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:
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - by Michael W Richards 5 minutes ago.
Torso Killings: JtR failed amputation. Torso killer was successful. - by Michael W Richards 9 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by Fisherman 11 minutes ago.
Torso Killings: JtR failed amputation. Torso killer was successful. - by Trevor Marriott 11 minutes ago.
Torso Killings: JtR failed amputation. Torso killer was successful. - by Harry D 16 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by Harry D 18 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - (49 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - (31 posts)
Torso Killings: JtR failed amputation. Torso killer was successful. - (26 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Did Mary Kelly meet the Bethnal Green Botherer? - (4 posts)
General Discussion: A broken down masher - (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 > Letters and Communications > Saucy Jack Postcard

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-10-2008, 02:08 PM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,248
Default Saucy Jack Postcard

i am reviewing a number of aspects of the ripper case and have come across an issue with regards to the saucy jack postcard.

From what has been written suggests that the postcard was received at the central newsagency on October 1st. Is there any definate proof that this was the case.

The envelope is clearly postmarked October 1st so I do not beleive it could have been posted and deleiverd on the same day.

In this day and age the postal service are not that good and i am sure in 1888 they were very basic.

If this be true then this must add more weight to the fact that it was a hoax.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-10-2008, 02:36 PM
Debra A Debra A is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Yorkshire England
Posts: 3,150
Default

Trevor,
I believe the Victorians enjoyed a minimum of 2 or 3 postal deliveries per day....and even then they wrote letters to the papers complaining about the crap service they were getting!
__________________
,,`,, Debs ,,`,,

I am not DJA. He's called Dave.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-10-2008, 02:48 PM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,248
Default Saucy jack Postcard

Hi debs
Thank you for that input however as you know the Ripper mystery is full to the brim with beliefs etc. If there is no definate proof that the letter was received on Oct 1st then there must be a serious doubt surrounding what people have relied on all these years in respect of this particular item.

The truth is out there or is it ?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-10-2008, 04:49 PM
Dan Norder Dan Norder is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 852
Default

Hi Trevor,

As Debs mentions, Victorian postal service was very good, so the postmark alone means that it was extremely likely to have been received on that date, unless it was posted very late that day. It was posted in East London and did not have very far to go. But we can also look at when it was mentioned.

Several press reports published Oct. 2 say it was received "yesterday morning." These accounts state that it had been delivered and then brought to Scotland Yard and then discussed by the time they were reporting on it (so add in time for the reporter to write it all up and the printing presses to churn the papers out). The police were already able to put together a facsimile copy of the Dear Boss letter and the Saucy Jacky postcard to put up at police stations by Oct. 3.

So, if somehow the Central News Agency was lying about having received it on Oct. 1, the only possible alternate date could have been Oct. 2, which really becomes nearly impossible for it to have been received, sent to Scotland Yard, and then have papers cover it by that same day.

There also obviously would have been an official mention in Met files about the receipt of this letter, which if the details we've been given by the press are true would also have been Oct. 1. As far as I know these files no longer exist -- as indeed the postcard itself has been missing for many years -- but those would immediately clear things up if they are around.
__________________

Dan Norder
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Web site: www.RipperNotes.com - Email: dannorder@gmail.com
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-16-2008, 08:28 PM
Celesta Celesta is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: American Dog-Lover
Posts: 1,625
Default Mail in Victorian England Link

Hi Trevor, Dan, Debs, et al,

I don't know if this will be useful. It may be a bit too early for your purposes, but it contains a reference to the mail schedules and frequencies of delivery. You have to click on Communications. I tried to post that section directly, but it kicked back to the main page.


http://www.victorianlondon.org/
__________________
"What our ancestors would really be thinking, if they were alive today, is: "Why is it so dark in here?"" From Pyramids by Sir Terry Pratchett, a British National Treasure.

__________________________________
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-16-2008, 08:35 PM
Debra A Debra A is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Yorkshire England
Posts: 3,150
Default

Thanks for that Celesta, as many as 6 to 12 deliveries and collections in one day for London...now that's a postal service!
__________________
,,`,, Debs ,,`,,

I am not DJA. He's called Dave.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-17-2008, 07:20 AM
Shelley
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
i am reviewing a number of aspects of the ripper case and have come across an issue with regards to the saucy jack postcard.

