Earl of Crawford

[How Brown]

Okay....so he's not necessarily a suspect in the WM...

....but I thought it might be a good idea to add a thread about him for discussion.

Any and all information on the Earl would be appreciated.;)

Crawford wrote a letter to the press in December of 1888 mentioning black magic as a motive in the WM.

[How Brown]

Whoops....:o

The Earl was thought to have written a letter ( The One Who Thinks He Knows ) to the Pall Mall Gazette....but in fact it was Stephenson. . Sometimes I forget to check my original posts.:rolleyes:

Nevertheless....what about this character ? Stephen Ryder showed back in 2001 that Crawford wrote to Sir Robert Anderson and may have been a source for the MacNaughten Memoranda.....as well as a pal with known kooky occultists.

[Grey Hunter]

James Ludovic Lindsay, K.T., V.D., D.L., J.P., LL.D., F.R.S., V.P.S.A. (1847-1913), became, in 1880, on the death of his father, the twenty-sixth Earl of Crawford and the ninth Earl of Balcarres. He was educated at Eton and Trinity College, Cambridge and later joined the Grenadier Guards. He resigned his commission when he was elected M.P. for Wigan in 1874. He was President of the Royal Astronomical Society in 1878. He was a great collector and bibliophile as well as having a long-standing interest in matters occult.

In December 1868 he was one of the witnesses to the famous 'levitation' incident at Ashley Place involving the celebrated spiritualist medium D.D. Home. This alone ensured his fame in the occult world and he built a reputation as a savant. It, too, would mean that his name would be very familiar in the Theosophical circles of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, perhaps explaining why they thought he was the author of the December 1, 1888 piece in the Pall Mall Gazette.

[How Brown]

Dear Grey Hunter:

Doesn't this seem to be a pattern of sorts during the course of study of the people involved or peripheral to the WM ? Men and women who straddle the edges of both science and spiritualism and at times,outright silliness?

Crawford was heavily involved with science ( the astronomy position ) and a bibliophile as well as an enabler of such beliefs as "levitation" .... Lytton comes to mind here,being a member of Parliament,yet likewise a dabbler in the similar practices.

Thanks,as always,for your insight(s) to this thread,sor..;)

[Dave O]

Hi Howard,

I haven't read much on the subject, but I think that the combination of science and spiritualism was much more common than it is today. There's a new book out that I'm interested in getting, Ghost Hunters by Deborah Blum, which is about The Society for Physical Research around the turn of the century. The Society was made up of some pretty illustrious people I take it--you can read an article about the book, "Ghost World", at

http://www.salon.com/books/review/2006/08/28/blum/index.html

You can watch a brief commercial that gets you a free day pass for the entire site.

The author also made an appearance on the popular Coast to Coast AM radio show last month (I haven't listened to it yet). This is the same show that Trevor Marriott was on awhile back and I don't know why more people aren't making appearances on it, particularly when they've got a book coming out.

Cheers,
Dave

[How Brown]

Thanks Big D !:thumbsupbud:

That Society for Psychical Research also had a member who committed suicide back in June of 1888 in Brighton.

His name was Edmund Gurney. His picture is shown in the PHOTOGRAPH section in case you wanted to know...Under the "Photograph " thread....

Jeff Bloomfield wrote a piece which appeared in Ivor Edwards' JTR/BMR which covered the events leading up to the discovery of Gurney's body in Brighton.

Yes,it certainly seems that those of a scientific bent ( Check out the documentary on Sir Isaac Newton one day if possible. He was a dabbler in the occult as well experimenting with alchemy ) were interested. Conan Doyle was a believer in fairies and spirits too.

[Dave O]

Hi Howard,

I remember reading something about Edward Gurney's suicide on Casebook I think. I will hunt it up as I forgot he was a member of the SPR. From what I understand, there was a fair amount of debunking going on in the SPR.

Yep, we laugh at Conan Doyle's being taken in by paper fairies today, but I don't think we really take the attitudes of the time into account and the novelty of science and photography.

Dave

[Night Stalker]

Reading both threads on Tabram and Crawford, something jumps out and punches me on the nose !

Both threads have one thing in common......Grenadier Guards!!!!

In the Tabram case, 2 Grenadiers. In Crawfords case, he was a Grenadier Guards officer.

I know there's a significant time gap, but once Crawford left the Regiment, he always had - " the old boy network".

The other train of thought I have is the - Masons. Sir Charles Warren, Dr Gull and I bet you a pound to a penny, Crawford was too.
I know from my own army career, there are many Masons and Buffs in the British Army with their own lodges.

