Fletcher Rogers : A Person of Interest

[SirRobertAnderson]

I have been authorized to post the following information. Fletcher Rogers has become a 'person of interest' in the Battlecrease investigation.

Mr. Rogers died in 1891.

Was he the author of the Maybrick Diary ? (My question.)

(The snippet from the Marion Daily Star is from the Casebook.)

Marion Daily Star
Ohio, USA
7 December 1889

The Maybrick Residence

It is a curious coincidence, a London paper notes, that Battlecrease house, the residence of the Maybricks, should have already found a new tenant, and that no other than Fletcher Rogers, the foreman of the coroner's jury before which the inquiry into the death of the late James Maybrick was conducted. The house, which is finely situated near the Mersey, has been thoroughly redecorated.

[Chris G.]

I have been authorized to post the following information. Fletcher Rogers has become a 'person of interest' in the Battlecrease investigation.

Mr. Rogers died in 1891.

Was he the author of the Maybrick Diary ? (My question.)

(The snippet from the Marion Daily Star is from the Casebook.)

Marion Daily Star
Ohio, USA
7 December 1889

The Maybrick Residence

It is a curious coincidence, a London paper notes, that Battlecrease house, the residence of the Maybricks, should have already found a new tenant, and that no other than Fletcher Rogers, the foreman of the coroner's jury before which the inquiry into the death of the late James Maybrick was conducted. The house, which is finely situated near the Mersey, has been thoroughly redecorated.


Hello Sir Bob

I don't think it is particularly suspicious that Fletcher Rogers, the foreman of the coroner's jury who heard the inquest into the death of James Maybrick, lived in Battlecrease after the Maybricks. After all, the coroner's jury would have been made up of well-to-do local men. Rogers probably saw an opportunity to relocate and move into the mansion. Why would we think he might have had anything to do with concocting the Diary?

Chris

[SirRobertAnderson]

Why would we think he might have had anything to do with concocting the Diary?

Chris

I'm hardly a participant in the investigation, so it's catch as catch can.

Working backwards from the Diary having originated from Battlecrease, I can see why Fletcher would be a 'person of interest' if for no other reason that he had a clear connection to the Maybrick case itself.

For more than that, I'll have to wait for the next message slipped under the door.

[Stephen Leece]

Remember the Maybricks only rented the property. Did Fletcher Rogers rent also? Who owned the property?

Regards

Stephen

[SirRobertAnderson]

Remember the Maybricks only rented the property. Did Fletcher Rogers rent also? Who owned the property?

Regards

Stephen

Good questions !

I'll add some: what did Fletcher do for a living ? Where did he live before Battlecrease ?

[Robert Linford]

In 1891 he was visiting the home of a lady of independent means. He had a son and daughter with him. Widower, age 67, cotton broker.

[Robert Linford]

In 81 he was living at 3 Aigburth Rd, but at the time of his death in Dec 91 he was living in Riversdale Rd.

[Robert Linford]

This could be him, if you're into cotton.:happy:

http://books.google.com/books?id=xwznlv0xEO4C&pg=PA237&lpg=PA237&dq=fletcher+rogers&source=web&ots=-FK7FyVT_y&sig=GeWGzkmvNAwUfsmZdGF_lU43j-s#PPA237,M1

[SirRobertAnderson]

Widower, age 67, cotton broker.

A cotton broker ?????? Same line of work as Sir Jim ?

[Robert Linford]

Absolutely, Sir R. Here's his funeral.

LIVERPOOL MERCURY DEC 24th 1891

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/LIv20Merc20dec20242091.jpg

[SirRobertAnderson]

Hmmm...ex President of the Liverpool Cotton Association.

Must have known James Maybrick quite well.

[SirRobertAnderson]

but at the time of his death in Dec 91 he was living in Riversdale Rd.

So he moved into Battlecrease shortly after Maybrick's death, but didn't reside there long. Interesting fellow.

that Battlecrease house, the residence of the Maybricks, should have already found a new tenant, and that no other than Fletcher Rogers, the foreman of the coroner's jury before which the inquiry into the death of the late James Maybrick was conducted

Now I realize this is a stretch, but let me say what is running through my diseased brain. Obviously one of the few remaining textual difficulties with the Diary is the infamous "tin match box empty" which some have claimed was only available in the coroner's report before Fido published it.

Can there be any linkage here ?

[Chris G.]

