Tumblety in the American Press

[A.P. Wolf]

I thought it might be a useful exercise to look in depth at the reports in the American press concerning Dr Francis Tumblety and then look at how that relates to the information we are fed with in modern articles.
Could be a good ride this one.
Tumblety first appears, it seems, in the 'Dead Letter Office' of the New York Post Office where he fails to collect a number of letters addressed to him there in 1860.
The rest is history, but let's start with the classified adverts he was inserting in the 'New York Herald' during 1861 on an almost daily basis. Like a good charlatan he starts and finishes with a poem:
http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/herb1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

That spot must out!
From 'Frank Leslies Illustrated Newspaper' 5th October 1861:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/pimple1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

The 'Pimple Banisher' must have worked cos blimey he's suddenly the Surgeon General!
From the 'Newark Advocate' 29th November 1861:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/surgeon1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

Then Tumblety surfaced in Washington where his classified adverts were running on an almost daily basis during 1862 in the 'Daily National Intelligencer'; along with his references like this one from the 22nd March 1862:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/washington1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

More references were to pour in, like this one from Quebec reported on the 10th May 1862 in the same newspaper:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/quebec1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

And then we come to Dr Tumblety and biological warfare.
The Indian Herb Doctor had a plan, apparently, to infect all them yankees with old yellah.
From the 'Daily Cleveland Herald', 8th May 1865:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/yellow1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

The confusion between Tumblety and J. Blackburn is best explained by the fact that Tumblety had, by miracle and the prodigious use of herbs, cured J. Blackburn of cancer three years before in Washington and being so pleased with the result sort of cured himself, or something like that.
The same newspaper takes up the story in St Louis on the 10th May 1865:
http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/stlouis1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

Finally, for this episode, if you are going to San Francisco be sure to wear some flowers in your hair.
The 'Daily Evening Bulletin' from 13th June 1870:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/ode1.jpg

[Joe Chetcuti]

We don't hear from the Rocky Mountain News too often, but I see that you posted a clip from that newspaper on the "Tumblety Images" thread. Nice work!

[A.P. Wolf]

Thanks Joe.
No doubt that Tumblety was a great fraudster and blaggard but Jack the Ripper?
Nah.
This guy seems to be a blundering, chaotic and almost lovable schuckster, much in the ilk of WC Fields bringing his own form of chaotic humour to small hick towns.
Would a potential serial killer really be advertising his potent and lucrative herbals for almost every single day in one of the most popular daily newspapers in the commercial capital of his country, New York, and then in the civic capital Washington?
Nah.
Would a wealthy American schuckster who liked his publicity so much that it almost hanged him several times, suddenly take himself off to the streets of Whitechapel and start slaughtering whores in the most horrible manner imaginable?
Nah.
Tumblety seems to have enjoyed implicating himself into serious criminal cases simply because it improved his reputation as the Great Indian Herbal Doctor.
Surgeon General, the assassination of Lincoln, smuggling biological weapons into New York City to kill off the Yankees, and Jack the Ripper... take your pick 'cos he was none of 'em.
Anyways, lets have a look at what he was up to after June of 1870.

[R.J.Palmer]

Dr. Marcel Petiot was a loveable, madcap fellow too, AP. That is, when he wasn’t beating women to death or killing Jews in his basement. Funny, when I read your above posts, I thought I could almost hear the agonizing screams of Matillda Clover. The very next murderer of prostitutes in a London slum (Lambeth) was a strutting toff from Chicago who even returned to North America inbetween his 2nd and 3rd murders. Like Tumblety, Thomas Neill Cream was a dandified flake, an immigrant and a failed social climber, a disreputable physician,and an arrogant ass. And when things started to go awry for Cream, he did just what you claim is an impossiblity: he started killing unfortunates in a slum on the otherside of the ocean. If one doesn’t understand the disease, one can’t see the symptoms. And the trouble with Ripperologists is that they've been looking for a 20th Century murderer, instead of a 19th Century one. Your madcapped Dr. Tumblety writing to the press is no different than Tommy Cutbush writing to Grimthorpe. Same disease, purer form.

[A.P. Wolf]

Nice to hear from you RJ.
I can't really disagree with what you say, but hell, at least I gotta try.
Thomas Neill Cream was not really of the same grade or quality as Tumblety in any manner or form. Prior to the Whitechapel Murders Tumblety was one of the most talked about men in American society, seemingly adored and lionised wherever he went in the States, described in the 'Daily Picayune' of 26th November 1888 by a reporter who knew him back in the 60's and 70's as 'One of the most beautiful men of his day' who had left behind 'many weeping maidens' when he decamped suddenly from Boston with his bills unpaid.
So popular and admired was Tumblety that the 'Boston Pepper Box' of that decade published a full page illustration of him, complete with his remarkable greyhounds.
As I pointed out before Tumblety was a man of considerable wealth - when of little substance - and his advertising campaigns during his days in New York, Washington and San Franciso (amongst many others) brought him very much into the public eye, as did the various editorials that were written about the Great Indian Herb Doctor.
In fact he was all over America like a rash.
Just like his pimple cure.
This man was a heavy weight of his time and age, famous throughout all the major American centres of commerce and trade; and by the time of the Whitechapel Murders he was an almost mystical and mythical figure of American street history.
When he died he left fabulous wealth and reputation behind him.
Now let us compare that man to Cream.
An insignificant little ferret of a man, clearly barmy and utterly charmless who practically jumped up on the gallows and hung himself.
I think the proof of the pudding would be to do exactly the same search process through the American Press - of the time - for references to Thomas Neill Cream prior to his poisoning of the Lambeth women, see what I get, and then compare that to the number of strikes that a search through the same journals for Tumblety prior to the Whitechapel Murders produce.
I'll do that.
Tumblety had a lot of friends in the world of the American press, and their view of Tumblety and the Whitechapel Murders was perhaps best summed up by the 'Daily Picayune' of the 26th November 1888 said of him:
'For the sake of more notoriety had himself arrested as the Whitechapel Murderer in London'.
Tumblety used great events to further his reputation and career.
Cream was just a sad little man who killed innocent women by long distance.

[A.P. Wolf]

I'm going to post some of the American press reports from 1888 shortly, but I have to say that after reading through reams of this stuff that I feel that our modern intepretation of these reports may be at fault, in that perhaps we are missing a very subtle point where Tumblety is described as either a 'woman hater' or 'despising women'.
Most modern readers see this as a clear reference to Tumblety 'hating' women; and then go on to use this as a motive for his guilt in the Whitechapel Murders.
Well I don't think this at all.
My belief is that these type of references are rather vague hints to his homosexuality; and that modern writers are twisting these Victorian 'catch phrases' to suit their modern purpose.
Anyways, the 'Daily Inter Ocean', November 20th 1888, and 'ere we go with the Pinkies:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/pink1.jpg

[Joe Chetcuti]

Rest In Peace: James Portmore.

Tumblety was a very organized writer and schemer. He was not out of control. The man knew the score on current political events and he understood his ethnic and religious history.

If you attempt to draw a conclusion on the make-up of this Ripper Suspect, you will fail if you solely focus on the man's newspaper ads.

[A.P. Wolf]

Joe, nobody is making conclusions here.
I've listened to a lot of hype about Tumblety in the last ten years or so, and I'm just exploring some of the material that is out there ready to explore; and already it is giving me grave doubts about the conclusion that many have reached about this man.
Especially in regard to his attitude towards the fairer sex.
And in many other regards.

If one conducts a search through the American press reports from 1870 to 1890 with Thomas Cream as the target one gets 36 results.
If one conducts a search through the American press reports from 1860 to 1887 with Tumblety as the target one gets 158 results.
Tumblety has four press reports to every one of Cream's.
And no criminal offence.

Got a story, Joe, then why don't you just post it?

[A.P. Wolf]

Hey Joe, where you going with that gun in your hand?

James Portmore did not die from massive injuries inflicted with a blade or anything like that, he didn't get shot or anything like that.
It is thought that he took some patent medicine from that Indian Herbal Doctor called Tumblety and was 'supposed to have died' from doing so, but even the court was not convinced and made the statement that it was 'only fair to say that there was evidence showing the harmless nature of the medicines'.
The verdict of 'manslaughter' was never finally prosecuted to Tumblety.
See the 'Bangor or Daily Whig and Courier' October 6th 1860 for more detail.