Mere coincidence or have I had one too many JD and cokes.

I know this is an open forum, so please dont slap me too hard if Ive got fact and fiction entwined.

If anything, the most I can do is raise a few eyebrows.:confused:

Night Stalker

[Magpie]

In the Tabram case, 2 Grenadiers. In Crawfords case, he was a Grenadier Guards officer.

I know there's a significant time gap, but once Crawford left the Regiment, he always had - " the old boy network".



interesting coincidence. However the "old boy network" would like not extend to the lower ranks. In the Victorian era, the gulf between soldier and officer was huge.

[Night Stalker]

Hey Magpie,

To this day there still is a huge divide, the "us and them" syndrome.

But through acts of valour or the casual, - "you scratch my back I'll scratch yours" system, you would be surprised by what you can aspire to. Even a lowly Corporal as I was..... get my drift ?:smoker:

Happy hunting,

NS

[How Brown]

Thanks very much for the brief but succint bio on the Earl, Grey Hunter:thumbsupbud:

NS:

You'll notice that the Earl left the Grenadiers in 1874. Its merely a coincidence in the long run this "link" between the gents seen with Pearly Poll/Tabram and the Earl. Magpie is correct as well.

It doesn't hurt to try to raise a few eyebrows either:thumbsupbud:

[Magpie]

Actually I've never heard it suggested that the soldiers seen with Tabram were Grenadiers. I was of the impression that the were identified first as Coldstream Guards, then possibly as Scots Guards. Can someone point me to the Grenadier Guards connection?

[Night Stalker]

Hey Lads,

How -
Ive come round to your way of thinking. You are quite right, 14 years is far too long and Im making a bit too much of this coincidence. Thanks for the pointer bud.

Magpie -
I think theres always been confusion, over which Guards Regiment it was.
Im sure Ive read that, a police officer saw a Grenadier Guardsman standing outside the george yard buildings. At the time of Martha Tabrams murder.
But, I could be wrong mate.

[How Brown]

Night Stalker:

One thing to keep in mind about the site is this:

No one cares if you make a mistake or changed your mind..

If that was the case,I'd have been booted a long time ago.

In fact,you may favor Maybrick today....have an epiphany....and favor Hyam Hyams.

No one cares. No one gets irritated. No one is the worse for wear.

:thumbsupbud:

[Magpie]

I think theres always been confusion, over which Guards Regiment it was.
Im sure Ive read that, a police officer saw a Grenadier Guardsman standing outside the george yard buildings. At the time of Martha Tabrams murder.
But, I could be wrong mate.

Seems plausible:) I was basing my comment on the parades that were held for Pearly Poll to try and identify her companion. However you are right, there's nothing to say that it couldn't have been a Grenadier.

[Grey Hunter]

From a summary report dated September 1888, by Chief Inspector Donald S. Swanson, ref- MEPO 3/140 ff. 36-42 -

2am. 7th Augt. Police Constable 226H. Barrett saw a soldier - a grenadier age 22 to 26. height 5 ft 9 or 10. compl. fair, hair dark small dark brown moustache turned up at ends. with one good conduct badge. no medals. in Wentworth Street; and in reply to the PC he stated he was waiting for a chum, who had gone with a girl.

11am 8th Augt. 1888 The Grenadier Guards who were on leave or absent on night of 6th were paraded and P.C.226H saw them, when he picked out one with medals, and then another both of whom were taken to the orderly room where the P.C. admitted his mistake in identity in the first, and his name was not taken. The second man, John Leary gave an account of himself on that night, which private Law, to whom he referred, and who was brought into the orderly room corroborated without communicating with Leary, thus clearing Leary.

[Night Stalker]

How, Magpie, Grey Hunter -

Thanks for the lively debate, no offence taken.

I always like to raise eyebrows in a light hearted way.;)

Wait til you hear some of my outrageous theories.....The alien landed his space craft in Mitre Square ! - only joking.

[SirRobertAnderson]

:bump2:

There's a book about Gurney, called The Mind of Edmund Gurney by Gordon Epperson. Picked up a copy online - my apologies for whoever first called to this my attention, because I dont' remember .

Interesting critters running around Victorian England to say the least. I'll post more after I read it. But at the outset the author maintains Gurney didn't kill himself, but accidently overdosed on the chloroform he was fond of sniffing.

Medicinal purposes, mind you.

Thanks Big D !:thumbsupbud:

That Society for Psychical Research also had a member who committed suicide back in June of 1888 in Brighton.

His name was Edmund Gurney. His picture is shown in the PHOTOGRAPH section in case you wanted to know...Under the "Photograph " thread....