So he moved into Battlecrease shortly after Maybrick's death, but didn't reside there long. Interesting fellow.

that Battlecrease house, the residence of the Maybricks, should have already found a new tenant, and that no other than Fletcher Rogers, the foreman of the coroner's jury before which the inquiry into the death of the late James Maybrick was conducted

Now I realize this is a stretch, but let me say what is running through my diseased brain. Obviously one of the few remaining textual difficulties with the Diary is the infamous "tin match box empty" which some have claimed was only available in the coroner's report before Fido published it.

Can there be any linkage here ?

How do you make that linkage? If you want to be fanciful you can make the link. Anything is possible in the airless world of Maybrickiana -- at least that's what Paul Feldman appeared to believe. A more legitimate but also partially fanciful question might be to wonder of what cause of death did Fletcher Rogers expire? Poison? :rolleyes:

Chris

[SirRobertAnderson]

How do you make that linkage? If you want to be fanciful you can make the link. Anything is possible in the airless world of Maybrickiana -- at least that's what Paul Feldman appeared to believe. A more legitimate but also partially fanciful question might be to wonder of what cause of death did Fletcher Rogers expire? Poison? :rolleyes:

Chris

I don't know how Rogers died, if he shuffled off in the very convenient way Crashaw did. But I am keener to know if he could get his hands on reports from other cases.

[Robert Linford]

Here is Fletcher's obit, Liverpool Mercury Dec 21st 91.

With 17 children to his name, one might suspect that a weak heart carried him off, but apparently not.

If he did know one or both of the Maybricks, then I'm not sure if he should have been sitting on a jury, but there you go.
http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/LIVERPOOL20MERCURY20DEC20212091.jpg

[Mr. Poster]

There must well be samples of his handwriting somewhere?

p

[Chris G.]

Here is Fletcher's obit, Liverpool Mercury Dec 21st 91.

With 17 children to his name, one might suspect that a weak heart carried him off, but apparently not.

If he did know one or both of the Maybricks, then I'm not sure if he should have been sitting on a jury, but there you go.

"Quite lately he caught a chill, and pneumonia supervening, this was the cause of his death."

Also from the obituary: "When Battlecrease House became vacant he took up the lease formerly held by the late James Maybrick, but dropped the name, using simply the number [7 Riversdale Road]."

The last part might be significant if Fletcher Rogers is mooted to have had any role in the creation of the Diary. Remember the words in the Diary: "I may return to Battlecrease and take the unfaithfull bitch." It sounds as if he was not much interested in remembering or celebrating the Maybricks, otherwise he might not have dropped the name Battlecrease.

I wonder then if he would have been involved in concocting a Diary that used the name Battlecrease. To do so would refocus attention on the very house where he was living. Or, if he was out of the house by the time the Diary became public, it could put the spotlight on him as a principal actor in the coroner's inquiry and a friend or associate of Maybrick's through the cotton business.

Chris

[Robert Linford]

Hi Chris

Well, it's all speculation, but those who want to link Rogers to the coroner's report needn't, I guess, do it directly - he would doubtless have had servants, for example.

As far as I can make out from the brief look I've had, the lady whom he was visiting in 1891 - Alice Sparrow - was his sister.

It seems to me, from looking around, that it would be very possible to contact one or more modern day family members. But I'd better keep out of that, because as I was remarking to someone only this morning, there's nothing worse than establishing contact with someone, only for someone else to come blundering on the scene.

Robert

[SirRobertAnderson]

With 17 children to his name

Busy guy !



If he did know one or both of the Maybricks, then I'm not sure if he should have been sitting on a jury, but there you go.

As the head of the Liverpool Cotton Association and a long time broker, I can't see how he wouldn't have had at least knowledge of Maybrick. I'm not trying to postulate any kind of close association.

I just find his moving into the house so soon after the trial - not to mention lots of folks don't like to live in houses where a murder took place - rather odd. And it's not like he put down roots there, either.

[Robert Linford]

Yes, it is an odd thing to do. People like that normally shun the merest scent of a whiff of notoriety.

[SirRobertAnderson]

Yes, it is an odd thing to do. People like that normally shun the merest scent of a whiff of notoriety.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying it proves anything....but it's odd behavior.

But.....if Keith Skinner is correct in saying the Diary came out of Battlecrease, perhaps we need to look at other occupants rather than James Maybrick himself.

And there is certainly enough about Fletcher to make him a "person of interest".

[Chris G.]

