well as Kosminski?

I am, and variants of Kosminski.

Rob

[Robert]

According to this excellent site, they were opened same month.

http://studymore.org.uk/4_13_ta.htm

[Sam Flynn]

According to this excellent site, they were opened same month.

http://studymore.org.uk/4_13_ta.htm

Warning! Useful site (thanks Rob), but a potentially seizure-inducing colour scheme!

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Dougie

Ostrog operated in and around kent. Which was why I was checking the prison records at Maidstone. Nothing turned up but hey only went back to the late !880's. However I'm sure he was at an asylum just outside Maidstone...Wateringbury?

I will have to check and get back to you later..sorry a little off thread.

Cheers everyone

Pirate

[robhouse]

Re: Private Asylums.

Chris,

I remember thinking that your search of Private Asylum records was not entirely exhaustive, as it would not have included pauper patients. You wrote:

"The searches I did weren't online, but in two paper registers at the National Archives - MH 94/6 (Licensed Metropolitan Houses, Jan 1886-Dec 1900) and MH 94/11 (Provincial Licensed Houses, Feb 1880-1900). It would be a big help if we could confirm whether those should cover all private patients (we know they won't cover paupers)."

I copied this from somewhere:

"Public asylums took years to build, so in the mean time the only way for most local authorities to keep the law was to send their lunatic poor to a private madhouse."

"The law distinguished between pauper lunatics, who were maintained out of the poor rates, and non-pauper. It should be noted that there were many non-paupers received at similar charges to paupers, and maintained in similar conditions. Paupers were poor but non-paupers were not necessarily rich!

In the mid-19th century all workhouse asylums and most county asylums were exclusively occupied by paupers, although a few county asylums made some provision for others. Most licensed houses did not take paupers. Only a minority (the pauper houses) took both or (exceptionally) only paupers. The pauper houses, however, included the very largest, and as a result over half the lunatics in licensed houses were paupers. Hospitals received relatively few paupers."

Also, this is a table of licensed houses receiving paupers in 1859
house All patients Paupers Private
Bethnal House - London 455 314 (141)
Grove Hall - London 359 173 (186)
Fisherton House - Wiltshire 330 117 (213)
Camberwell House - London 318 247 (71)
Peckham House - London 317 188 (129)
Hoxton House - London 312 213 (99)
Vernon House - South Wales 212 194 (118)
Haydock Lodge 205 162 (43)
Dunston Lodge - Durham 161 126 (35)
Bensham - Durham 94 88 (6)
Gateshead Fell - Durham 94 88 (6)
Fairford House - Gloucestershire 77 25 (52)
Norwich Infirmary - Norfolk 75 75 (0)
Gate Helmsley - York 55 28 (27)
Dunnington House - York 44 19 (25)
Grove Hall, Acomb - York 23 7 (16)
Claxton Grange Retreat - York 22 7 (15)
Portland House - Hereford 19 3 (16)

And this:

London Licensed Houses receiving paupers:

Warburton's, Bethnal Green
1.1.1844 562 patients. 336 pauper and 226 private.
COMMENDED IN 1844

Hoxton House
1.1.1844 396 patients. 315 pauper and 81 private.
SEVERELY CENSURED IN 1844 REPORT

Peckham House
1.1.1844 251 patients. 203 pauper and 48 private.
SEVERELY CENSURED IN 1844 REPORT


Sorry, this is just a mess of information I found online somewhere, but I thought it might be helpful in following up the private asylum thing.

I personally think Sagar's "private asylum" comment was a just a simple mistake, but it is probably a lead that should be put to bed. A private asylum in Surrey would kill two birds with one stone... so to speak.

Also, maybe someone can explain this map. I think the "commission" is the Lunacy Commission. I am not sure if this indicates what area a pauper lunatic from Mile End would be committed to?

In short, I am still pretty confused on all this.

Rob H

[Chris]

"The searches I did weren't online, but in two paper registers at the National Archives - MH 94/6 (Licensed Metropolitan Houses, Jan 1886-Dec 1900) and MH 94/11 (Provincial Licensed Houses, Feb 1880-1900). It would be a big help if we could confirm whether those should cover all private patients (we know they won't cover paupers)."

From what I've read, I think they should cover all private patients. But it would be nice to get that confirmed by someone with expert knowledge.

"The Also, maybe someone can explain this map. I think the "commission" is the Lunacy Commission. I am not sure if this indicates what area a pauper lunatic from Mile End would be committed to?

I think this must define the distinction between "London" and "Provincial" reflected in those registers.

As far as I know a pauper from Mile End would have to go to one of the Middlesex county asylums (one of which was in Surrey, of course). The only other possibility might be the City of London asylum at Stone, if the family lived in the City at some time. But I think the indications are pretty strong that they lived in Mile End Old Town or just over the boundary in Whitechapel for the whole time up to 1891.

I did wonder whether the dog-walking incident in December 1889 was a clue that Woolf might have lived in the City around that time. But the evidence from the school register shows that his daughter Rebecca was attending Settles Street School then. As she was only 7, I can't believe she would have "commuted" to school from the City rather than transferring to a closer school.

[Robert]

Chris, what about the LMA? I think there's some stuff there that isn't at the NA concerning, e.g., Bethnal House.

[Chris]

Chris, what about the LMA? I think there's some stuff there that isn't at the NA concerning, e.g., Bethnal House.

I suppose some records of private asylums will have survived in various places, and some will have been lost, but if I understand correctly the centrally-maintained registers in MH 94 should list everyone who was committed to a private asylum anywhere in the country.

But if - because of some subtlety I've missed - that isn't the case, I supose we are doomed to be unsure about the possibility of an earlier committal to a private asylum, because some of the records are bound to have been lost.