Jeff Bloomfield wrote a piece which appeared in Ivor Edwards' JTR/BMR which covered the events leading up to the discovery of Gurney's body in Brighton.

Yes,it certainly seems that those of a scientific bent ( Check out the documentary on Sir Isaac Newton one day if possible. He was a dabbler in the occult as well experimenting with alchemy ) were interested. Conan Doyle was a believer in fairies and spirits too.

[aspallek]

James Ludovic Lindsay, K.T., V.D., D.L., J.P., LL.D., F.R.S., V.P.S.A. (1847-1913), became, in 1880, on the death of his father, the twenty-sixth Earl of Crawford and the ninth Earl of Balcarres. He was educated at Eton and Trinity College, Cambridge and later joined the Grenadier Guards. He resigned his commission when he was elected M.P. for Wigan in 1874. He was President of the Royal Astronomical Society in 1878. He was a great collector and bibliophile as well as having a long-standing interest in matters occult.

Some interesting information here. Thanks GH. The Eton-Trinity (Cambridge) background is, no doubt, a common one among British upper crust but it is interesting that John Henry Lonsdale shared this educational track -- though he would have been 10 years or so after Crawford. Yet, one wonders whether there might have been an acquaintance. I have postulated Lonsdale as a possible source of Macnaghten's "private information" but, of course, Crawford's letter refers to the informant as "she." Mrs. Katherine Lonsdale, perhaps? But this is wild conjecture.

I don't find other references to Crawford's being a bibliophile, though he had renowned philatelic interests. His brother, the 25th Earl of Crawford is described as a bibliophile, so I wonder if there has been confusion between the two. Crawford's philatelic library is now apparently in the hands of the British Library. One wonders whether there is private correspondence also in these documents. Crawford's astronomical library was given to the Royal Observatory Edinburgh in 1888, a bit too early to be of interest to us.

The 26th Earl of Crawford:

[Chris Phillips]

I don't find other references to Crawford's being a bibliophile, though he had renowned philatelic interests. His brother, the 25th Earl of Crawford is described as a bibliophile, so I wonder if there has been confusion between the two. Crawford's philatelic library is now apparently in the hands of the British Library. One wonders whether there is private correspondence also in these documents.

The 25th earl (d. 1880) was his father, not his brother, and both were great bibliophiles. Nicolas Barker wrote a biography of the father and son, with an emphasis on their book-collecting activities, entitled Bibliotheca Lindesiana. The Lives and Collections of Alexander William, 25th Earl of Crawford and 8th Earl of Balcarres, and James Ludovic, 26th Earl of Crawford and 9th Earl of Balcarres (1978).

The family papers are now at the National Library of Scotland. Barker said that the father preserved his correspondence obsessively, but that the son was less systematic. However, I should think there's still a lot of his correspondence among those papers. If there were a Ripperologist at a loose end in Edinburgh, it might make an interesting research project.

For what it's worth, I still think the suspect mentioned in the Crawford letter sounds more like Kozminski (or a similar suspect) than Druitt.

Chris Phillips

[aspallek]

Hi Chris,

Thank you. I stand corrected. My source did say that the 25th Earl was his father. I misread it at first. I also have now seen the 26th Earl of Crawford described as a "philatelic bibliophile." I should think it would be very worthwhile to meander through his papers but I have no plans to be in Edinburgh.

I don't think the Crawford letter sounds like any suspect in particular. It is of particular interest to me in that Macnaghten mentions "private information" regarding Druitt and the Crawford letter suggests "private information," albeit addressed to Anderson rather than Macnaghten.

[R.J.Palmer]

Chris - Just dropped in, and noticed this thread. I've also long suspected that the Crawford letter is more likely to refer to Kosminski than Druitt, but of course it could relate to someone else entirely. I suppose the D'Onstonites might want a piece of the action. But the 'private information' relating to Druitt seems to have gone directly to Macnaghten, so I don't think Crawford is the source.

I know you are not keen on the proposed Martin Kosminski link, but it might be noted that the West End Kosminskis (and Martin in particular) appear to have lived very near to Crawford in West London. Looks like about 175 yards. If I recall, Kosminski's daughter was a singer of some repute in social circles.

At any rate, since the letter is undated, it would be interesting to know if Crawford's time in London could be ironed-out, so we would have a better idea of when this letter may have been written.

[aspallek]

This is by no means a criticism of anyone, but what makes you think the Crawford letter points to any suspect in particular? I don't see the content pointing to anyone at all. The only clue is that is appears to be "private information" and we know that there was "private information" regarding Druitt. Of course, this is practically no help as there was probably "private information" regarding numerous suspects.