I just find his moving into the house so soon after the trial - not to mention lots of folks don't like to live in houses where a murder took place - rather odd. And it's not like he put down roots there, either.




Yes I agree, that is queer, although I still think it's hard to connect him with the Diary. Almost like moving into Maybrick's coffin, as it were, so soon after the infamous recent events. :rolleyes:

Chris

[SirRobertAnderson]

Yes I agree, that is queer, although I still think it's hard to connect him with the Diary. Almost like moving into Maybrick's coffin, as it were, so soon after the infamous recent events. :rolleyes:

Chris

No argument about a difficult connection, but I think we can agree someone odd enough to sit in on official inquiries into Maybrick's death, and then move into Battlecrease immediately thereafter, is an odd duck. And it would take an odd duck to write something like the Diary.

He writes it, hides it in Battlecrease and moves out, dying shortly thereafter.

It would explain a great deal.

[Paul Butler]

Afternoon all.

I think we should be mindful of Michael Maybrick in all of this. He took charge of everything after his brother's death and we know he arranged to sell off the contents of Battlecrease house with what some might deem to be undue haste. (Poste haste?)

He seems to have been keen to rid himself of the fiancial commitment of his brother's house as quickly as possible, which I suppose is not entirely unreasonable, although the children were quickly parted and taken from the only home they really knew when perhaps the right thing to do would have been to leave them in the house with a couple of the servants for a while.

I can't see how Fletcher-Rogers could NOT have been at the very least passing acquaintances of Jim and Florrie, moving in the same social circles would be inevitable, and if Michael could see a quick way of passing on the lease then I'm sure he'd have taken it.

You'll need to do some more digging Sir Bob. Why is Fletcher-Rogers of interest? Is this connected with Keith Skinner's researches? We need to be told these things!

regards.

Paul

[SirRobertAnderson]

You'll need to do some more digging Sir Bob. Why is Fletcher-Rogers of interest? Is this connected with Keith Skinner's researches? We need to be told these things!

regards.

Paul

Hey Paul ! I post what I learn as I learn it, and am told it's OK to post.

I realize that leads to a tease, but that's the nature of the beast. Researchers that come forward with things Maybrick related have learned through bitter experience that the Net has not been their friend.

I am hoping we can change that.

I can say that I have never spoken to Mr. Skinner. I wouldn't expect him to be very forthcoming, for the simple reason is he doesn't own the research.
For instance, IF someone had hired him to research Mr. Rogers, what he's learned belongs to his employer - not him and certainly not us.

At least we know that Rogers is a person of interest and hopefully we can collectively dig out a few facts ourselves.

[Chris G.]

Afternoon all.

I think we should be mindful of Michael Maybrick in all of this. He took charge of everything after his brother's death and we know he arranged to sell off the contents of Battlecrease house with what some might deem to be undue haste. (Poste haste?)

He seems to have been keen to rid himself of the fiancial commitment of his brother's house as quickly as possible, which I suppose is not entirely unreasonable, although the children were quickly parted and taken from the only home they really knew when perhaps the right thing to do would have been to leave them in the house with a couple of the servants for a while.

I can't see how Fletcher-Rogers could NOT have been at the very least passing acquaintances of Jim and Florrie, moving in the same social circles would be inevitable, and if Michael could see a quick way of passing on the lease then I'm sure he'd have taken it.

You'll need to do some more digging Sir Bob. Why is Fletcher-Rogers of interest? Is this connected with Keith Skinner's researches? We need to be told these things!

regards.

Paul


Hello Paul

While I don't entirely agree with the aim of Anne E. Graham and Carol Emmas to blacken the name of Florence Maybrick as an out-and-out tramp in The Last Victim (Headline Book Publishing, 1999) which benefits the Diary camp -- rather I think she was a naive and impressionable young woman some 26 years younger than her husband and who may have erred with Brierley but no further -- I do buy the idea that Michael Maybrick had undue influence on coroner Samuel Brighouse. I discuss this in the article I wrote on Brighouse and that can be found on Casebook, "A Coroner for All Seasons: Sir Samuel Brighouse." (http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rip-samuel-brighouse.html) I think, by extension, then, that it's also possible then that he had some sort of sway over Fletcher Rogers. I am still not conceding though that he had anything to do with hoaxing the Diary.

Chris

[Paul Butler]

Hi Sir Bob.

Any little snippets of info that we didn't previously know about are good in my book, and you've been a good source of those snippets, so no complaints here.

Hi Chris.

I enjoyed reading your Casebook article very much.