From what has been written suggests that the postcard was received at the central newsagency on October 1st. Is there any definate proof that this was the case.

The envelope is clearly postmarked October 1st so I do not beleive it could have been posted and deleiverd on the same day.

In this day and age the postal service are not that good and i am sure in 1888 they were very basic.

If this be true then this must add more weight to the fact that it was a hoax.
It may be possible that if someone posted the postcard early in the morning, say between 3am - 5am approx, then the postcard could have been collected at say around 6am - 7am that the card may well have been delivered same day to the news office around 8.30am - 9.30am that very same day....Even though they have machinery today, they were very efficent and perhaps more so in the Victorian period...it was probably a better service than today. However, i think you are right Trevor in that the postcard was more than likely to be a hoax.

Last edited by Shelley : 03-17-2008 at 07:24 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-18-2008, 12:51 PM
Mike Covell Mike Covell is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: From Hell, From Hull
Posts: 2,957
Default

Regulations of the Twopenny Post Office.- The principal office is at the General Post Office, St. Martin's-le-Grand There are, besides, upwards of 400 receiving houses for letters, both in town and country. There are seven collections and deliveries of letters in town daily, and five deliveries daily at all places in the environs of London, situate within a circle of three miles' distance from the head establishment in St. Martin's le Grand, that having been determined as the limits of the Post Office. The country delivery, as it is called, extends to a distance of twelve miles from the metropolis, and most places within that limit have four despatches and four deliveries daily (Sundays excepted). The hours by which letters should be put into the receiving houses in town for each delivery are as follow - For delivery in town,
Over night by eight o'clock, for the first delivery.
Morning by eight o'clock, for the second delivery.
Morning by ten o'clock, for the third delivery.
Morning by twelve o'clock, for the fourth delivery.
Afternoon by two o'clock, for the fifth delivery.
Afternoon by four o'clock, for the sixth delivery.
Afternoon by six o'clock, for the seventh delivery. For delivery in the country,
The preceding evening by six o'clock, for the first delivery,
Morning by eight o'clock, for the second delivery.
Morning by twelve o'clock, for the third delivery.
Afternoon by two o'clock, for the fourth delivery.

Mogg's New Picture of London and Visitor's Guide to it Sights, 1844

It wasn't always that smooth though,

'Sir -

I believe the inhabitants of London are under the impression that Letters posted for delivery within the metropolitan district commonly reach their destination within, at the outside, three hours of the time of postage. I myself, however, have constantly suffered with irregularities in the delivery of letters, and I have now got two instances of neglect which I should really like to have cleared up.

I posted a letter in the Gray's Inn post office on Saturday at half-past 1 o'clock, addressed to a person living close to Westminster Abbey, which was not delivered till 9 o'clock the same evening; and I posted another letter in the same post office, addressed to the same place, which was not delivered till past 4 o'clock in the afternoon. Now, Sir, why is this? If there is any good reason why letters should not be delivered in less than eight hours after their postage, let the state of the case be understood: but the belief that one can communicate with another person in two or three hours whereas in reality the time required is eight or nine, may be productive of the most disastrous consequences.

I am, Sir, your most obedient servant,

7 May,

K.

letter to the Times, 8 May 1881


For more details,

http://www.victorianlondon.org/
__________________
Regards Mike
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-05-2008, 03:03 PM
fido fido is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusette
Posts: 99
Default

If memory serves me aright, Richard Whittington-Egan's Casebook of JtR carries what seemed to be a definitive examination of the dates and times of the postcard's postage and reception, though you'l almost certainly have to use inter-library loan to get hold of it.
All the best,
Martin F
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-06-2008, 11:40 PM
Wolf Vanderlinden Wolf Vanderlinden is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 471
Default

Far be it for me to correct Martin but in fact Whittington-Egan gives only a cursory look at the Saucy Jacky postcard. It is the Lusk letter that he looks at in some detail in A Casebook On Jack the Ripper.

Wolf.
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 03:39 AM.


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