[Chris Phillips]

This is by no means a criticism of anyone, but what makes you think the Crawford letter points to any suspect in particular?

As far as I'm concerned, it's mainly the reference to the informant's family being placed "in peril" should suspicions attach to her. That seems to point to a family living in the East End.

There is also Stephen Ryder's comment:
As this is the only letter within his entire surviving correspondence having anything to do whatsoever with the Whitechapel murders, one might assume that this item held particular significance for Mr. Anderson.
http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-emily.html (http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-emily.htmlIt)

It (http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-emily.htmlIt) could perhaps be argued that as Anderson (at least later in life) became convinced that his Polish Jewish suspect was the culprit, it's more likely to refer to that suspect than to anyone else. But on the other hand, it could just be a chance survival.

Chris Phillips

[Robert Linford]

It's an odd letter. I know that people don't always write what they mean, but the word "suspicions" suggests something in the way of an accomplice or accessory - did Crawford instead mean to speak of "scandal" attaching to the woman?

She seems concerned for herself and her family, but no mention is made of any concern for her relative, or for the women he will go on to kill if he isn't stopped. It's very strange.

Robert

[aspallek]

She seems concerned for herself and her family, but no mention is made of any concern for her relative, or for the women he will go on to kill if he isn't stopped. It's very strange.

Possibly because her relative, the killer, is dead! :shocked:

As to the informant's fears, I suppose it could point to the East End. However, I would think that anyone in England would have reason to fear some sort of abuse directed toward her family under such circumstances.

[Robert Linford]

Hi Andy

Well, it's true that the present tense used in the letter may not have been meant as a genuine present tense. Looking purely at Monty, I would have thought that alerting the police after Druitt had been quietly buried, and the inquest safely negotiated, would have been the one way to positively invite bad publicity. On the other hand, though, perhaps this was an example of a Druittist depression at work - maybe similar worries to the ones that afflicted Druitt in his last days?

Robert

[Chris G.]

Hi All

Since I don't think it has been quoted in this thread, here is the text of the Crawford letter, undated, and sent to Sir Robert Anderson, as quoted in Stephen Ryder's dissertation, "Emily and the Bibliophile: A Possible Source for Macnaghten's Private Information" (http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-emily.html):

2 CAVENDISH SQUARE
W.

My dear Anderson,

I send you this line to ask you to see & hear the bearer, whose name is unknown to me. She has or thinks she has a knowledge of the author of the Whitechapel murders. The author is supposed to be nearly related to her, & she is in great fear lest any suspicions should attach to her & place her & her family in peril.

I have advised her to place the whole story before you, without giving you any names, so that you may form an opinion as to its being worth while to investigate.

Very sincerely yours,
Crawford

I would infer from the wording of the letter that the suspect was still alive when Crawford wrote the letter, and that the fear had to do with either harm the suspect might cause the family or himself.

But it is very curious that the letter states that the supposed murderer "is supposed to be nearly related to her" -- was he related to her or not? Or does this wording imply some distant relationship, a cousin many times removed or an in-law, perhaps, rather a close blood relative?

The other thing is that the way the letter is phrased appears to imply that the female who contacted Crawford is not a poor person and that they may be from a family with some standing in society -- which would fit the Druitts.

Or else is it just Crawford's phrasing that makes it appear that way, and the person bringing the information could be any class? However, think about it. Would a person of the Kosminskis' station in life be able to contact a peer of the realm? A poor Polish Jew?

Of course we cannot know if the suspect who is referred to is Druitt or if it is Kosminski or some other suspect, or indeed if the informant's fears were just playing up and the suspected person was absolutely innocent.

The other thing to note is that because the letter is undated and the Whitechapel murders continued into 1889 onward as reported by the press and investigated by the police, the letter may not even be from 1888 and may in fact be from some time later, so it might not in that case be in reference to either Montague Druitt or Aaron Kosminski.

Chris

[Chris Phillips]

But it is very curious that the letter states that the supposed murderer "is supposed to be nearly related to her" -- was he related to her or not?

I think it's just saying that the murderer is supposed to be nearly related to her, not that the supposed murderer is supposed to be related to her. There's only one "supposed".

The other thing is that the way the letter is phrased appears to imply that the female who contacted Crawford is not a poor person and that they may be from a family with some standing in society -- which would fit the Druitts.

Or else is it just Crawford's phrasing that makes it appear that way, and the person bringing the information could be any class? However, think about it. Would a person of the Kosminskis' station in life be able to contact a peer of the realm? A poor Polish Jew?