They way I see it is this. Some of us are perhaps a little more accepting that Keith Skinner's May revelations, (May! Get it?), have more than likely got some substance to them, and that the diary can be traced back to Battlecrease at some point in the past. Any previous occupants must therefore be very firmly in the frame as a likely candidate for "Sir Jim".

What better place to start than with the very next occupant of the Maybrick homestead after James and Florence?, and I'm all with Sir Bob in thinking he's well worth a look at. His handwriting being maybe the place to start.

Somebody wrote the damned thing, and that somebody was probably at Battlecrease at some time or other. The list can't be that long surely?

This is all getting very interesting.

Regards.

Paul

[Christopher Jones]

Dear All,

Thanks for your messages of welcome. I am working on a Maybrick website and an A to Z, but both are rather basic, so please do not expect too much. Most of you know far more than I will ever know about James, Florence and any possible Ripper connections.

I am primarily interested in Liverpool and I have been looking at local reports into how the Maybrick saga played out in the city. I believe that if you want to get to the truth of what happened, you need to examine the primary sources and base all ideas and conclusions firmly on facts. All the books contain at least some statements that are simply inaccurate. As there are gaps in the records, some guesswork is required, but they should be educated guesses, done in an objective manner. I also want to find out about the various institutions and processes of social interaction in Liverpool in the 1880s. For example, I spent some of today looking at the Palatine Club where James was a member, and the Collegiate Institution. The latter, I am almost certain, is the school that James attended in Liverpool. The school had a strong Anglican tradition. In October 1840, when the foundation stone of the school was layed by Lord Stanley, a special service was held at St Peter's Church. That of course, was where James' father was the parish clerk. Pressure to build the new school came from the local Anglican clergy and community.

Florence writes in her autiobiography that many of the jury at James' inquest had been guests at her house. If you check the records, you will find that at least two of them had attended James' funeral. Fletcher Rogers would have certainly known James and Florence. As you know, he was married twice. He had three sons and two daughters by his first wife, and three daughters and nine sons by his second wife. His second wife was Miss Emma Pearson.

Fletcher Rogers did NOT write the Maybrick Diary! Apart from his 17 children, he was a very busy man. He was heavily involved in the cotton trade and public affairs. He was a member of the Local Poor Law Board; the local National Church School in Garston; and was heavily involved in St Mary's Church in Grassendale and church affairs in general. He was the local representative for the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. He is buried in the vaults of the Parish Church in Garston, not St Mary's. Sadly, the church today and the graveyeard are in a poor state. (Will post a picture soon.)

Why did he move into Battlecrease? Probably because of its size and location. There were not many houses of that size, with its extensive grounds, available at the time in the area. He took over the lease of the house, he did not buy it.

The term 'battlecrease' is an agricultural one, nothing to do with cricket or wars. Local paper reports at the time suggest that Florence gave the name to the house herself.

Best wishes, Chris Jones

[How Brown]

Dear Mr.Jones:

Thanks ever so much for the update on your work and efforts regarding Maybrick. We all appreciate it.

If at any time you need any material from JTRForums....please feel free to use it or post it on your fledgling site.

How

[Christopher Jones]

Further to my post yesterday, I decided to cycle down to Garston Parish Church this morning to try and find Fletcher Rogers' grave. I timed my arrival to coincide with the end of the morning service so that I could get inside the church (it is normally closed and locked) and maybe speak to one or two of the older residents.

I had been passed the church many times, but had never actually been inside. I was really surprised by what I saw - the church interior was very beautiful. Unfortunately, the old records of the church had all been destroyed. The burial vaults were all outside the church (on the east side). I managed to find Fletcher Rogers' grave. He was buried in a grave with his second wife. She died on 2nd October 1877, aged 35. In her relative short life she had given birth to 12 children. At the time of her death, the family lived in Wood End, Grassendale. I took some pictures and will place them on this site in the future.

The Church of St Michael's, Garston, is one of those hidden gems. It is located in a very deprived area of Liverpool and the graveyard is overgrown. Nevertheless, it is well worth a visit.

Best wishes, Chris Jones

[Chris G.]

Further to my post yesterday, I decided to cycle down to Garston Parish Church this morning to try and find Fletcher Rogers' grave. I timed my arrival to coincide with the end of the morning service so that I could get inside the church (it is normally closed and locked) and maybe speak to one or two of the older residents.

