Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson?

[Fisherman]

Reminds me of Trevor Marriott's favourite Christmas carol:

"O Feigenbaum, o Feigenbaum, wie treu sind deine Blätter"

Brings a X-masy tear to my eyes! Do you know if he does "Oh come, all ye faithful" too?

[Sam Flynn]

Brings a X-masy tear to my eyes! Do you know if he does "Oh come, all ye faithful" too?

He's very versatile, our Trev.

[Batman]

Nothing is changed because the police were interested in people in Astrakhan coats, Batman. I still believe that it is quite unlikely that the Ripper would use that kind of disguise, since far from diverting interest, it instead attracts it.

It seems to me that after Eddowes so such was done to make sure women were off the streets that JtR inevitably would have to turn to unfortunates of a little higher standing, which would be like the women in Miller's court who could afford their own single rooms.

I doubt that JtR would have gone out stalking dressed like that, which is why I am inclined to believe that Kelly knew her assailant from prior engagements and had possibly arranged the meet.

[Sam Flynn]

If it is true to the depicted man, then it´s a fine drawing by a skilled artist.

Well, it is.

Let´s be clear here - I am not saying that the sketch is not depicting Bowyer. I am simply saying that if you want to pick flaws from Dews book, there are clearer and better examples.

Dew seems to have a penchant for giving the impression that he was closely involved in several aspects of the Ripper case: he was familiar with Mary Kelly; he knew about the Squibby affair, but got things wrong (ta, Gary); he was on the spot when the "youthful" Bowyer arrived; he was the first on the scene with Reid at Miller's Court; Reid said, "Come along, Dew!" before they left the station, and "For God's sake, Dew, don't look!" when they got there; he slipped in the awfulness on Mary Kelly's floor, even though we know that the mess was confined to her bed and bedside table. Are we also to believe that he was involved with star witness Hutchinson? It all smacks of (over)blowing his own trumpet and inflating his own importance.

[Fisherman]

It seems to me that after Eddowes so such was done to make sure women were off the streets that JtR inevitably would have to turn to unfortunates of a little higher standing, which would be like the women in Miller's court who could afford their own single rooms.

I doubt that JtR would have gone out stalking dressed like that, which is why I am inclined to believe that Kelly knew her assailant from prior engagements and had possibly arranged the meet.

I don´t think that A man was the assailant at all. I don´t think that prior arrangements had been done between the two. I don´t think they knew each other beforehand. I don´t agree that there were only " a little higher standing" prostitutes to use for prey in Whitechapel after Eddowes.
Otherwise, we´re in total agreement - Jack would hardly stalk the streets in A mans attire.

[Abby Normal]

There is but a longish answer to that question.

To begin with, the two matters are different in character. Dew may - or may not - have misremembered Bowyer. There hav been suggestions in the past that a boy may have been involved, running ahead of McCarthy and Bowyer. And much as Bowyer was described as a pensioner from the Indian army, it is not a given how old he was.
As Casebook states: "Thomas Bowyer has not been definitely identified in other records. Newspaper reports described him as a pensioned soldier, and say that he had travelled a great deal and formerly lived in India."

So that does not specify his age, and to make matters worse, the Casebook text goes on to say "Some press reports and Walter Dew's memoirs described him as a young man, but the contemporary illustration suggests he was middle-aged."

And so it was not only Dew who described him as a youth, there were papers that did the same which should give us a paus.

There was a sketch of him in "Penny Illustrated", and that sketch certainty points to an older man, but a sketch is a sketch, and we don´t know to what degree it was true to the original. In fact, we can´t even be sure that it depicted Bowyer - since we have other papers saying that he was a youth, something must be amiss.

There is also a sketch of McCarthy and Bowyer finding Kelly, and in that sketch, Bowyer looks much like a strong young man, so it´s not a given that Dew must have been totally wrong.

Conversely, the Hutchinson errand is one that is laid out in Dews text to a degree telling us that he remembered it correctly. And when we read that text:

"Then followed other information which further shook the police reconstruction of the crime.