[R.J.Palmer]

AP - Unfortunately, and I mean this in the most respectful way possible, because I think of you as one of the most insightful thinkers in the field, you're making the same mistake that Paul Begg and nearly everyone else has made who has studied or written about this guy. You're misinterpretting what was known in the American press as a "nine-day wonder.' You've even rigged your data. There is next to NOTHING written about Tumblety in the press between 1865 (his arrest at the time of the Lincoln assassination) and 1888 when he was arrested in London at the time of the Whitechapel murders. That's a 23 year span. I've had this same discussion with Dan Norder three years ago, who made the same mistake, and claimed (wrongly) that the American Press was 'well used to linking Tumblety to the great scandals of the day." Bollocks. The only exceptions in those 23 years are a few local advertisements that Tumblety had placed himself (such as San Fran, 1870) or the times when he was briefly in the local news when he was genuinely involved in a lawsuit or had been arrested for some minor offense. I've been studying this guy for the better part of 7 years and I'm well aware of all the articles you're mentioning. (I don't like to admit it now, but I spent the better part of one summer sleeping in my car in Albany, New York and Washington D.C., looking through hundreds if not thousands of newspapers; my eyes never fully recovered). What you are in fact seeing is the last throes of a has-been. Tumblety was well-known in the late 1850s and early 1860s on parts of the Eastern seaboard, yes, but by 1888 he had become an obscure figure. The explosion of newsreports you are analyzing came from journalist on the hotel circuit who remembered this odd-ball from the 1860s, or remembered him as a nuisance who had been himself travelling the hotels and health resort circuit in the 1870s and 1880s. They wrote-him up as a star, becaue that's how the NY press worked in those days (and still largely works today). Check your dates on those "hits" again, AP, only this time don't rig the evidence. You'll find almost all of them were written in Nov. 1888, or thereafter, and when you recheck Neil Cream, include the dates when he was on trial in London. You'll have dozens if not hundreds of hits on Cream, and they will be very much the same sort. BLokes remebering Cream's troubles in CHicago years earlier, or when he was a hell-raiser in McGill's college in Montreal. Then there's the whole score of small newspapers who reprinted stories that actually came out of Montreal or CHicago. But I agree there's a lot a rubbish to sort through;but if you keep peeling back the onion skin you're not going to like what you find when you reach the core, old fellow, I promise you that. BUt I don't expect you'll be believing me anytime soon; the facade was all too effective. Ask yourself something AP; when you see those loudmouth blokes, with the big diamond rings, who like to flash thier money. What do you see? Almost to a man, an inadequate little boy who is overcompensating for a wretched childhood. All the very best. RP

[A.P. Wolf]

Thanks RJ
all I'm doing is reporting the news as the newspapers wrote it.
Nothing more.
In the search module I was careful to exclude the news reports for Cream after 1890; and then for Tumblety after 1887.
That 'rigging' would have been for the Lambeth murders and Whitechapel Murders respectively; and please tell me I don't have to explain to you why I did that?
Yes, I'm aware of the lack of reports concerning Tumblety in the years you mention; and unlike you I believe that actually highlights the degree of influence Tumblety appeared to exercise on the American press, rather than negating it.
They couldn't wait for him to come back.

As I said before, I believe that there has been a hell of a lot of hype and tripe published about Tumblety in our modern times, and I'm trying to turn that clock back and get back to the original reports.
The stuff Joe has just pulled me up for is a classic example.
Rest in Peace my asp.

[R.J.Palmer]

"They couldn't wait for him to come back."

No, my friend, he couldn't wait to come back.

The result is Mitre Square. Such was the power of the penny dreadful.

[A.P. Wolf]

Anyways, onwards and upwards, 'The Daily Picayne' of November 22nd 1888:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/queer1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

As you'll note, RJ, I hope, that is a report on Tumblety from 1880 in New Orleans which has the British Consul coming to the rescue of Tumblety.

[Joe Chetcuti]

At least that's what Jimi Hendrix told me to do. In reality, I've seen enough gunshot wounds in my time in emergency rooms, so I'll keep away from all of that.

Thanks for mentioning the Bangor and Daily Whig and Courier newspapers and I'll look into them. I'll include them with the material I've accumulated on the Portmore murder and we'll continue to see if Tumblety had a reason to run away or not. You did a really good job on the New Orleans paper. I've had a tough time getting reports out of that city.

Oh you know me, AP. If I've got something to report, I'll make it known. I don't need much of a push from you to put my findings in writing! Sometimes the cards aren't worth a damn if you don't lay them down. At least that's what the Grateful Dead said.

I think the dust has settled, so Howard can have a nice weekend now! Hey, it's Friday night so let's crack open the Jack Daniels.

[R.J.Palmer]

AP - The consul's name was De G. de Fonblanque. I know all about the event, but I'm sorry I can't be as generous as you and Joe are, AP --too many nights sleeping in my car, eating beans from a can, and (more recently) reading about how foolish I was on internet forums. I'm one of those horders you dispise, but my defense is this: History is a slow process, and digitalization isn't helping; quick data leads to quick, superficial answers. Slow it down. For instance, do you recall who Dr. Cream was hobnobbing with when he was busy murdering unfortunates in Lambeth? And why did Cream chose a tiny neighborhood in an obscure slum of all places? Anyone ever wonder about that? It wasn't just about the anonymity. Cream's old schoolmaster remembered him as a 'wild' boy, fond of ostentatious displays of wealth and clothing. Hmm. Sounds oddly familiar. What's driving him, AP, besides his syphilis and his fancy for sniffing chloroform? When you're in bed staring at the cracks of your ceiling tonight, think a little bit about ol' Dr. Cream, and ask yourself that, and don't answer lustmord. It's the greatest force in the world, and if, as a child, you went through any state school system you’ll know what it is, only you've just forgotten it. Identify the disease, and it all starts falling in place. Don't identify it, and Sir Robert Anderson wins, and Aaron Kosminski goes down in history as Jack the Ripper. Je me suis séché a l'air crime. "I dried myself in the air of crime"--Rimbaud.

[How Brown]

(I don't like to admit it now, but I spent the better part of one summer sleeping in my car in Albany, New York and Washington D.C., looking through hundreds if not thousands of newspapers; my eyes never fully recovered). --R.J.P.

Rajah...that is a remarkable statement. I mean that. That is one of the most impressive remarks within the whole of all the remarkable posts you have ever made and you know how high I regard your posts. I'm glad you did admit it,buddy.

I think the dust has settled, so Howard can have a nice weekend now! Hey, it's Friday night so let's crack open the Jack Daniels.-Joltin' Joe

With discussion such as what you,A.P. and Rajah provided,my weekend's already in good shape. Good repartee and interesting perceptions of this character Tumbelty. Many thanks.

[A.P. Wolf]

Thanks How, much appreciated.
I'd just like to say that I do acknowledge - gladly - that both RJP and Joe have been studying Tumblety for a lot longer than me; and both of them do speak from the authority of ripeness in this regard whilst I am very much the green one around here.
It was - and still is - not my intention to step on any toes around here... my apologies if I have.
My earlier comments about Tumblety were a tad rash, and unconsidered; and maybe even made without due regard to the sensitivities of folks who might read them.
Again I apologise if that is the case.
As I said I'm just reporting the news here so that folks can read the original material themselves.
So onward Christian - and other - soldiers.
The next extract is from the 'Daily Evening Bulletin' of November 23rd 1888:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/anderson1.jpg

[Robert Linford]

Hi AP

I've mailed you.

Robert

[A.P. Wolf]

The last report showed an interesting piece of confusion concerning Tumblety when he was down South, with Stanley and his two greyhounds.
My understanding of greyhounds in the earlier part of the LVP is that they were very rare beasts indeed, especially in America, but heck... I'm no greyhound expert either.
The following report is from 'The Daily Inter Ocean' of December 8th 1888:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/knewtum1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

The last report is exactly what I find surprising in this Tumbleweed episode, for he we have the statement of a man, Alberger, who appears to have known Tumblety for many a long year, and he makes Tumblety sound like some kind of Robin Hood; and certainly did not feel Tumblety capable of any kind of murderous activity.
Not my opinion... but his.
The next report is an absolute hoot, concerning the activities of a London detective sent over to keep an eye on Tumblety.
'The Daily Inter Ocean' of December 10th 1888:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/sleuth1.jpg

[Dan Norder]

There is next to NOTHING written about Tumblety in the press between 1865 (his arrest at the time of the Lincoln assassination) and 1888 when he was arrested in London at the time of the Whitechapel murders. That's a 23 year span. I've had this same discussion with Dan Norder three years ago, who made the same mistake, and claimed (wrongly) that the American Press was 'well used to linking Tumblety to the great scandals of the day." Bollocks.

Unfortunately, RJ, when shown newspaper aricles that clearly show this assertin of yours to be wrong, you just will them to disappear and then return to pretending you were right.

But then this refusal to accept reality and desire to run along with whatever fantasies you've already cooked up are a pretty standard feature of how you and Joe insist that Tumblety has to be the Ripper despite all evidence to the contrary. That includes th claim that people are looking for a 20th century killer instead of a 19th century killer, because the two are actually extremely similar (as shown by all the 19th century killers we do know about), while what you describe a a "19th century killer" is something you picked up from bad fiction of the era.

[A.P. Wolf]

For my part, RJ, I'd be more than happy to discuss the Cream saga with you when I've done with Tumblety.
In fact I'll dig out all the American press reports concerning Cream and flag them up on another thread for discussion as soon as I've got the weed out of the tumble.
Deal?
Meanwhile - from 'The Daily Picayune' of December 10th 1888 -news from Gotham City:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/gotham1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

And there we have a very solid statement from a man of the time who was well acquainted with the activities of Dr Tumblety:

'That he (Tumblety) has anything to do with the Whitechapel atrocities is as likely as that the most innocent reader of the 'Picayune' is "Jack the Ripper".'

[A.P. Wolf]

Sadly the last report from 1888 is being a bit of a buggar and won't be fully captured, so all I've got is the tail end... ah well, sometimes that wags the dog.
This report smacks of some kind of desperation, in that it appears that the press have given up on Tumblety as a suspect in the Whitechapel Murders, and then gone on to suspect a strange companion of Tumblety's known as 'Jack'.
I'll try again to see if I can capture the full report, but I'm not hopeful.
'The Daily Picayune' of December 17th 1888:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/manfriday1.jpg

[Robert Linford]

This is the left hand column.

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/p1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

Thanks Robert, you're an absolute diamond.