I don't see anything in the letter that implies the female is not poor. But in any case, if - for the sake of argument - it was Aaron's sister-in-law Bertha Abrahams, she wasn't poor. Rob House's recent discovery in the Booth notebooks shows Isaac Abrahams had an income of up to £3,000 a week in today's money.

Why she would have contacted the Earl of Crawford is a good question, though - whoever she was.

Chris Phillips

[R.J.Palmer]

I doubt that we will ever know who Crawford's suspect is, but I agree with Chris George that it sounds like the man is still living, which rules out Druitt. Macnaghten also seemed to make a specific point of writing that the 'private information' about MJD had been received by him, so that's another mark against it.

Personally, I don't see someone from the East End slogging all the way to Marylebone to contact Crawford. More likely, this was someone in the immediate neighborhood who contacting him out of desperation, knowing he was a prominent man, and could pull strings.

I realize that my suggestion has been as popular as intestinal air in church, but I do still note that Jessie Kosminski, age 16, daughter of Martin Kosminski, prominent furrier, lived at 48 Berners Street, Marylebone District 3 which is in the Municipal Ward of Cavendish Square, which is where Crawford lived. This was in 1891, at the time of the Kosminski investigation. I earlier said she lived about 175 yards away from 2 Cavendish Square, but it looks closer to 1/4 mile. Either way, just a walk up the street. Of course, most write-off Martin Kosminski as a name coincidence, and this could well be true; on the otherhand, the social divide between the East End and West End Kosminskis could readily explain the tone of the Letter, and the young woman fearing that her family would be connected to someone “supposed to be nearly related to her.”

Jessie K. was a young woman who was probably trying to make it in the London social scene; as previously noted, she was a trained singer who would go on to perform at fairly prominent social events in the 1890s. The plot thickens...maybe.

[aspallek]

I don't think it's a matter of whether or not is it genuine present so much as it is whether one can claim relation to a dead man. If Henry Ford were my great-great grandfather (which he is not), I might rightly say "I am related to Henry Ford."

As to the "supposed" qualification, I take that to mean this is a supposition made by Crawford, i.e. that she made some remark to lead Crawford to believe that he was a relative. The question remains whether "nearly" means that he was a close relative or whether he means "nearly" in the sense of "almost" as if they may have been childhood friends, so close that they were practically family.

[Robert Linford]

Hi RJ

Well, if it was Jessica then 1902 might be a good bet for the letter. She seems to have got married that year, and it might explain the worry over "suspicions" - I believe that some Jewish marriages are subject to a kind of eugenics test - illness running in the family, that sort of thing.

Robert

[Caroline Morris]

The language to me suggests that what is meant, in today's parlance, would be: 'the murderer is thought [supposed] to be someone who is closely [nearly] related to her'. In short, she thinks a close relative is the murderer.

She and her family would have been in deadly peril if true, and if the murderer had suspicions that she was on to him and busily confiding her fears in others.

That is how I read it.

Love,

Caz
X

[Chris Phillips]

The language to me suggests that what is meant, in today's parlance, would be: 'the murderer is thought [supposed] to be someone who is closely [nearly] related to her'. In short, she thinks a close relative is the murderer.

She and her family would have been in deadly peril if true, and if the murderer had suspicions that she was on to him and busily confiding her fears in others.

Yes, I think that's exactly right.

On RJ's suggestion, it's an interesting one and I'd be only too happy if it turned out to be correct. The problem, as I see it, is that we now know enough about the genealogy to rule out any particularly close relationship between Martin Kozminski and Aaron. They could be cousins at best. And I still feel that the informant's sense of "peril" is pointing towards the East End of London, and probably to the Autumn when the Ripper scare was at its height.

Chris Phillips

[aspallek]

The language to me suggests that what is meant, in today's parlance, would be: 'the murderer is thought [supposed] to be someone who is closely [nearly] related to her'. In short, she thinks a close relative is the murderer.

She and her family would have been in deadly peril if true, and if the murderer had suspicions that she was on to him and busily confiding her fears in others.

That makes good sense, Caz. Still doesn't identify the suspect or the informant.

I suppose one argument against the suspect being Druitt is that a learned man like Crawford would probably have recognized the Druitt name, yet he says he doesn't recognize the informant's name. Of course, the informant may have been a cousin with a different surname. On the other hand, if it were Jessie Kosminski and if she was a fairly prominent singer, it is strange that Crawford doesn't recognize her name.

There's just too many holes even to come up with an educated guess. One area to investigate further is Emily Druitt. Stephen Ryder now believes she was a relative of Jabez Druitt and not directly Montague but it now appears that Jabez was a relative of the Christchurch Druitts.

