Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - by Sam Flynn 3 hours ago.
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - by Debra A 3 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - by Herlock Sholmes 6 hours ago.
Scene of the Crimes: Mitre square, very upsetting! - by Rob1n 6 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - by Rob1n 7 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - by Rob1n 7 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - (10 posts)
Torso Killings: torso maps - (9 posts)
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - (5 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: Mitre square, very upsetting! - (1 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (1 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Was the ripper and also the torsomans crimes totally non sexual in nature? - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Police Officials and Procedures > General Police Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #241  
Old 05-17-2011, 10:15 PM
Chris Chris is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,840
Default

Actually, checking what Clutterbuck says, I see that there are actually five sections per letter of the alphabet, so what we have is an image of part of a page covering essentially surnames beginning Ke, which obviously changes the calculation. Not that I'm convinced that's the right Kennedy anyway, considering that there does seem to have been a fairly prominent nationalist with the right initials.

Clutterbuck does seem to believe that the arrangement within each cut is chronological, as he speaks of "taking an archaeological approach" to estimating the dates of entries from nearby ones.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #242  
Old 05-17-2011, 10:19 PM
Stewart P Evans Stewart P Evans is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,994
Default Impossible

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil H View Post
...that the material would never be released and if it appeared that it was going to be accessed it would be destroyed.
Which would, as I understand it be a criminal offence punishable (in a worst case) by imprisonment.
These registers are known to exist, are part of the public record, are known to be subject to public interest and thus destruction would be a deliberate act.
...
Non-release and a refusal to release would be enough - destruction would not be required and I do not think any individual would willingly put himself/herself in that position. "Woe unto them" if they do.
I don't doubt that the words were spoken, but it sounds to me like hyperbole.
Phil
Yes, the words were spoken and I don't even know who the gentleman was who made the statement.

If the ledgers were simply to disappear how would anyone be able to prove they had been destroyed? You need evidence to prove just who was responsible for the items going missing and I don't think you would find too many witnesses behind those closed doors. And if the hierarchy were sympathetic to the non-production of the material then I should think the task would be impossible.
__________________
SPE

Treat me gently I'm a newbie.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #243  
Old 05-17-2011, 10:23 PM
mariab mariab is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 2,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris View Post
Actually, checking what Clutterbuck says, I see that there are actually five sections per letter of the alphabet
5 sections arranged after the SECOND letter of the name, alphabetically?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris View Post
Clutterbuck does seem to believe that the arrangement within each cut is chronological, as he speaks of "taking an archaeological approach" to estimating the dates of entries from nearby ones.
I'm not comtemplating for a minute that this isn't a basically chronological entry system, but I suspect that there might have been subsequent/additional entries, added out of order. I think that Debra Arif also sees it that way. (If I'm not mistaken.)
__________________
Best regards,
Maria
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #244  
Old 05-17-2011, 10:50 PM
Chris Chris is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mariab View Post
I'm not comtemplating for a minute that this isn't a basically chronological entry system, but I suspect that there might have been subsequent/additional entries, added out of order. I think that Debra Arif also sees it that way. (If I'm not mistaken.)
I suppose it's possible, if for some reason there were delays before some classes of items were entered.

I'm not really clear why people think the order isn't chronological, though, because that would be the norm in a record arranged like this.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #245  
Old 05-17-2011, 11:02 PM
mariab mariab is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 2,977
Default

The comparison is a bit unfortunate, but this reminds of working with the Vademecum notebooks of librettist Eugène Scribe, which are mainly chronological and sometimes even dated, but sometimes Scribe goes back and writes things subsequently – and not just additions/corrections, but also new entries.
__________________
Best regards,
Maria
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #246  
Old 05-17-2011, 11:12 PM
Stephen Thomas Stephen Thomas is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,728
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stewart P Evans View Post
Whilst making tentative enquiries about the ledgers a few years ago we were warned that it was a sensitive subject and was best steered clear of. I took part in a public debate about the Whitechapel murders and I mentioned the Special Branch material. After the talk I was approached by someone who informed me that the material would never be released and if it appeared that it was going to be accessed it would be destroyed.
Thanks Stewart. These people are not to be messed with, I'd say.
__________________
allisvanityandvexationofspirit
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 05-17-2011, 11:58 PM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13,841
Default tempus fugit

Hello Chris.

"I'm not really clear why people think the order isn't chronological, though, because that would be the norm in a record arranged like this."

I think it's because some entries--like the Kerwin--describe events in the distant past. Similarly, the Jenkinson material seems to refer to BEFORE he was sacked (end of 1886--beginning of 1887).

Debs conjectured that all these entries refer to proceedings from the Parnell commission. Perhaps so.

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 05-18-2011, 12:03 AM
mariab mariab is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 2,977
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lynn cates View Post
Similarly, the Jenkinson material seems to refer to BEFORE he was sacked (end of 1886--beginning of 1887).
Obviously. ;-)
__________________
Best regards,
Maria
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #249  
Old 05-18-2011, 01:36 AM
Chris Chris is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lynn cates View Post
I think it's because some entries--like the Kerwin--describe events in the distant past. Similarly, the Jenkinson material seems to refer to BEFORE he was sacked (end of 1886--beginning of 1887).

Debs conjectured that all these entries refer to proceedings from the Parnell commission. Perhaps so.
It's certainly very perplexing.

I note that Clutterbuck comments on Jenkinson's presence in the ledger as follows:
"One question remains unanswered, even after reading the Monro memoirs. If Jenkinson had departed in january 1887, be it through resignation or dismissal, why are there numerous references to him in the Chief Constable's Register which appears not to have commenced until April 20th, 1888? These references are not historical leftovers from previous years but appear to be current issues e.g. "Jenkinson, Mr - attention of Home Office again called to papers with - 3622/2" and "Jenkinson, E. G. Esq - forwarding file re detaining files of Irish papers - 3622/2". The most likely explanation is that Jenkinson returned to his previous duties as Assistant Under Secretary for Police and Crime at Dublin Castle. This would account for his involvement with correspondence relating to Irish extremism and the continuing references to him in the Chief Constable's Register."

Or could he have just been gradually sorting out his old files and sending them on to Special Branch?

Also, where there are numbers in the final column, identified by Clutterbuck as containing folio numbers in the correspondence register, they appear to run in sequence, which again suggests to me that the order is chronological.

I assume the entry "re warrant for arrest of Pat Molloy" relates to the warrant issued for his arrest on 5 December 1888 to force him to attend the Parnell Commission. That would be reasonably consistent with the possible timing I suggested before for the Tanner entry.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #250  
Old 05-18-2011, 02:00 AM
mariab mariab is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 2,977
Default

As per the Tanner entry, too beat to read that entire Hansard thing now. Going to sleep...
__________________
Best regards,
Maria
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.