And while on the subject of wealth, I am astonished at the amount of wealth old Tumblety used to carry around with him.
In April of 1891 Tumblety was staying at the Plateau Hotel when it was robbed by a gang of desperate thieves and he lost $2000 in cash, $3000 in jewellery and a whopping $22,000 in Canadian Railway Bonds... oh and his trousers.
He had to send out for new trews.
It seems that his fortune actually increased with his suspected role in the Whitechapel Murders.
Frisking Dr Tumblety could also be quite a rewarding experience, as this report from 'The Emporia Daily Gazette' of November 19th 1890 shows:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/quack1.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

And then Robin Hood strikes back, in 'The Daily Picayune' of August 26th 1891:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/robinhood1.jpg

[How Brown]

Perhaps in the best interest of this discussion on Tumbelty....should anyone be able to provide a clipping between the period of 1865 and 1888 that links Tumbelty to a scandal or activity of dubious distinction within these 23 years, which Mr.Palmer states do not exist...we could settle this contested issue once and for all. In fact,lets make that after the arrest in the Lincoln Assassination scandal.

Can it be done is the question....


On another note...perhaps R.J. would care to discuss the difference he feels that exists between the "19th Century" serial killer and the "20th Century" serial killer and what specific machinations Tumbelty displayed that separates him from 20th Century murderers.

This is very good stuff A.P. Thanks for posting all this stuff up. You too,Mr.Linford,sor.

P.S. If I am correct...the Picayune is a New Orleans paper. I think its still in existence ( without my lazy toches looking for the answer ).

[A.P. Wolf]

Thanks How
well I think I already pushed up two references to old Tumblety between those dates, one was from 1880, but I'll agree that they were not actual press reports from that time period.
But hey, let's see what we can do.
There are certainly press reports on Tumblety's activities and movements in the British press as well, within the dates.
Good project.

[A.P. Wolf]

The San Francisco adverts of 1870 cannot be ignored, they show that Tumblety was up and about his business.
'The Times' of London reported on his nefarious activities on the 1st December 1873. The image is too large for me to capture but perhaps Robert can catch it.
Then we have the 'Irish Canadian' report of 12th October 1875 detailing the fact that Tumblety was back in Montreal.
I mean if you want blood out of a stone.

[Robert Linford]

AP, here's a link to the Casebook transcription.
http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/times/18731201.html (http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/times/18731201.html)

[R.J.Palmer]

Howard - In regards to your question. Blokes like Dan Norder aren't hard to figure out. They are clinging to a phony and superficial "scientific" model. You can't really blame 'em, because it seems so much more senisble than Stephen Knight, Maybrick, and all the garbage that has come down the pike. Unfortunately, like Ressler, Douglas, etc. they are trying to be responsible, but have no real explanation for the appearance of these so-called "serial murderers" in our midst; so they conclude (wrongly) that it is a biological event. In other words, the old Kraftt-Ebing idea of 'lustmord', or some vague (but unidentified) ailment of the 'frontal lobes.' Dan wants to preach this rubbish and pretend that those who dont' buy it are 'crack-pots,' but the reality isn't so simple. In fact, he has it completely backwards. There is no biological explanation for crimes of this sort. It's a false god. Any anthropologist or socio-biologist worth his or her salt would dismantle this tripe in a few well-crafted paragraphs. When Norder claims that 19th Century murders or, say, murders from 17th Century Peru, or modern 20th Century America are all the cut from the same cookie-cutter he's merely falling back on the same bogus 'biological' explanation. The fact is , he hasn't even given it much thought. Sadly, even many of the best minds in the field (Phil Sugden, Martin Fido) haven't given it much thought either. Murder, like anything else, springs from complex social causes. I am convinced that serial murder, in particular, is very much a crime of social identity. Ultimately, this means that the murder is reacting to specific social 'cues.' Believe me or dont' believe me, but I have the facts and the research to back this claim up, and am not throwing it around casually. I am not a 'fantasist.' My opinions are based on published studies and scientific data. Yes, I am also painfully aware of the image of Tumblety that the NY World, AP Wolf, Dan Norder, Paul Begg, Wolf Vanderlinden, and 99 out of 100 Ripperologists are clinging to. I once clinged to it myself, and used to be inclined towards Druittism or Kosminskism. Then I began to look deeper. I dont' suspect you'll be believing me anytime soon, but I warn you that you are analyzing a facade. Behind the facade is a poorly educated Irish immigrant who used the techniques of other quack doctors as his own; who was not particularly compentent, nor original, and who abused and manipulated young men in order to run his business. He's a poor man's version of Neill Cream. They guy is, in fact, a very ordinary and in some ways grotesquely incompetent bloke who made most of his money in the 1850s and had a good banker (Henry Clews) who kept him wealthy on Wall Street. AP posts a few advertisements from S.F. from 1870, but he misses the point. San Fran had twelve or fifteen newspapers and advertising was exceedingly cheap. Tumblety flooded the press with his ads to give himself a facade of success. In fact, his herb shop was not particuarly successful and he left town within a few months under a cloud of failure and suspicion. And how in the heck is this event releveant to the fact that the most imporant and arguably best officer in 1880s Scotland Yard (John Littlechild) calling him a 'very likely' suspect 18 years later? No one has a credible explanation for that. No one. Norder, Vanderlinden, Begg, and now A.P. Wolf, bless 'em, aren't really thinking very clearly. They're still looking for that non-descript local chap suffering from lustmord, and all they're seeing is a bombastic and fantastical quack. No one wonder they dont' take Littlechild seriously.

More anon. I'm outta here again, but I plan on tackling your question at great length in the not-so-distant future. I'll make sure a copy of it falls into your hands.

[How Brown]

Dear Rajah:

I hope that my previous post did not appear as a "challenge" of sorts and that some gauntlet was laid down. Far from it,old bean. The way I understood it already... is that you strongly feel Tumbelty is being superficially looked at by the community when we look at the less violent episodes in his life that are regurgitated in the press. If this is correct,I can understand that for sure. Using a contemporary serial killer ( Rader ), 20 articles or so in local Kansas newspapers mentioning his Boy Scout work,church work,or other experiences prior to his capture and conviction, overlooks the hidden inner being of that monster throughout the whole of his life.

I would never have any reason to doubt you or your word on material you mention or have researched or further,refer from. I think many people agree that serial murder emanates from the individual's social identity and that despite similarities that appear in m.o., each is unique in its way,hence the signature or elements within the individual's motive for the murders they commit that are uniquely theirs.

I look at it this way,Rajah....Tumbelty may,if he had committed these murders...and for the record,I have less interest in "the suspect",but rather the times and causation issues with respect to the whole body of suspects....have committed them for what you see as "social identity" issues equally with what others assume were committed for lustmorder based-issues or perhaps,other issues such as power/control.

As a layman,its often hard to differentiate between what would be considered a "social cue" and one based on a biological "imperative" ( for want of a word). In the assessment of individuals such as Hyams,Cohen,Kosminski,and the psychotics, its not really necessary to labor over the root cause or cues from social identity and/or biological based reasons. Tumbelty comes from a different kettle o' fish.

Hence,with individuals such as Tumbelty,who on paper doesn't seem to be in the least bit shy,socially awkward,and in fact, seems desirous of attention dating back decades prior to 1888...the task is a little harder for the layman to "fit" Tumbelty in the role of Ripper.

By all means, elaborate further whenever possible,R.J.

Thanks.

[A.P. Wolf]

Hey RJ
I hope you are not lumping me together with others who believe all this hype and tripe about serial killers, for I have moved heaven, and earth, to bring some plain common sense and humanity into the study of the social causes of murder.
Go back to Casebook, poetry thread, and read my Colony module.
And please don't lump me together with others who may have a false or faulty vision of Tumblety, for I have none, as yet.
My main hesitation with Tumblety as a suspect for any murder, Whitechapel or otherwise, is his enormous wealth, not his character, or even his 'doings'.
If you read carefully through the article I posted late last night about Tumblety's early days in Canada I think you will see that my hesitation is shared by other researchers who have absolutely no interest - vested or otherwise - in the Whitechapel Murders.
Hesitation is good RJ.
Your conviction that Tumblety is a suitable suspect for the Whitechapel Murders is to be admired.
Now all you have to do is convince everyone else.

There are other reports out there concerning Tumblety in those missing years. The 'Rochester Daily Union and Advertiser' of the 4th April 1881 has Tumblety in New Orleans picking the pockets of a government clerk.

Thanks for the link, Robert.

[Joe Chetcuti]

Howdy Howard,

Continuing on your theme, Tumblety was involved in a number of minor scrapes during the 1866-1887 period. In 1866, he was admonished in Cincinnati's St. Peter's Cathedral because of his pompous behavior during a mass. He was accused of scandalizing the congregation.

Later he was chased out of Pittsburgh because he caused trouble for two of his female patients. In 1868, he was run out of his Grand Street medical office in New York. In 1872, he supposedly initiated a physical confrontation with an editor in the 5th Avenue Hotel, and he was immediately arrested for it. The following year, he took an eighteen year old carpenter named Henry Carr with him to Liverpool, and William Pinkerton hinted that he sexually violated the boy.

Tumblety was charged with bodily assault in Toronto in 1880. AP was correct in stating that he was arrested in New Orleans by Private Detective O'Malley. He was kicked out of NY's 5th Avenue Hotel around that time, too. Tumblety also did some time in NY's Ludrow Street jail for refusing to pay for a bill. In 1872, he was booted out of St. Louis for parading around as an army surgeon. And he had NY litigation problems in the early 1880's for sexually violating his young collegiate employee named Lyons.