I had been passed the church many times, but had never actually been inside. I was really surprised by what I saw - the church interior was very beautiful. Unfortunately, the old records of the church had all been destroyed. The burial vaults were all outside the church (on the east side). I managed to find Fletcher Rogers' grave. He was buried in a grave with his second wife. She died on 2nd October 1877, aged 35. In her relative short life she had given birth to 12 children. At the time of her death, the family lived in Wood End, Grassendale. I took some pictures and will place them on this site in the future.

The Church of St Michael's, Garston, is one of those hidden gems. It is located in a very deprived area of Liverpool and the graveyard is overgrown. Nevertheless, it is well worth a visit.

Best wishes, Chris Jones


Hi Chris

Thank you for your last couple of posts. I know Garston well, being a Liverpool "South Ender" myself. I have taken the liberty of copying your last post onto the Yo Liverpool forum (http://www.yoliverpool.com/forum/showthread.php?p=112833) thread featuring discussion of Garston as I know what you have to say will have interest for the members there.

All the best

Chris

[Paul Butler]

Fletcher Rogers did NOT write the Maybrick Diary! Apart from his 17 children, he was a very busy man. He was heavily involved in the cotton trade and public affairs. He was a member of the Local Poor Law Board; the local National Church School in Garston; and was heavily involved in St Mary's Church in Grassendale and church affairs in general. He was the local representative for the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. He is buried in the vaults of the Parish Church in Garston, not St Mary's.

Morning Chris J, and its great to see you joining in the Maybrick discussions.

You seem very certain Fletcher-Rogers didn't write the diary. I'm not suggesting for a moment that he did, but as all occupants of Battlecrease for 100 years from 1889 are possibly in the frame as "Sir Jim", I was just wondering where that level of certainty came from.

regards.

Paul

[Christopher Jones]

Paul,

I think that you are coming at the issue of Fletcher Rogers from the wrong starting-point. If you want to suggest a named individual as the person who may have written the diary, then the onus is on you to give a valid and credible reason why he/she might have done it. Just living in Battlecrease is insufficient.

What would be his motive? Does he fit the accepted profile of a person who might have written the diary? Did he have the opportunity, the time, the knowledge?

From what we know about Fletcher Rogers he appears to be last person you would suspect as having written the diary. He was a very religious man. He was very well respected in the community. He was incredible busy - 17 children; head of his firm; active in the Cotton Brokers Association; active in the church; a Poor Law Guardian; civic figure. He fits none of the accepted criteria for being: 1. The Ripper; 2. A practical joker; 3. a sick individual.

Theories must rest on facts.

Best wishes, Chris Jones

[Paul Butler]

Hi Chris.

Yes. Theories must rest on facts. The trouble is that where the diary is concerned facts are rather hard to come by!

There are a few strong likelihoods, and a great deal of wishful thinking, but damn all in the way of facts really.

So I don't think I'm coming at it from the wrong starting point at all. We have to this day, no real clue as to the motive for writing the diary, and we can only make educated guesses as to when.

One of the "strong likelihoods" concerning the diary is that it was at some point removed from Battlecrease. This puts any and every occupant of that house in the frame as our diary author, no matter how unlikely any one person might seem.

I'm interested in Fletcher-Rogers for no better reason that that he was there in the house in 1889 and for no other good reason. He needs to be eliminated, and I'm sure he probably will, but we would be foolish not to look.

A handwriting sample might do it, just as it did for the real James Maybrick.

Sir Bob tells us that this gentleman is in fact being looked at elsewhere, so clearly it would be best to leave well alone and not tread on the toes of others for the time being, but I'm not happy to make any assumptions until we know a bit more.

best regards.

Paul

[A.P. Wolf]

It was the Pall Mall Gazette that - nationally - first pointed out the 'curious coincidence' of Fletcher Rogers purchasing the house of a murder victim upon which he had pronounced as the foreman of a jury at trial. That was on November 5th 1889.
Sadly for Mrs Maybrick, I believe that Fletcher Rogers had been entirely influenced in his jury duty in the Maybrick trial by the earlier, and massive, publicity concerning the local case of Elizabeth Berry who was accused and sentenced for poisoning her daughter - and possibly her mother as well - in 1887 in an alleged scam to defraud the insurance company she had insured her child's life with.
Fletcher Rogers owned and ran insurance companies, and he wouldn't have liked this one bit at all... and he wouldn't have liked any such woman killing off a cotton merchant and broker either a year or so later.
Probably the most catastrophic foreman of a jury ever appointed.
I can see a serious miscarriage of justice here but little else.

