Ripper Notes #28 - "The Legend Continues"

[aspallek]

Andy,

I'll continue on the appropriate thread if necessary, but basically your article amounts to nothing more than the same type of speculation that others engage in. There is absolutely nothing to put Druitt at any station other than Blackheath and certainly not Cannon.

Ally,

We are discussing the article here and its intent and not so much the facts within the article, so I think this is the appropriate thread. However, if you want to move this discussion to the Druitt area that's OK by me. My suggestion is let it go another round or two here first.

You say "If it can be shown that MJD travelled through Cannon Street Station on his frequent trips to London then this objection to his candidacy disappears and Druitt can indeed be placed near the East End at the time of the murders" We already know Druitt was "near the East End"' by virtue of the fact that London is "near the East End".

Oh come on now, this is the silliest argument I have ever heard of. Cannon Street Station is considerably nearer the East End than either Blackheath or Druitt's chambers at King's Bench Walk. If it can be shown that he was at Cannon Street Station, this obviously increases the possibility that Druitt ventured into the East End. Surely even your biased mind can grasp that! At any rate, I set out to challenge the common objection that Druitt cannot be tied to the East End. I suggested my finding shows that he likely was at least near the East End repeatedly. That's all.

This does absolutely nothing to prove he was ever IN the East End.

I never set out to prove that he was in the East End. Nor have I ever set out to prove that Druitt was Jack the Ripper.

You claim it would have made no sense for him to go to charing cross, but there's that pesky ticket that he purchased to there. Why? If obviously he was used to going to Cannon Street, oh well that particular day, he decided the hassle was worth it, unlike every other day when it wasn't.

I believe you are referring to the second half return ticket found on him dated 1 Dec and that was issued for travel between Charing Cross and Hammersmith. I dealt with that in my article and I admitted that it is "a fly in the ointment." Yet there is significant reason to view it as a possible exception to his usual routine. His ultimate destination on 1 Dec was not his chambers (which lie to the East of Charing X) but rather Hammersmith (which lies to the West of Charing X). It was also a Saturday, when crowds, and thus delays, were probably less severe. The train he was connecting to in order to travel to Hammersmith was the Metropolitan District which is today's District Line of the London Underground. Maybe he just wanted to stay on the more comfortable train for as long as possible, out of the sooty tunnels (the line was not yet electrified). Yes, it is a "fly in the ointment" but not enough of a problem to override the overall logic of my argument.

People obviously DID ride the train through to Charring Cross. Saying that Druitt wouldn't have done that isn't a logical argument, when it is clear that it did occur, and he bought a ticket to there.

This is just more silliness. Of course people did travel from Blackheath to Charing Cross. Maybe these people had offices in the publishing trade in Charing Cross Road, or near Trafalgar Square, or in Westminster, or in the West End for blooming sake. Charing Cross would be closer to any of these locations but it was not closer to King's Bench Walk. You are grasping at straws because it is your unshakable belief that Druitt must not be guilty.

[aspallek]

Andy,

Pple R now saying thiz iz common 4 an English papr 2. What is b-cuming common iz not necessarily what is acceptable in professional research. Of course if you want to just go ahead and accept that Ripperology has nothing to do with professional research, I'll grant you that.

I would prefer to use the term "academic research." Ripperology is at best tangential to academic research.

[Robert]

The cover is interesting, from the point of view of the two doors. I would appreciate an expert putting me straight about these doors, because I think originally there was only the one? At the end of the passageway from the door on the left there looks like a parch of light. Also, the doorstep of the door on the right looks to be more worn than the doorstep of the door on the left - there's a gap under the door. I can't make out if the doorstep by the doors is one solid piece of stone or two steps joined together.