None of these instances were national news material though. He was also involved in some civil lawsuits during this time period. For example, four years ago Stephen Ryder came across paperwork that showed Tumblety's $100,000 lawsuit against the U.S. Government was disallowed in January 1873. This probably was the only matter that potentially involved the doctor on a national level during the 1866-1887 time period, yet still this lawsuit didn't seem to attract the attention of the press.

[A.P. Wolf]

Thanks for that Joe
some stuff there that I haven't found yet.
A trend that I have found though is that when you look more closely at some of these charges and offences levelled against Tumblety, is that they all sort of tumble down.
I'm left with the impression that the man's wealth may well have attracted the attention of blaggers and blackmailers.
That is only an impression though.
I mean if he was gay...

[R.J.Palmer]

There are other reports out there concerning Tumblety in those missing years. The 'Rochester Daily Union and Advertiser' of the 4th April 1881 has Tumblety in New Orleans picking the pockets of a government clerk.

AP -- I mean this in the nicest possible way, because I like you. But currently you're thinking about as deeply as Dan Norder and your old friend, the profiler Glenn Andersson. That alone should give you pause to think.

Do you honestly believe any of this comes as a revelation to me? Let me remind you that I've been studying this guy for the better part of 6 or 7 years. I realize he was a dandy and a career criminal. I also realize he was 6' 1" or thereabouts and looked nothing like the man seen with a woman who might have been Kate Eddowes at the entrance to Mitre Square at 1.37 a.m. I realize that Wolf Vanderlinden has Inspector ANdrews off chasing fenians in December, 1888 and not Tumblety. I realize Paul Begg and Martin Fido have Littlechild out of the loop. I realize Tumblety was a flamboyant homosexual, and that every profiler in the world says he wouldn't have killed women. I realize, too, that collectiing uteri is not a credible explanation for the Whitechapel Murders. I know that Tumblety was a well-known street figure in 1860s Brooklyn and that he published bizarre pamphlets in his defense. You hold 51 cards, my friend, and I only hold one.

I don't know quite how to explain it to you, but perhaps if you found these articles, like I did years ago, by cranking the slow handle of a microfilm reader or flipping through hard copies in a tiny room full of kindly Mormon ladies, instead of getting them with a few clicks of a mouse thanks to the rush-rush world of digitalization, you'd be seeing things in a different light. This guy was on a downhill run to 1888. If you were there beside me, You would have had to scroll past those 364 other days, with 12 pages per whack in almost indecypherable 8 pt. lead type that said nothing whatsoever about this guy who stole a wallet. And once again, you've failed to even remotely address the relevance of whatever your point you're trying to make. Tommy Cutbush lifts a guys wallet in 1879 and what...you're going to argue....er...what exactaly are you going to argue? Because I think I've seen you in better form than this, old boy.

Friendly advice, as always. Theorize in haste, and repent at your leisure. I got to do a little work now, but watch this space. I'll be back in awhile and thrown my friend Howard a bone and explain to you why I'm not out of my mind. Cheers, RP

[Joe Chetcuti]

AP, thanks for the additional info about the $22,000 worth of Canadian railroad bonds that were taken from Tumblety in Arkansas. I knew "important papers" were stolen from him during that Plateau Hotel robbery, but I never knew what the paperwork consisted of. I remember talking a few years ago with a Hot Springs, Arkansas police sergeant about this 19th century crime in his city. He was really interested in this research. He even directed me toward a local historical society, and they in turn provided me with a couple of Arkansas Gazette news articles on this robbery. I ended up donating those articles to the Casebook. The articles stated that William Pinkerton came down from Chicago to handle the matter. The Plateau Hotel crime occurred less than a week before the Carrie Brown murder.

Dr. Tumblety will be talked about for a long time to come. He was involved in so many stories, and new info about him keeps coming in.

You're not going to read of a more cold-hearted man though. Even his publicized acts of charity were performed for his own self-promotion. The callousness he expressed toward his dead carpenter patient in the Oct 16, 1860 Morning Freeman was a good example of this selfishness of his.

That New Brunswick article also spoke of how Tumblety was to return to St. Johns for the Portmore killing when their Circuit Court re-opens. The article explained that the charges against the doctor were not bailable. Earlier in the month, Tumblety boasted that he'd return to St. Johns to face the criminal charges, but he never did.

Ironically, when Tumblety high-tailed it across the border after the Portmore killing, he rode his white steed. It reminded me of the time when O J Simpson ran away from the law. So one guy rode on a white steed and the other in a white bronco! Of course both of them were innocently on the run for those who choose to believe it that way.

Dr. Tumblety rode a white steed
Into St. Johns in its time of need

Quite a brave crusader, wasn't he?

AP, if you got any more news on that jail boy whom Tumblety tried to befriend, feel free to spill it!

Thanks!

Joe

[A.P. Wolf]

RJ
you don't have to hurt me to talk.
Comparing me to others is like eating an ice cream with its wrapper on.
I know you know better than me, but just dance a bit on those keys and prove it, and I will be all humble pie.
You know me RJ, I will roll over and have my belly stroked the very second someone gives me that true bone.
I did what you did. At Collindale. I slept in cars. I wore my eyes out on fiche and chips, so bad that I had to get a new eye.
But hey RJ I don't take prisoners here, and never did.
You deliver boy, or you fall on that sword.

[Stan Russo]

I'm sorry, but did I read and understand that right? Does RJ want us to believe Tumblety was the murderer because of his difficulties with microfiche and Morman librarians?

WOWZA.

Stan

[R.J.Palmer]

No Stan, what I really want is for the public to think that the Ripper was John Walsh, Jeremiah O'Donovan Rossa, and Dr. Hamilton Williams, because I sat up one night reading Christie Campbell's Fenian Fire and got to start thinking I was Sherlock Holmes.

[Stan Russo]

Well that's just equally as silly.

Stan

[How Brown]

Fight nice pals...por favor. We gotta good thread going.

Gracias.

[Stan Russo]

How,

I'm sorry if I always wind up starting a fight. I was just reading a post where the poster appeared to tell another researcher that his convictions about a murderer became hardened after struggling with the archaic mechanics of a microfiche machine. I asked if that was the case and the response I got was what followed, to which I responded by saying what I said.

I'm not sure why there needs to be a fight. I've read Fenian Fire and it doesn't make me disbelieve everything else on the case or suddenly believe Tumblety was or wasn't 'JTR'. I'm not sure what that ridiculous response was even meant to do.

Stan

[How Brown]

Stosh:

I dig,I dig. It wasn't "aimed" at anyone in particular... Essentially,I made that comment hoping that R.J. would elaborate as he planned to do with more on why he feels so strongly about Tumbelty. I apologize for coming off in the wrong way,buddy.

[Stan Russo]

no apology necessary my brutha from anutha mutha.

In case I read it wrong,I think RJ did explain why he believes in Tumblety so strongly. It has something to do with a microfiche machine and Morman women.

Stan

[R.J.Palmer]

Howard - In response to your earlier message last night. No offense taken. None in the least; my post of yesterday came out in white heat-- but not out of anger--but because the office was closing up (5.30 pm) and I was trying to dash it off as I headed out the door. Always a big mistake. It came out sloppy and frenetic, but that wasn’t my intention.

I like AP, and if I didn’t, I wouldn’t bother pointing it out when he stumbles. And he’s stumbling badly. And yet, he’s a worthy and noble adversary so I don’t fear any serious rift if I give him a little resistance. Do me a favor and read the following twice, and read it slowly.

One of the many problems I have with criminologists is that they’ve created a false taxonomy. Sadly, AP Wolf, who knows better, is really heading down this same road. The field of criminology developed in that most deranged of ages, the Victorian age--a time when everything was being ‘classified’ and placed in neat little boxes--just like a zoologist would go about doing things. The bank robbers were lumped in one category with the other bank robbers, the rapists in a second box with other rapists, and, thanks to our old friend Krafft-Ebing, the ‘sexual serial killers’ were given a nice little pigeonhole of their own.

Perhaps somewhere in your reading, Howard, you may have come across the term ‘descriptive.’ When it’s used, it’s not meant in a nice way. When I say the ‘explanation’ that the profilers and criminologist offer up to explain sexual serial killing is ‘descriptive,’ I don’t mean it in a nice way, either. Ted Bundy, they tell us, had sex with his victims so he we will call him a ‘sexual serial killer.’ David Berkowitz didn’t, so we’ll have to call him a psychopath. Simple, eh? For Bundy, sex is the “explanation,” just like it was with Kurten, etc., so no need to think any further. It becomes safe to turn off our brains now. And by gawd, we know all this is true because John Douglas (that most insightful of men) interviewed Bundy and told is it was all about ‘sex.’ The knife, of course, is a penis. And when Bundy used a crowbar, I guess that was just a bigger penis.

Anyone with even half a brain ought to see how circular and ‘descriptive’ this is. Have we really found what makes Teddy tick with this gibberish? I don’t think so. Anyone with 3/4 of a brain can see that in making up a taxonomy one runs the risk of not seeing the bigger picture. AP says that Thomas Neil Cream didn’t hack up women with a knife, so he’s placing him in a different box. All fine and good; AP’s playing the taxonomy game, too, and thinks I’m dumb enough to bite. And perhaps another criminologist writes-off Cream as an insurance swindler. But can’t you see, my friend, how self-deluding this is? Can’t you see the enormous similarity between a guy like Berkowitz and a guy like Bundy? Or one of those reprehensible nurses who --for no apparent reason-- poisons off 50 or 60 elderly patients? Or even the disturbed kid who, instead of picking off an ‘unfortunate’ every other week, goes in for mass murder and shoots up his school in one blaze of horror and posts it all on the internet beforehand?