[Spiro]

The undated letter from the Earl of Crawford sent to Anderson is certainly an enigma and I would like to add some further details that may be of interest to this absorbing thread. I cannot explain its contents, as the details are vague in determining to what and whom it is referring, so I approached the problem from another direction.

The letter was of interest to me in research for an article published in Ripperologist No. 58 March 2005 that included a mention of the Earl of Crawford and his known associates. If the woman who had concerns about someone who “is supposed to be nearly related to her” being the Whitechapel murder could not be identified from the details in the letter alone, then perhaps it would be worth exploring Crawford’s associates for indications. My alternative reading of the phrase was that the woman had knowledge from an association rather than family ties as her fears were for herself and them. It does not mean I am right about that only that it was worth exploring in the attempt to clarify the details that I was not able to do.

Stephen Ryder’s article, Emily and the Bibliophile: A Possible Source for Macnaghten’s Private Information, that discusses his discovery and explores the possibility that the letter perhaps was in reference to Druitt was naturally the first call. In the course of research, I asked for and received an update on Stephen’s position on his article as Andy has mentioned. The complete reply was informative and published as a note to my Ripperologist article and for anyone interested, I will reprint it here:

Ryder subsequently discovered that William Muir’s in-laws were Sophia and Jabez Druitt, who belonged to a different line of Druitts entirely. They had a daughter or granddaughter named Emily, who was an art student. The logical assumption is that it was that Emily Druitt who collaborated on the Blake facsimiles with Muir and Quaritch, and not Montague’s cousin. Jabez Druitt lived in Mile End Road at the time of the Ripper murders and was apparently related to Montague’s family.

[aspallek]

And just to continue on, the existence of correspondence between Jabez Druitt and the Christchurch Druitts (relatives of Montague) has been discovered, though the contents of such correspondence is as of yet unknown.

[R.J.Palmer]

Andy - Just a little clarification. Please note that I didn't say that Jessie Kozminski was a promiment singer; I said she went on to sing at a number of "fairly prominent social events in the 1890s." She may well have been virtually unknown. Regardless, in 1891 she was 16 years old, and there is no reason to believe that Crawford would have been aware of her.

That said, I certainly don't have any emotional stake in the theory, and accept Chris Phillip's point that any link between the East and West London Kosminskis is speculative at best. I still believe the answer lies in Crawford himself; it must have been someone in his neighborhood, or someone who knew of him through a servant, etc. No reason to contact him otherwise. Cheers.

PS. I like Robert's suggestion of a marriage. It's subtle and dramatic. The Jewish matchmaker. Lazy afternoons shopping for elegant silks in Mayfair, all the while her hands trembling with fear that the bridegroom is going to find out the dark family secret sitting in a cell in Colney Hatch, his mind done-in by solitary vices.

[aspallek]

Andy - Just a little clarification. Please note that I didn't say that Jessie Kozminski was a promiment singer; I said she went on to sing at a number of "fairly prominent social events in the 1890s." She may well have been virtually unknown. Regardless, in 1891 she was 16 years old, and there is no reason to believe that Crawford would have been aware of her.

Fair enough, R.J. I took some liberties with what you wrote.

[R.J.Palmer]

Andy - Not a problem.

I still feel that the informant's sense of "peril" is pointing towards the East End of London, and probably to the Autumn when the Ripper scare was at its height.

I can accept that; it would seem to be the case. I don't think you are specifically referring to a Jewish informant, but if so, is there any unintentional irony in this letter, especially considering Sir Robert's later comments on the case? In my mind's eye, I imagine a poor Jewish woman coming to Crawford for advise, fearing a pogrom breaking out in the East End and ruining her family, and Crawford sicking Dr Robert onto her!

I suppose it cuts both ways. In a sense she is 'protecting her own,'; in another sense, she seems willing to secretly point the finger of blame at a near relative. It doesn't quite 'work' in relationship to Anderson's later thoughts; nor perhaps for Macnaghten's. But even if the letter turned out to be irrelevant hookum, it may have helped validate both men's thoughts that a family (or social group) would be hesitant to turn their relative over to justice out of fear of notoriety and reprisal.

[Caroline Morris]

Good points, RJ.

If only we knew what 'Katy' did next...

Did she perhaps refuse to confide in Anderson out of fear?

If he had any confidence in Crawford's instincts, that this woman did indeed have a story worth telling, and if he also discovered she was Jewish, it might well have contributed to his confident conclusion about the Jews protecting their own when push came to shove.

Love,

Caz
X

[Chris G.]

Good points, RJ.

If only we knew what 'Katy' did next...