[Rob Clack]

Hi Robert,

I don't know if I'm expert enough but you are right there was only one door. The one on the left as you look at it. I don't know when the second door was added but if I remember correctly 'N Brill' was there in 1895, so possibly around that time. It might be more worn down because it got a bit more usage.

regards

Rob

[Stephen Thomas]

Hello Robert

The door on the left would be the original door with the one on the right put in later in order to make what was originally the front parlour of the house into a self contained business unit. Originally this room would have been accessed from a door down the corridor behind the left hand front door. The 'shop window' would be a later addition, I think. Note the newer brickwork beneath it. Don't know what that light is at the back, though.

Best wishes

p.s. Anybody seen the teaboy?

[Rob Clack]

I suppose since I've had a few debates with Andy about Druitt over the past few months I thought I'd make a comment regarding his article.

While I applaud Andy for his efforts, his article doesn't convince me that Druitt could have visited the East End, it did appear to me that Andy seems determined to place Druitt near the East End. Cannon Street Station is not as Andy has said "a very few minutes' walk from the East End". And then says "it's only a 13 minutes walk from Mitre Square". You would have to go past Mitre Square/Aldgate to get to the East End, which would put the East End at least 15 to 20 minutes walk from Cannon Street, hardly a very few minutes.

Rob

[Rob Clack]

Hi Stephen,

The light at the back would be the back yard.

All the best

Rob

[Natalie Severn]

I think Stephen is right here.Thats exactly how they adapted London properties for flats too.
BTW,the cover picture is terrific!

Ally,
Cannon Street Station is minutes from Billingsgate Fish Market----diagonally opposite to Fish Street where Mary Kelly is believed to have gone quite often.
Its just five minutes walk from the Minories and the East End.
Natalie

[Natalie Severn]

Rob,
I agree with what you say here and you and Ally are right-strictly speaking.However,Joe Barnett for example would have made daily trips to and from Billingsgate,as would many of the workforce of Billingsgate.This was the place people from the East End went to to buy fish. Mary Kelly allegedly went there too---possibly to do business and that could put a different complexion on things because it then becomes within the realms of possibility that Druitt may have stopped for a pint in Fish Street sometimes or one of the other streets nearby, and come across her there.If you go to the area of a Summer evening you see lots of "City" types drinking outside on the pavements by the Monument [top of Fish Street]before heading off to Cannon Street-still a really busy station for commuters.
Natalie

[Stephen Thomas]

The light at the back would be the back yard.

Not sure about that, Rob. It looks like the light at the end of the proverbial tunnel. If the back door had been open there should be much more light there. Maybe something was blocking it.

Best wishes

[Rob Clack]

Hi Nats,

I understand what you are saying, but we are talking about Druitt here. We know Barnett went to Billingsgate and we know he lived in the East End. And to place Druitt East of Cannon Street is speculation. There were other watering holes for Druitt to go to between Kings Bench Walk and Cannon Street (if he went to Cannon Street that is).

Regards

Rob

[Rob Clack]

Not sure about that, Rob. It looks like the light at the end of the proverbial tunnel. If the back door had been open there should be much more light there. Maybe something was blocking it.

Best wishes

Hi Stephen,

I don't know what else it can be, it's in the position where the back door would be, I can only think most of the backyard was in shadow leaving the dark area. The film probably wasn't sensitive enough to expose that area.

Best wishes

Rob

[Natalie Severn]

Rob,
It is speculation I completely agree-----but its speculation that falls within the realms of possibility thats all.
Best
Natalie

[Ash]

Hi Stephen,

I don't know what else it can be, it's in the position where the back door would be, I can only think most of the backyard was in shadow leaving the dark area. The film probably wasn't sensitive enough to expose that area.

Best wishes

Rob

Rob, forgive me if I'm wrong, but having seen the interior photographs, the passage bends round the stairs before it gets to the door, so as we are looking directly down the passage, it is actually in the position where the stairs would be. Looking at it, I would say it was light from the front reflecting off the shiny front surfaces of the stairs.

[Rob Clack]

Hi Alan,

I should have done this earlier. This is a close up of the area (hopefully Philip wont mind me posting it). I think it's clear that it is the back yard.




All the best

Rob