We need to wake up, because we’ve been fed a mountain of horse shit for decades, and it may take decades more to realize it, particulary when you have blokes popping up on the internet repeating the garbage their reading out of Ressler &co. The trouble with Ripperologists is that they love it too much. They love what they do. No offense, my friend, but to flip Oscar Wilde on his ear, ever man refuses to kill the thing he loves.

What I’m inviting you to do, Howard, is to imagine a general theory of murderers of this ‘type’ that goes beyond the superficial redescriptions of their acts. I’m suggesting we zero on the real issue that all these very different criminals have in common; if we don't’, we have no right whatsoever to determine who is a ‘likely’ suspect, and who isn’t. I’m not a guru, Howard, just an ordinary bloke like you, but let me suggest an insight that I think I have. Forget the gibberish about lustmord, or Russo’s conspiracy theories. All crimes of this sort have one thing in common: they are profoundly --profoundly-- social acts. If that sounds simplistic, think about it deeply. They are profoundly social acts. And because society changes in profound ways, it is very misleading to take case histories from one society and superimpose them on another. No truly thoughtful historian would do it.

Anyone who wants to pawn off on me the idea that so-called serial murderers (and I don’t like the term) are ‘explained’ by ‘lustmord’ or some genetic flaw needs to explain a couple of things, beyond first explaining why they’re willing to settle for a transparently descriptive term. Why are these aberrations appearing in vastly different rates in different cultures? Why are so many of these perpetrators coming from broken homes? Think about it. Ken Bianchi, adopted. Ted Bundy, unwed mother, adopted father. Aileen Wuornos, adopted. Joel Rifkin, adopted. Joseph Kallinger, adopted. David Berkowitz, adopted. Albert DeSalvo, not adopted, by horrific childhood and institutionalized as a troubled teen. Carl Panzram, ditto; spent his childhood in reform schools. The list goes on. There is no rational or scientific explanation why so many killers allegedly suffering from a genetic disorder (be it lustmord, or psychopathy) would be coming from a background that was determined after conception. It don’t jive. Come on, man, you come from the mean streets of Philly and know bullsh*t when you see it. And hey, I hasten to add that I have nothing against adoption. God Bless Angelina Jolie, she’s saintly and I have no doubt her kids are getting a fabulous home. But can’t you see that for certain individuals, coming from an inadequate social background would be crippling to their social identity? How else, Howard, are you going to explain those urban gang-bangers with their thick gold chains, $200 Nikes, and all their extremely exaggerated set of social codes, where to ‘disrespect’ someone by flashing the wrong bandana color, is going to get you knifed? They come from broken homes, my friend, and great poverty. See it for what it is. Their exaggerated sense of prestige and superficial wealth is an overcompensation for the little kid inside who didn’t know his father, and had to use water on his cornflakes instead of milk. The serial-killer comes in many forms, but the driving force is still the same. Little Tommy Cutbush didn’t have a dad, his family had problems, and he had a driving ambition to be a doctor, a somebody. His writing to Grimthorpe is highly suggestive. He thought of himself as a mover & shaker, and a young man who deserved to be heard by these toffs he read about in the papers. ANd when it all came crashing down for little Tommy, he went out and soothed his ego by stabbing women in the buttocks on the pavement. He’s another social failure all over again, Renwick Williams.

You asked me yesterday about the difference between 19th Century serial-killers and the modern variety. If you’re with me so far, realize that all this talk about brain chemistry is bunk. Social identity is the driving force, and thus as society changes in profound ways, so do these blokes change--who they are, where they are coming from, and the ‘form’ they are taking. But the force behind these acts stays the same. Let me introduce you to a name that you may or may not know. A 19th Century murderer. “Dr. Edward Prichard. Early VIctorian Era, his dates are 1825-1865. I suspect that almost immediately Dan Norder or someone else will pop in and tell you that Prichard didn’t kill women in alleyways with a knife. But remember: I’m not ‘into’ taxonomy and i’m not into descriptive classifications. The guy murdered at least one servant girl, and he slowly poisoned both his wife and another nursemaid to death with antimony, Body count at least three, maybe more. Now let’s look at Dr. Pritchard. We don’t know much about his youth, but Pritchard was a social-climber. He bragged endlessly. He b.s’d his way into the Royal Navy and later padded his meager medical qualifications with bogus credentials. One of his greatest peculiarities is that he printed up dozens of daguerreotypes of his own image, in an age when this sort of thing wasn’t cheap, and liked handing them out to strangers. He owned a gold-caned walking staff engraved “From your great friend Garibaldi’--but, of course, he wasn’t REALLY Garibaldi’s friend. Does this guy sound the least bit familiar to you? It is impossible for a guy like Pritchard to appear nowadays, because the social conditions have changed. It's just taken on a different form.
Because of their tragic or inadequate social-backgrounds, these blokes have ENORMOUS social pretensions, HOward. Enormous. The gang-banger twice over. ANd when it starts unraveling for them, they snap. IT goes in two ways. They either they strike out at those who represent the failure of their own social pretensions, or they strike out at the ‘scum’ at the lowest tier in the social strata. It’s not too difficult to see which choice the Ripper made. Bundy, he chose the former path. Abandoned by his birthfather, he grew up in poverty, but had great ambitions. He was smart and handsome and likable, but the magnet of his background seemed to drag him down. He was a failure in law-school and dropped out. In his young adulthood he met a societal girl from Frisco, a wealthy model type. She dumped him. When Bund started killing, it this girlfriend that he was killing--over and over. He chose the college suburbs because that’s what represented his social failure the most. The failed promise of his college years and the girl that dumped him. And when Bundy was finally caught, he was most alive, because then he could play the part of the lawyer he always wanted to be, complete with a bow-tie. The other type is represented by the half-dozen or more murders in recent decades who killed bums and transients across America.
How does this relate to Tumilty? You see, Howard, AP can’t win this argument. He can kick against the pricks, but I’ve got him dead to rights. The very things that makes AP and the rest of the Ripperolgy “hoot’ and slap their knees with the laughter are the same things that ought to make you realize there is something seriously, seriously screwed-up about this guy. They just can’t see it. They’re misreading the evidence. Our friend Joe C. is wrong on one point. Tumilty did not have a wealthy family. This guy came out of Dublin in 1847 and landed in the worst slum in Liverpool. His family was dirt poor Irish who had just gone through one of the worst social catastrophes in the history of the modern world --the Irish potato famine. I’ve traced his sister to the worst slum in Europe. When Tumilty landed in America the Irish were literarily the riffraff of society, scum of the earth. One fellow citizen in Rochester later said of Tumilty after he had transformed himself into Dr. Tumblety, “He has become very aristocratic.” See it for what it is, Howard, its Dr. Eward Pritchard all over again. Instead of Garibald’s walking stick it’s military outfits, greyhounds, and medals pinned to his chest. The 19th Century press wrote him up as a buffoon because they had no other way of processing him. And the 19th Century murderer was different than the modern nobody who kills for the sake of CNN Headline news, because the social conditions were profoundly different. There was great class distinctions...particularly in London. A man merely had to put on a fancy suit and a thick gold watch chain and he suddenly became a ‘gentleman’ instead of a filthy pauper. But deep down, the impostor knows he’s an impostor, and when he can’t fake it anymore, watch out bud. Tumblety, as you know, wrote ridiculous pamphlets in his ‘defense.’ There’s a story of Tumbelty after 1889 going around with a pocket full of these pamphlets, handing them out on omnibuses and trains. Know somebody else who wrote a pamphlet, Howard? It’s not well known, but that most Ripper-like of murderers, Andrei Chikalito--also a child of famine, but in his case, Stalin’s forced starvation of the Ukraine-- printed up a little pamphlet in his own defense, too. “A Biography of the Defendant A.R. Chikatilo, Citizen of the USSR, Victim of Famine and Cannibalism in 1933 and 1947, Stalinist Repressions, Stagnation, and the Crisis of Perestroika.” The same overblown, pompous tone of Tumblety's own productions, but written by Chikalito himself, instead of a rent-boy Tumblety hired for the purpose, and comparing himself to a Chancellor in the Communist Party instead of Charles Stewart Parnell.
Howard, old friend. I realize your skepticism. I understand the image that is hard to swallow. Believe me, I know it. Tumblety runs 100% counter to everything we are taught. Everyting that the Resslers are yelling from the roof-tops. But I know this guy. I;ve chased him in the windy streets in San Francisco, I followed him up to Toronto, and I’ve seen his shadow in Whitechapel Road. I’ve studied him long and hard and I understand him now. There is no reason in hell you should believe me. AP, Russo, Norder, and the whole host of ‘Ripperologist’ can all write me off as a flake. So be it. But mark my words, they are seriously misreading this guy. at the end of the day this is the guy that’s gong to be the real McCoy. He was a bottomless pit of social pretension, and when he finally snapped, the women died in the slums.

All the best, RJ Palmer

P.S. In response to Russo's smart-ass remark. I realize I'm being a bit arrogant. But yeah, there is a difference with a microfilm reader, bud. One is a little ol' suggestion offered up by Alex Chisholm years ago. Don't read the article, read the whole page. If you read this stuff out of context you're lost. Because context is everything. The second thing is nothing that comes cheap is likely to do you anygood. One need the days of disappointment, the hours of self-doubt, and those moments when you realize you're on a fool's errand. One rung at a time, Russo, one rung at a time, or you never get to the top.