The informant this time was a young man name d George Hutchison, who declared that he had seen Kelly at 2 a.m. in Dorset Street. She had been drinking. He spoke to her, and she confessed that she was " broke ".

A few minutes later he saw her again. This time she was in the company of a man, and the two were walking in the direction of Miller's Court.

This man had no billycock hat and no beard. He was in fact the exact opposite in appearance of the man seen by Mrs. Cox.

Hutchison described him as well-dressed, wearing a felt hat, a long, dark astrakhan collared coat and dark spats. A turned-up black moustache gave him a foreign appearance.

But I know from my experience that many people, with the best of intentions, are often mistaken, not necessarily as to a person, but as to date and time. And I can see no other explanation in this case than that Mrs. Maxwell and George Hutchison were wrong.

Indeed, if the medical evidence is accepted, Mrs. Maxwell could not have been right. The doctors were unable, because of the terrible mutilations, to say with any certainty just when death took place, but they were very emphatic that the girl could not have been alive at eight o'clock that morning.

And if Mrs. Maxwell was mistaken, is it not probable that George Hutchison erred also? This, without reflecting in any way on either witness, is my considered view. I believe that the man of the billycock hat and beard was the last person to enter Marie Kelly's room that night and was her killer. Always assuming that Mrs. Cox ever had seen her with a man."


... we may note that Dew was somewhat of a cynic at times. Note how he leaves the possibility open that Cox never even saw Blotchy, but instead made him up. No such distrust is attached to Maxwell and Hutchinson, where Dew takes great care to point out that he would not reflect on their honesty.

All in all, that makes quite a good case for Dew - who was there when Hutchinson surfaced and who was in the know - being correct about old George. Or young George, to be more precise.

Finally, there is of course the matter of how we should accept that a man like Dew is telling the truth until we can prove the contrary.

So that´s why.

hi Fish
Thanks for posting this. ive never seen the tail end of dews statement before and that he thought Blotchy was the killer. interesting.

as you know, blotchy has always had a top spot on my list.

[Fisherman]

Sam Flynn: Well, it is.

It is what? A fine drawing or a good likeness? Beware of the trap built into the question (there is only one verifiable answer).

Dew seems to have a penchant for giving the impression that he was closely involved in several aspects of the Ripper case: he was familiar with Mary Kelly; he knew about the Squibby affair, but got things wrong (ta, Gary); he was on the spot when the "youthful" Bowyer arrived; he was the first on the scene with Reid at Miller's Court; Reid said, "Come along, Dew!" before they left the station, and "For God's sake, Dew, don't look!" when they got there; he slipped in the awfulness on Mary Kelly's floor, even though we know that the mess was confined to her bed and bedside table. Are we also to believe that he was involved with star witness Hutchinson? It all smacks of (over)blowing his own trumpet and inflating his own importance.

A few comments:

It is by no means impossible that Dew garnished his own contributions to the case with some bling. Writers often do and such books make publishers happy because they sell better. It is however not possible to prove it in retrospect, and there is the matter that Dew would not like to be made a fool of for having exaggerated.

You know, when I worked at Sydsvenskan, the fourth largest daily in Sweden, we used to get calls from people who said we had gotten this and that wrong. We answered that by saying "Did you notice all the things we got right?"

The same goes for Dew. And we can see how his take on Hutchinson dovetails with how the papers describe him as a stand-up citizen and how Abberline was much impressed by him too.

Ergo, the more likely thing is that he was never regarded as a timewaster or a liar by the police.

It is that simple.

[Fisherman]

hi Fish
Thanks for posting this. ive never seen the tail end of dews statement before and that he thought Blotchy was the killer. interesting.

as you know, blotchy has always had a top spot on my list.

I´m aware of that, Abby!

[Sam Flynn]

The same goes for Dew. And we can see how his take on Hutchinson dovetails with how the papers describe him as a stand-up citizen and how Abberline was much impressed by him too.

Did the papers describe him as an upstanding citizen? They may have done, don't get me wrong, in which case we have another potential source of information that Dew could have used. Given his howlers elsewhere in respect of his involvement, I wouldn't trust Dew's opinions on Hutchinson, if they were indeed his opinions in the first place and not something he'd made up or picked up second- or third-hand.