Did she perhaps refuse to confide in Anderson out of fear?

If he had any confidence in Crawford's instincts, that this woman did indeed have a story worth telling, and if he also discovered she was Jewish, it might well have contributed to his confident conclusion about the Jews protecting their own when push came to shove.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz

I should think that the suspicion against the suspect, if a Jewish suspect, was developed independently of the family. It would not have been "one of his own" who turned the focus of the investigation on the man.

Chris

[Chris Phillips]

I should think that the suspicion against the suspect, if a Jewish suspect, was developed independently of the family. It would not have been "one of his own" who turned the focus of the investigation on the man.

You mean you think Anderson was right when he said the Jewish community would refuse to "give up one of their number to Gentile justice"? Wasn't that a rather controversial view even back in 1910?

Chris Phillips

[Caroline Morris]

Well the point is, Chris (George), that Anderson either got to 'see & hear' this woman and to assess her story or he didn't.

If he didn't, was it because he didn't consider this to be a potentially important lead, or was it because the woman didn't take Crawford's advice and refused to talk to anyone in the police?

Love,

Caz
X

[Chris G.]

You mean you think Anderson was right when he said the Jewish community would refuse to "give up one of their number to Gentile justice"? Wasn't that a rather controversial view even back in 1910?

Chris Phillips

Yes it would have been a controversial view then as it would be now. I am just trying to reconcile the Crawford letter with Anderson's theory to see if it is the same suspect. To me, it doesn't make sense that one of his people would give him up to the police and then those same people refuse to go further if he really was a dangerous man.

Chris

[Chris Phillips]

To me, it doesn't make sense that one of his people would give him up to the police and then those same people refuse to go further if he really was a dangerous man.

I don't quite follow that. What evidence is there that the family of Anderson's suspect refused to cooperate with the police?

Chris Phillips

[Caroline Morris]

I wanted to add that if the woman failed to take Crawford's advice for any reason, Anderson could have seen her non-appearance as suspicious and taken the lead further himself simply by obtaining her name from Crawford.

Alternatively, she could have come forward and taken the advice to the letter, by steadfastly refusing to name any names - with the same consequences.

Love,

Caz
X

[Chris Phillips]

Well the point is, Chris (George), that Anderson either got to 'see & hear' this woman and to assess her story or he didn't.

If he didn't, was it because he didn't consider this to be a potentially important lead, or was it because the woman didn't take Crawford's advice and refused to talk to anyone in the police?

As it was a letter of introduction, to be presented by the woman herself, doesn't the fact that it ended up in Anderson's possession imply that she did see him?

Chris Phillips

[Caroline Morris]

It certainly does, Chris.

But she could have got cold feet at any point after handing the letter over, or refused to name any names, as per the advice she was given. Anderson could hardly accuse the Jews of being the sort to harbour murderers, if she was Jewish and had spilled all the beans about this close relative whom she suspected in his very presence!

Love,

Caz
X

[Chris Phillips]

Anderson could hardly accuse the Jews of being the sort to harbour murderers, if she was Jewish and had spilled all the beans about this close relative whom she suspected in his very presence!

That's a fair argument to some extent, but I think it's important to look at the context of Anderson's statement.

He is claiming that at an early stage he and his colleagues decided that the killer was a "low-class Polish Jew" - the reason being that the house-to-house search had eliminated men who lived alone, so that the killer had to be someone who didn't live alone, but was being shielded by "his people". And only the "low-class Polish Jews" would do such a thing.

Of course, that argument has more holes in it than a colander, but unless Anderson made up the whole thing, it describes his reasoning before he knew anything about the particular suspect he's talking about.

If it later turned out that his favoured suspect's family did cooperate with the police, that would admittedly render his argument more inconsistent than it otherwise would have been. But that's hardly decisive, because the argument is inconsistent in so many other respects.

Even if one wants to give credence to Anderson's claim that "our diagnosis was right on every point", there's the possibility that he found vindication for his criticism of the Jewish community in his belief that the suspect was protected by a Jewish witness. In that sense, there would be no need to bring the suspect's family into it at all.

Chris Phillips

[Chris G.]

To me, it doesn't make sense that one of his people would give him up to the police and then those same people refuse to go further if he really was a dangerous man.

Chris

I don't quite follow that. What evidence is there that the family of Anderson's suspect refused to cooperate with the police?