[Stan Russo]

"smart ass remark"? I asked you a simple question. You responded with a dick head answer. In your post, you make it seem that because you labored through an archaic machine to read articles about Tumblety that no one else had, that means he did it.

Dan Farson worked longer, harder and with much tougher material/machinery/methodology than you did. Why wouldn't that mean MJ Druitt did it?

Simple question - is that not what you meant when you wrote that post?

Stan

[Dan Norder]

Actually, RJ, the major problem with Ripperologists is that so many of them work so hard to ignore things like actual history, real evidence, and what known serial killers do all so they can replace it with whatever nonsense they cam up with off the top off their heads one day just because they happened to be reading through some old newspaper report that had been seen already been discarded as completely unreliable.

People spend so much time attacking criminology, psychology, forensics, sociology and so forth in the hopes that if they can tear it down and that suddenly whatever bizarre theory they've come up with will win by default. What they don't understand if that you can't just dismiss the sum of human knowledge through some ill-informed internet rant, and even if you could throw that all out, their own theories are still wouldn't be the ones at the top of the heap when the dust clears, because there's still nothing there to hold it together any more than the hundreds of other ideas that get tossed around. It's just a slash and burn ethic because they don't know how to make an actual case for what they want people to believe... and as long as they fight against the only tools we have for being able to sort out nonsense from sense they never will be able to come up with any arguments other than "I want to believe it, so it must be right."

[A.P. Wolf]

What truly makes me uncomfortable here is that an independent, unbiased researcher with absolutely no interest or knowledge in the Whitechapel Murders can come along and completely, utterly and successfully dismiss the notion of Tumblety as an abortionist in his early career in Canada.
For this is what McCulloch has done in his stunning report on Tumblety's early career in Canada, and he has done it entirely with factual evidence gained from original reports and documents of the time; and he doesn't offer opinion or theory but just plain old simple facts.
Writers and researchers have for years used Tumblety's alleged involvement in abortions as a ground base for their argument that Tumblety was the Whitechapel Murderer, as this was a direct indication of his 'hatred' for women and prostitutes in particular, as the 'victim' of his botched abortion attempt was a prostitute.
As I've said over on the 'Tumblety in Canada' thread it does appear that Tumblety was never technically tried in a court of law for this alleged offence, as a Grand Jury ruled that there was 'No True Bill' in his case. This is a complete and utter acquittal and Tumblety would have carried no criminal record.
In other words, from the point of view of the law, no offence had been committed.
As I've also said on this thread, it does appear to me that we as dwellers of the time we inhabit might well be making a base error of judgement by claiming that Tumblety was a woman 'hater', or a man who 'despised' woman because the press of that time said he was. I honestly think that such phrases were used at that time to describe a man who was a homosexual.
They couldn't after all say he was.
So they hinted at it.
Basically I do feel that if the very base work and ground - that writers and researchers use to justify their claims that Tumblety could have been the Whitechapel Murderer - has been wiped out, as it has been done by McCulloch here, then... well, they ain't got a leg to stand on.
Let alone anywhere to put that single leg down.
The ground has gone... and the rest?

[A.P. Wolf]

I'm also worried about the apects of considering Tumblety as a person with 'class' or 'social' aspirations and problems.
In July of 1880 the good Dr Tumblety was in possession of over $100,000 worth of US government bonds - see the 'New York Herald of 4th December 1888 for more detail - and I reckon that made him a very wealthy man indeed, and massive wealth has no class or social aspiration.
He didn't need to worry about his background. Least of his worries.
Even the American detectives of 1888 laughed at the suggestion that Tumblety was the Whitechapel Murderer as this report demonstrates:
New York Times
December 4, 1888
"Watching Dr. Tumblety" "Dr." Francis Tumblety, who left his bondsmen in London in the lurch, arrived by La Bretagne of the Transatlantic Line Sunday. Chief Inspector Byrnes had no charge whatever against him, but he had him followed so as to secure his temporary address, and will keep him in view as a matter of ordinary police precaution. Mr. Byrnes does not believe that he will have to interfere with Tumblety for anything he may have done in Europe, and laughs at the suggestion that he was the Whitechapel murderer or his abettor or accomplice. The man who is supposed to be Tumblety came over on the steamship as "Frank Townsend," and kept in his stateroom, under the plea of sickness.

[R.J.Palmer]

A little knowledge is always a dangerous thing. Oh Ye of little faith, AP. I really expected you'd be able to think a little more clearly. The simple fact that you're marching arm & arm with what Dan Norder has been spouting for the better part of 3 years should be enough to scare you sober, but, as I say, theorize in haste, repent at leisure....

[R.J.Palmer]

Norder - As I said earlier, you're not a hard guy to figure out. We know you support "Science." The trouble is, would the scientists support Dan Norder? From where I'm looking, I'd have to say "no." I asked you this question many times, Norder, but you never answer. You merely get angry and start ranting. What are the scientific credentials of John Douglas? What are the scientific credentials of Robert Ressler? Show me a single independent scientific study that verifies the reality of anything these fellows are saying. Show me a single scientific study that identifies "serial killing" as a biological disorder known as 'lustmord.' I wannt the names of scientific journals, and the citations out the articles. You're merely regurgitating all the clichés, and I've never been under the impression that you've ever even given it much thought.

And while you're at it, please give some specific examples of the 'historical facts' that I'm allegedly ignoring. What would these "facts" be?

Many thanks for your cooperation. RP

[A.P. Wolf]

RJ
my faith is enormous.
Tumblety as an abortionist was dismantled in 1993, but almost 15 years later it still comes up for discussion; and still forms the essential detail for the personification of his so-called 'evil' nature.
But it never really happened, did it?
The trial was thrown out of court by a Grand Jury, wasn't it?
I do wonder what will happen when we examine some of his other 'crimes', in a little more detail, which I will do in due course, of course without opinion or prejudice.
As I always do.

Just on another score, much is always made of Tumblety's erratic wanderings around North America, the implication perhaps being that he was always on the 'run' from some criminal affair or the other, but McCulloch also shot that down in 1993, didn't he?
Herbalists were itinerant by the very nature of their work, in Britain and North America, simply because their customer base was limited to one shot, which usually didn't work, and then they had to move on because of that.
Killing customers was not good business practice.
You do know that Tumblety had set himself the task of removing the population from the 'iron grasp of mercury and other mineral poisons', the type of stuff that Thomas Cutbush was dabbing on his face, which eventually drove him to the edge where he began to stab the beast that could not cure him, and then in his desperation he wrote to the Great Indian Herbal Doctor in the House of Parliament... Lord Grimthorpe.

[A.P. Wolf]

I have to assume that with the 'murder' of Portmore by Tumblety you guys are playing an April Fool on me?
Tumblety was giving Portmore 'parsley tea' to help relax his stomach problems.
What a bastard of a killer Tumblety was!!!!!!!!!!!
Parsley tea!!!!
Gets 'em everytime. Who needs a blade when you got good old Parsley tea.
Dr William F Humphrey was actually the doctor who was looking after Portmore shortly before his death, supplying a terminally ill man with 'purgatives' - which Portmore threw up - and then applying leeches to his stomach.
Next time I get stomach ache I shall apply a dozen blood sucking creatures to my belly and no doubt die suddenly and blame...
errrr... blood sucking leeches that might have poisoned me.
Nah, this ain't working boys, and is really getting to be quite pathetic.

[R.J.Palmer]

AP -

“You do know that Tumblety had set himself the task of removing the population from the 'iron grasp of mercury and other mineral poisons', the type of stuff that Thomas Cutbush was dabbing on his face, which eventually drove him to the edge where he began to stab the beast that could not cure him...”

Now it’s my turn to hoot with laughter, AP. I’ve been at this longer than you, old friend. Tumblety fed his patients syrup water, opium, and alcohol, not caring if they lived or died. And when they complained, he occassionally kicked them down stairwells. He was constantly on the move because he was constantly run-out-of-town on a rail. Keep digging, old boy, and when you come to the part where he beats up street urchins, come back and tell me of his humanitarianism. But every jailbird deserves a jailhouse lawyer, AP, so have fun while it lasts.

Concerning Tumblety’s wealth. You’re a brilliant chap. Do me a little favor, because I would seriously like to hear you on this. What is your philosophy of murder? How would you explain an O.J. Simpson? American football player. In the Hall of Fame. Household name. Man of great wealth and prestige and sex appeal. The cliché, I suppose, would be “he had it all.” Yet, beyond all reasonable doubt, he slips out one night and risks throwing it all away by committing an unthinkably appalling act: slashing to death his ex-wife and her boyfriend with a knife. Most Ripper like, but since he's not a serialist, will exclude him from the Ressler Box. How would you, AP Wolf, explain this remarkable act of irrationality and violence? Too much mercury in his nose powder? Or would you just quote Othello, shrug it off as ‘jealousy’, and not ask yourself from where this jealousy sprang? From where in his psyche did this rage come? Marcel Petiot had wealth, too. But I'm starting to suspect, AP, that you’re a Paul Verlain to my Rimbaud. You sip expensive brandy in your hotel, and I swill cheap beer when I’m not working a lathe. THus we see things differently. You’ve heard about ‘blue-collar rage’ in a book, but it doesn’t seem real to you, having never been around it. It doesn’t strike you as any more real than Fairy Land. But I could be wrong on that point--let me know if I am.
There are some noble words, by I think, Jesse Jackson, and I am embarrassed to say I can’t necessarily even quote them accurately. “You can put me in the ghetto, but you can’t put the ghetto in me.” In the long history of mankind, we have thousands of stories that illustrate this spirit. People who have endured the most appalling degradation and kept their pride and sense of self. And certainly, for a well-integrated person, this is possible--even necessary. But what do you do with those individuals who, for reason known and unknown, aren’t well integrated? That DO have the ghetto in them? Tell me AP, you’re going to give someone like Carl Panzram $100,000--which he obtained illegally by bilking women and farmers in a slum--and it’s somehow going to take away his rage? Make him lie down with the lambs? Maybe. It’s possible. But I’m under the impression that it might be otherwise. RP

[Joe Chetcuti]

Do you recollect Dr. Tumblety who came to St. Johns about 1860 and who used to ride about on a beautiful white horse with a long tail, and a couple of greyhounds following him?...And do you recollect how it was asserted that he killed Old Portmore, the carpenter who built the extension to my house?...He is the man who was arrested in London three weeks ago as the Whitechapel murderer.