[Fisherman]

Did the papers describe him as an upstanding citizen? They may have done, don't get me wrong, in which case we have another potential source of information that Dew could have used. Given his howlers elsewhere in respect of his involvement, I wouldn't trust Dew's opinions on Hutchinson, if they were indeed his opinions in the first place and not something he'd made up or picked up second- or third-hand.

It´s up to anybody to choose not to trust whatever source he or she chooses to. It comes with the risk of having people thinking that the source is discarded for reasons of bias, but if one does not mind that...

There were papers writing about how Hutchinson could not be shaken, and that he was straightforward in his answers. To me, that equals being upstanding and honest.

[Joshua Rogan]

Well, it is.
Dew seems to have a penchant for giving the impression that he was closely involved in several aspects of the Ripper case: he was familiar with Mary Kelly; he knew about the Squibby affair, but got things wrong (ta, Gary); he was on the spot when the "youthful" Bowyer arrived; he was the first on the scene with Reid at Miller's Court; Reid said, "Come along, Dew!" before they left the station, and "For God's sake, Dew, don't look!" when they got there; he slipped in the awfulness on Mary Kelly's floor, even though we know that the mess was confined to her bed and bedside table. Are we also to believe that he was involved with star witness Hutchinson? It all smacks of (over)blowing his own trumpet and inflating his own importance.

Dew actually was involved in the chase and arrest of Squibby, according to the Morning Advertiser 10 Sept;

"George Cullen, alias Squibby, 25, was charged, before Mr. Bushby, with assaulting Betsy Goldstein. Constable Bates, 166 H, said on the 1st inst. the prisoner accosted him in Commercial street, and threatened that he would "do for him." Cullen was a notorious street gambler, and had been chased the previous Sunday. After his threat he took up a stone and flung it at the officer. It struck the young girl he was now charged with assaulting. On Saturday morning Cullen was seen in Commercial street, and chased by Detective Dew, H Division. He dodged under market carts and horses' legs, and presently other constables took up the chase, Cullen giving them a smart run through Spitalfields, where the cry was raised that ot was "the murderer," and some thousands of persons gathered in a state of the greatest excitement. Previous convictions for assault on the police having been proved, Mr. Bushby sentenced the prisoner to three months' hard labour."

[MrBarnett]

Dew actually was involved in the chase and arrest of Squibby, according to the Morning Advertiser 10 Sept;

"George Cullen, alias Squibby, 25, was charged, before Mr. Bushby, with assaulting Betsy Goldstein. Constable Bates, 166 H, said on the 1st inst. the prisoner accosted him in Commercial street, and threatened that he would "do for him." Cullen was a notorious street gambler, and had been chased the previous Sunday. After his threat he took up a stone and flung it at the officer. It struck the young girl he was now charged with assaulting. On Saturday morning Cullen was seen in Commercial street, and chased by Detective Dew, H Division. He dodged under market carts and horses' legs, and presently other constables took up the chase, Cullen giving them a smart run through Spitalfields, where the cry was raised that ot was "the murderer," and some thousands of persons gathered in a state of the greatest excitement. Previous convictions for assault on the police having been proved, Mr. Bushby sentenced the prisoner to three months' hard labour."

Indeed he was, but when Dew recounted the story in his memoirs ‘the murderer’ had become ‘Jack tbe Ripper’.

[Fisherman]

Indeed he was, but when Dew recounted the story in his memoirs ‘the murderer’ had become ‘Jack tbe Ripper’.

Surely that is a rather minor flaw, though? Dew - and the rest of the world - came away from the autumn of 1888 with a new aquaintance, named Jack the Ripper. I find it understandable that he wrote about the hunt for Squibby as if the name had already been invented.

[Joshua Rogan]

Indeed he was, but when Dew recounted the story in his memoirs ‘the murderer’ had become ‘Jack tbe Ripper’.

So you think he just got the day wrong?

[Sam Flynn]

Surely that is a rather minor flaw, though?

Minor or not - and it certainly is minor compared to his other howlers - it shows that Dew's memoirs can't be taken literally.