Chris Phillips


No evidence whatsoever, Chris. Except that is what Anderson said happened, or at least we can infer that it was the suspect's family when Sir Robert wrote, "his people knew of his guilt, and refused to give him up to justice." (The Lighter Side of My Official Life, Chapter IX (http://www.casebook.org/ripper_media/rps.lighterside.10.html))

Chris

[aspallek]

There is another possibility. If the woman hand delivered the letter of introduction, as seems likely, Anderson might have immediately referred her to his assistant, one Melville Macnaghten (depending on the date, of course) and it may have been Macnaghten who heard her "private information."

[Chris Phillips]

No evidence whatsoever, Chris. Except that is what Anderson said happened, or at least we can infer that it was the suspect's family when Sir Robert wrote, "his people knew of his guilt, and refused to give him up to justice." (The Lighter Side of My Official Life, Chapter IX (http://www.casebook.org/ripper_media/rps.lighterside.10.html))

You've just illustrated exactly the point I was making above - that it's very misleading to take that quotation out of context.

The context is a description of Anderson's reasoning before he knew anything about a specific Polish Jewish suspect. It is all general reasoning, unrelated to any particular family:
One did not need to be a Sherlock Holmes to discover that the criminal was a sexual maniac of a virulent type; that he was living in the immediate vicinity of the scenes of the murders; and that, if he was not living absolutely alone, his people knew of his guilt, and refused to give him up to justice.

To say that all this must apply to the suspect, because if it didn't Anderson's claims would be inconsistent, is a big leap of faith. Indeed, our knowledge of Aaron Kozminski's circumstances suggests that much of what Anderson said didn't accurately describe him. We know that there is no indication in Aaron Kozminski's medical records that he was any kind of "sexual maniac". He probably didn't live within the area of the house-to-house search. And his family were not "low-class Polish Jews", but respectable tradesmen and entrepreneurs.

Chris Phillips

[Chris G.]

Hi Chris

Anderson wrote, "In saying that he was a Polish Jew I am merely stating a definitely ascertained fact." Swanson's notes to the same text would appear to indicate that a specific suspect was meant, and that suspect was Kosminski. Yes you can say that the statements that Anderson made do not specifically describe Kosminski's circumstances, but most of the writings by the policemen do not exactly fit the facts either. Square pegs in round holes -- leaving us Ripperologists to try to interpret what they said and what the real circumstances were.

Chris

[Robert Linford]

Chris (P), wouldn't someone like Anderson have considered family tradition, rather than recent attainment, the touchstone of class? The Kosminskis would have seemed low class in origin to him - even the Druitts were only "fairly good family" to Macnaghten.

Robert

[Chris Phillips]

Chris (P), wouldn't someone like Anderson have considered family tradition, rather than recent attainment, the touchstone of class? The Kosminskis would have seemed low class in origin to him - even the Druitts were only "fairly good family" to Macnaghten.

I think there may well have been an element of this in Anderson's statements - he may have been distinguishing the recent Jewish immigrants in the East End from the established Anglo-Jewish community, among which - he was quick to protest - he had personal friends.

What is difficult for me to believe is that Anderson considered the Jewish immigrant community as a whole to be one in which families would be likely to shield a serial murderer, and in doing so allow him to continue killing. Particularly remembering that that community was on the whole significantly more law-abiding than the Gentile population of Whitechapel. The claim might sound a bit less unreasonable if it referred to some kind of criminal under-class within the immigrant community.

Either way, it seems to me that it must have been the result of racial prejudice, despite Anderson's protestations.

Chris Phillips

[Chris Phillips]

Anderson wrote, "In saying that he was a Polish Jew I am merely stating a definitely ascertained fact." Swanson's notes to the same text would appear to indicate that a specific suspect was meant, and that suspect was Kosminski. Yes you can say that the statements that Anderson made do not specifically describe Kosminski's circumstances, but most of the writings by the policemen do not exactly fit the facts either. Square pegs in round holes -- leaving us Ripperologists to try to interpret what they said and what the real circumstances were.

I wasn't arguing against the proposition that Anderson's suspect was Aaron Kozminski. On the contrary, I think the suspect clearly was Kozminski.

I was just pointing out that Anderson's story contains inconsistencies, and that it's dangerous to draw inferences from it without taking those inconsistencies into account.

But perhaps the discussion is wandering too far from the Earl of Crawford's letter.

Chris Phillips

[Spiro]

And just to continue on, the existence of correspondence between Jabez Druitt and the Christchurch Druitts (relatives of Montague) has been discovered, though the contents of such correspondence is as of yet unknown.

Hi Andy,

Thanks for the additional details, good work. It is also great to know that this has been followed up on what appears to be an East End connection for another line of Druitts in Jabez. It is I agree an alternative explanation for the vague details in the Earl of Crawford's letter to Anderson.

Spiro