Those were excerpts from a Dec 1, 1888 letter written by a Deputy Minister of Ottawa named H.M. Smith. This Portmore killing must have made quite a news story in St. Johns in its day. Here it was 28 years later, and a government official still vividly recalled the details about the victim and where the focus of attention had been placed in terms of who was doing the killing. Because of the massive St. Johns fire of June 20, 1877 I bet we won't find any existing coroner's report on this death. Fortunately the press spoke of Dr. Humphrey and Dr. Bolsford's post mortem examination of Portmore. It can be looked at here:

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/morning_freeman/600929.html

As for Tumblety and the abortion issue, I think it would be really good if thorough research can be conducted some time on Lispenard's Clinic. It'll make for fine reading to see what type of men of medicine this place was producing and what the clinic's specialty was.

Here is an old Casebook item that some of you might once again find interesting. It was brought to us by a couple of superb researchers. Back in February 2005, Tim Riordan posted the lyrics of a 19th century song entitled "The carte-de-visite album." Jeff Bloomfield did an excellent job of providing us with a history of the lyrics. One part of the song went:

"The famous Doctor Tumblety
The knight of pill and pestle
Stuck in a corner there you'd see
Along with Madame Restell."

The reason why Dr. Tumblety and Madame Restell were placed together was of no secret back then. Jeff explained:

Madame Restell was Mrs. Anna Lohmon, the wife of a quack doctor (sound familiar) who - when he died - became very rich. Her mansion on Fifth Avenue (the site is now the site of the Empire State Building) was imposing. It was called, "the mansion built of baby skulls." You see, Restell was New York's leading abortionist.

The story had a tragic ending though. Unlike her lyrical partner and fellow occupationalist, Madame Restell committed suicide once her abortion practice was exposed. It's great that Jeff and Tim are still going strong in this field of research.

[How Brown]

Dear R.J.

Thanks very much for the post from last night. Its much appreciated.

As I mentioned previously,I'm not as interested in the suspects as I used to be...in the usual sense,at least. I think that more information on these individuals will continue to surface and will affect how we percieve them in the future. This is the "game" that moves as you play it. I'm interested in looking at them "backwards",as people before suspects... in order to keep an open mind and learn more of the times and the whole of the case.

I find your explanation of the social identity concept intriguing,whether it defines Tumbelty as the Ripper or not. At one time,I had my own Stephenson-as-Ripper concept which was based on social identity ( actually, I theorized RDS as a social misfit,based on elements within his life that appear to indicate RDS's failure to live up to his or others' expectations of him and not as a sinister,hocus pocus magi...) issues.


I think you make excellent points about the environment that these people came from... in being determinants in the criminal behavior and crimes each committed. None came from exactly the same environment ( by degree ),nor they did commit the identical crimes....yet all had similarly bad starts to life.

One scientific theory that actually might unite Dan ( the 'science' guy ) and yourself about all of us featherless bipeds is the theory that as infant humans, we make noises and cry....not out of hunger or a need for warmth....but to get socially connected ( by means of a hug or human contact/touch ) in order to know we are therefore going to get warm and an available teat because of that hug/ social contact. Our brains need to begin their hardwiring from human contact equally as the obvious need to eat and keep warm as infants is to the immediate physical. I saw this today on the Discovery Channel in a program about feral children on the Is It Real? series. A Dr.Nelson from Harvard discussed it.

This Dr. Nelson stated that if we do not recieve the external stimuli our brains need...changes in the brain occur which manifest themselves in different ways and are unalterable.

I bring this up here...not to champion or dismiss Tumbelty...but in a hope that this subject/suspect is used as a template for suspect-study.

A cursory examination of the events in Tumbelty's life reveal...and there's no way anyone can deny it...a "social death wish" in his behavior,whether in church,with scams,his indecency charges,etc....From here,it looks to me like he probably was a few hugs short as an infant and his lifelong behavior was compensatory as R.J. theorizes.

A cursory examination of the events in Tumbelty's post flight from bail life are in want of an explanation as to why how he survived a meltdown to murder for nearly 15 years up until his death in 1903....From here,it also and equally appears to me that here was an individual who was in complete control and comfortable with his flight,since he was so accustomed to what "to do in case of social emergency" situations....

Since we do not know (yet ) everything about Tumbelty at this time....maybe in the interest of this suspect...and in fact,all suspects....we might want to break Tumbelty up into separate and individual threads on these and other issues about the man.

Obviously and because this should never be a consideration on this site...should Roger or anyone else wish to establish "workshop" threads to share ideas...they don't need affirmation from Tim or myself. Thats what the site is for.

You see,lumping all the information that we have on a suspect or even an aspect at times creates a Chinese fire drill atmosphere where concepts criss cross and muddy the waters. This is what has happened ( much to my doing) on RDS here.

Tumbelty,by virtue of the attention he garnered back in 1888 and today,is a viable suspect and I,for one,think that since so much of his life is known,under scrutiny,debated,argued, and theorized in various ways as the Ripper, should be discussed more with all the cards on the table....

Thanks again,R.J...


***************************

On another note...

R.J.'s mentioning of the social identity issues in regard to the "why" or cause of the several killers he mentioned and their crimes is exactly what I was looking for on that "Motiveless Murders?" thread.

In the haste to put that thread up,I wound up twiddling my thumbs in trying to differentiate between "motive" or "reason".

I think that "social identity" issues are motiveless. The expressions of rage that these killers fulfilled in murder...whether by serial killing or mass murder...or whatever....were always there in dormancy since childhood. They just need or require the proper trigger.

In most examples of Tim Mosley's 32 Motives and Reasons, invariably most were developed over a period of time due to specifics. Drugs,disease,acquired mental conditions,events of violence,conspiratorial,etc..etc..

Even though its not germane to this thread...I just wanted to mention this. Thanks R.J.

[A.P. Wolf]

I'm afraid I struggle with RJ's thoughts on the social background of an individual perhaps shaping his future role as a killer, especially as he points out in cases where the individual has had no 'father figure' in their early life.
Although I can generally run with his concept, it is particularly with Tumblety that I struggle, for I am not right in assuming that Tumblety did not lose his father until he was in his early 20's?
The early 20's are hardly the formative years of an individual's social make up and attitudes.

Another concept I struggle with is that of a serial killer - capable of astonishingly swift and murderously devastating attacks upon women, and then making good his escape in what must have been an equally swift and rapid method, without ever being detected doing so - who is practically drawing his old age pension.
Surely Tumblety was knocking 60 when he was in England in 1888?
Yes, one could see such a man carrying out crimes against small children just like Albert Fish did, but the Whitechapel Murders and a pensioner?
Nah... get outta 'ere.

[Stan Russo]

still waiting on an answer to my question RJ

Stan

[A.P. Wolf]

Hey Joe
just going back to Madame Restell for a moment.
The quote about her mansion being built on baby skulls is the following:

'Assistant District Attorney Fellows complained that "Every brick in that splendid mansion might represent a little skull, and the blood that infamous woman has shed might have served to mix the mortar."

Did she commit suicide? Or was she....?
Hush now, boy.

[Joe Chetcuti]

http://www.casebook.org/forum/messages/4922/16324.html

On Jeff's Monday Feb 21, 2005 posting at 2:49pm he informed us that in April 1878 Madame Restell went into her bathroom and cut her own throat. Her death is shown on the Internet as April 1878. If I'm wrong about my conclusion that she committed suicide, please show me where I've erred.

I'm on to other thing now. All in all, I think these two threads were pretty good. I think deep down AP knows we're all men and women here, and there are no boys and girls amongst us. Keep these threads informative and keep them clean folks, and we'll all do just fine.

Joe

[A.P. Wolf]

Sorry Joe, my last post was perhaps unclear.
I was saying 'hush' to myself as the boy around here.
For mooting the idea that Madame Restell may have actually been murdered.
Which she could have been.
My sincere apologies for any confusion.

[A.P. Wolf]

And did Madame Restell suicide herself or did she do a 'Mary Kelly'?
From 'The North American', April 4th 1878:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/restell1.jpg

[How Brown]

How about that ! Nice find A.P.

Just as an aside...because I am nosey...and not to divert the thread: Do you believe MJK was the body found in Millers Court?

I do and more than ever based on Don Souden's article in issue 26 of Ripper Notes. I cannot see her identity being "missed" by not only Barnett,but by Indian Harry and Johnny Mac.

Back to this great thread...I apologize for the intrusion.

[Stan Russo]

How,

I don't recall "Indian Harry" identifying her, other than going to collect rent and looking through the window, then telling McCarthy.

An interesting aside - why was Bowyer sent to collect rent? She was approximately 8 weeks overdue and there has been a link to McCarhty as being one of her relatives. The whole collecting rent seems a bit strange, given all the circumstances.

Stan

[How Brown]

Stosh:

What I should have said was that only Barnett was asked to identify her. My mistake. I suppose I assumed Bowyer would have "recognized" her as McCarthy would have "recognized" her,had they looked at the torso like I think they may have. But in the end,you are right...Barnett is the only one for sure to have been asked or required to identify her.

[SirRobertAnderson]

An interesting aside - why was Bowyer sent to collect rent? She was approximately 8 weeks overdue and there has been a link to McCarhty as being one of her relatives. The whole collecting rent seems a bit strange, given all the circumstances.



An intriguing question, and one that doesn't get asked enough IMHO.

Here's a thought : what if McCarthy heard or saw something funky in the night, didn't care to intervene or seek the police, and sent Bowyer around to "collect" but to actually see if all was well in Kelly's room ? If she's OK, no harm no foul. And if not, McCathy doesn't have to explain why he was concerned in the first place.

[A.P. Wolf]

Thanks How, for the moment I'm going to resist answering your question about Mary Kelly, and continue with the mysterious death of Madame Restell.
For as the 'Cleveland Leader' of April 1878 pointed out:
'It was curious that a woman like Madame Restell, skilled in the use of drugs, should kill herself with a carving knife when she might have taken poison.'

Now that is a very good point indeed.

The 'Inter Ocean' of April 4th, 1878, reported the following:
http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/rest11.jpg

[Robert Linford]

How, Mccarthy identified Kelly at the inquest.

According to Hutchinson, he too was asked to view the body, though we don't know whether he was able to give further confirmation. I've also seen reference to women looking into the room, but again, no known result. So as far as I know, there were just the two sworn IDs, Barnett and McCarthy.

Robert

[A.P. Wolf]

The 'Inter Ocean' further reported on April 5th, 1878; and this was followed by a report in the 'Daily Rocky Mountain News' on the 13th April 1878:



http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/rest22.jpg

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/rest33.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

Then years later in July of 1889 one is able to find a report in the 'Bangor Daily Whig and Courier' which astonishingly reads:

'Madame Restell is alive and resident in Paris, the body in the bathtub was a Madame Really who died while being treated at Madame Restell's house. The throat was cut after death.'

Now, do I believe that the body found in Miller's Court was Mary Jane Kelly?
Nah... I reckon it was Mary M'Carthy.

[Stan Russo]

A.P.,

Interesting. Almost as interesting as when I pointed out that it was not Mary Kelly, four years ago.

Stan

[How Brown]

Robert:

One question,sir....

...I was under the impression that what McCarthy meant was that he "saw" the body in the room...from outside the flat and not at the Inquest. If I am wrong,thanks for the correction. I know he stated he was certain it was her...but I felt that this observation was based,as I said,from outside the flat.

Barnett,obviously,got close enough to mention that it was her by "ear and eyes". I just didn't know McCarthy "got that close".

Thanks.

[How Brown]

Thanks for the information on Mme.Restell., A.P.

Sir Bob:

Thats not a bad idea either...what you mentioned:

"what if McCarthy heard or saw something funky in the night, didn't care to intervene or seek the police, and sent Bowyer around to "collect" but to actually see if all was well in Kelly's room ? If she's OK, no harm no foul."

I don't know about anyone else...but it has always been a little unusual to me that a man would do what Bowyer did when he got to her door...got no answer and then invaded her flat by pulling the rag.

I know in Philly,you will get shot if you try that stuff....but then again,maybe they were acquainted "enough"...and since there weren't any noises emanating from the room...the only room after all...he figured it wouldn't hurt to do what he did.

[SirRobertAnderson]

..but it has always been a little unusual to me that a man would do what Bowyer did when he got to her door...got no answer and then invaded her flat by pulling the rag.

I know in Philly,you will get shot if you try that stuff.....

IMHO, only two explanations:

1) Landlord decided that VERY MORNING WAS THE MORNING THEY HAD TO ABSOLUTELY HAVE THE RENT

0r

2) They were concerned about something that went bump in the night.

And it was a piece of real estate that had more than a few bumps.

[Robert Linford]

Hi How

McCarthy wouldn't have seen the body at the inquest. He'd have gone into the room on the ninth. I can't now put my finger on a press report that he actually entered the room, but I've always believed that he did. In any case, the police wouldn't have been content with an ID through the window. They'd have wanted McCarthy to see the blody close-up, if not in the room then later at the mortuary.

Robert

[How Brown]

Dear Bob:

Its probably one of those "details" that wasn't necessary to explain in any great length( that Mac went into the room,which I'm sure he did as you say ).

Thank you,sor...

[Robert Linford]

How, this is from McCarthy's statement in the Times Nov 10th, copied from Casebook :

So soon as Superintendent Arnold arrived he gave instructions for the door to be burst open. I at once forced the door with a pickaxe, and we entered the room. The sight we saw I cannot drive away from my mind. It looked more like the work of a devil than of a man. The poor woman's body was lying on the bed, undressed. She had been completely disembowelled, and her entrails has been taken out and placed on the table. It was those that I had seen when I looked through the window and took to be lumps of flesh.

[A.P. Wolf]

While we are on the subject of Tumblety and McCarthy I thought this following report from 'The Daily Picayune' of November 26th, 1888 to be quite riveting:

'The 'Boston Pepper Box', a flash magazine in the (illegible but probably 1850's) declared that Tumblety was an adventurer... his true name being McCarthy.'

That would sort of explain everything.

[A.P. Wolf]

Found this little bargain while I was a'roving:

128. Tumblety, [T. F.] A Few Passages in the Life of Dr. Francis Tumblety, The
Indian Herb Doctor, Including his Experience in the Old Capitol Prison, To
which he was Consigned, with a Wanton Disregard to Justice and Liberty. By
Order of Edwin Stanton, Secretary of War. Also Journalistic and
Documentary Vindication of His Name and Fame, and Professional
Testimonials Respectfully Inscribed to the American Public.
Cincinnati: Published by the Author, 1866, first edition, 12mo, 82 pp., original
printed pictorial wrappers, edges of wraps chipped, some dust soiling, else a
very good copy. Tumblety wrote this work to protest his arrest and three week
imprisonment on charges of complicity in the assassination of Abraham
Lincoln. At one time previously Dr. Tumblety had assumed the alias of J. H.
Blackburn, and this confused those investigating the assassination with a case
of mistaken identity. Many years later Tumblety was believed to be Jack the
Ripper. In Stewart P. Evans and Keith Skinner’s The Ultimate Jack the Ripper
Source Book, is found a letter from Chief Inspector John George Littlechild [head
of Special Branch at Scotland Yard 1883-93] to a journalist and author George R.
Sims that says, in part: “I never heard of a Dr. D. in connection with the
Whitechapel murders, but amongst the suspects, and to my mind a very likely
one, was a Dr. T. [which sounds much like D]. He was an American quack
named Tumblety and was at one time a frequent visitor to London and on
those occasions constantly brought under the notice of the police, there being a
large dossier concerning him at Scotland Yard. Although a “Sycopathia [sic]
Sexualis” subject he was not known as a “sadist” [which the murderer
unquestionably was] but his feelings toward women were remarkable and
bitter in the extreme, a fact on record. Tumblety was arrested at the time of the
murders in connection with unnatural offences and charged at Marlborough

Page 51

Street, remanded on bail, jumped his bail, and got away to Boulogne. He
shortly left Boulogne and was never heard of afterwards. It was believed he
committed suicide but certain it is that from this time the “Ripper” murders
came to an end.” Tumblety is also listed in Evans and Paul Gainey’s Jack the
Ripper: First American Serial Killer. Howes T-413
$ 450.00

[A.P. Wolf]

Joe asked me to post this some considerable time ago, but I forgot all about it.
This is Tumblety in New York in 1891 - still - offering to adopt the 19 year old stowaway Samuel Sickerman and give him an education.
I dread to think what kind of education the good doctor planned to give him.
One thing is for sure though, you can't keep a good man down.

Sorry Joe, the file is so large that it will not load.
The report is in the Daily Inter Ocean of July 25th 1891 if anyone else is able to manipulate it.

[Robert Linford]

Here we go.

[Robert Linford]

I don't know why that's come out as links and why the first file is so indistinct. Must be an effect of the new software. Can we have the old one back?


Robert - there was a setting out of place, presumably from the update. This should now be fixed, from all appearances.

- WTM

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Robert,

How do you have access to so many newspapers? If there's an online resource you can point me towards, I'd be eternally grateful.

[A.P. Wolf]

Thanks for that, Robert, much appreciated.
It's a very interesting case all on its own, even without Tumblety's dubious offer of an education for the boy.
And everyone is looking for Tumblety all over the place, and there he is in New York all the time.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi AP,I cant work up much enthusiasm for Tumblety to be honest though I accept he is important to the case for a number of reasons.
There seem to have been quite a number of such charlatans peddling their dubious wares at the time and he seems to follow the pattern.
Anyway this is mostly to say "hi" and how delighted I am to see you again!
Natalie

[A.P. Wolf]

And I, my dear lady, are absolutely delighted to see you again.

[Robert Linford]

Thanks Tim.