[SirRobertAnderson]

From what we know about Fletcher Rogers he appears to be last person you would suspect as having written the diary. He was a very religious man. He was very well respected in the community. He was incredible busy - 17 children; head of his firm; active in the Cotton Brokers Association; active in the church; a Poor Law Guardian; civic figure. He fits none of the accepted criteria for being: 1. The Ripper; 2. A practical joker; 3. a sick individual.



Actually, point #1 hadn't even entered my mind. I hope no one thinks I'm proposing our man Fletch as a Ripper suspect.

We should also bear in mind that if the Diary did come from Battlecrease - which I am willing to accept as a given - the author didn't bring it forward. It was "hoaxed" but never presented for public consumption. So I'd be unwilling to eliminate any resident of Battlecrease prima facie because it may have never been meant for our eyes and so perhaps not indicative of a twisted mind.....well, a severely twisted mind....

BTW, I consider someone with 17 kids to be a bit of an odd duck right off the bat.

[Paul Butler]

No Sir Bob! We certainly don't want Fletcher-Rogers as a ripper suspect!

He's got to be a bit interesting though.

Like you, I'm prepared to accept the Battlecrease origin of the diary as a given for the time being. I am also happy to accept that the diary just MIGHT be 19th century. In that case Mr F-R fits the bill as a possible hoaxer quite well, (as would any subsequent tenants of course).

I think I'm remembering right, when I say that the Dodds family converted the place into flats when they moved in. Was the diary found then, or maybe the tenant of one of those flats might have been Sir Jim?

Hi Chris J.

I'm very much looking forward to the Maybrick site. Is it up and running yet?

regards.

Paul

[SirRobertAnderson]

He's got to be a bit interesting though.


Well, let's work backwards.

What would we be looking for in the ideal candidate as author ?

1) Residency at Battlecrease
2) Knowledge of the Maybricks, socially as well as legally
3) Access to coroners' reports

As far as Fletch goes, he's got #1 and #2 nailed; access to the coroner's report is only a speculation, but not a crazy one given his foreman's position.

I'm not saying all this proves a blessed thing other than that he should be "a person of interest".....

[A.P. Wolf]

Apparently the local residents and press of Liverpool saw nothing strange in the fact that folks intimate to the Maybrick family would sit in judgement of them. The 'Liverpool Mercury' May 20th 1889:
'Very many of the Jurymen were near neighbours of Mr Maybrick, with whom some were indeed personally intimate.'
'nuff said.

[Stephen Leece]

On the other hand, the journalist may have reported that because it was indeed unusual and worthy of highlighting....The journalist can't add anything negative to the statement for fear of the UK libel laws. All that can be done is drop the hint that possibly something nefarious has occurred.

[Chris G.]

Apparently the local residents and press of Liverpool saw nothing strange in the fact that folks intimate to the Maybrick family would sit in judgement of them. The 'Liverpool Mercury' May 20th 1889:
'Very many of the Jurymen were near neighbours of Mr Maybrick, with whom some were indeed personally intimate.'
'nuff said.


In fact, I believe I recall that Florence wrote in her autobiography, My Lost Fifteen Years, that a number of the men on the coroner's jury had dined at the Maybricks' dinner table.

Chris

[Christopher Jones]

Hi Chris J.

I'm very much looking forward to the Maybrick site. Is it up and running yet?

regards.

Paul[/quote]


Hi Paul,

All the information/details for the Maybrick website are now with the guy who is actually constructing it (the technical stuff!). It should be up and running in a few weeks.

Much of it will be very basic as far as most people on this site is concerned. It is designed primarily for people who do not know the main parts of the Maybrick story. It does have items from the James Maybrick Trial so that people who didn't attend will get a real flavour of what went on.


On a different matter.......

A girl in my school recently told me that she sleeps in Jack the Ripper's room! It turns out that she stays in Battlecrease at the weekend with her father and actually sleeps in the room that James Maybrick died in. She is a clever girl, interested in History, with a good general knowledge. As she has a clear connection with Battlecrease does that make her suspicious (as has been suggested on these boards)? Could she have written the Diary (in-between homework assignments and doing her hair)? Or would common sense dictate that a mere connection with Battlecrease does not put you in the frame to be the illusive diarist. We need to filter out the people who obviously do not fit the profile of a possible diarist and that in my opinion includes Fletcher Rogers.

As for Mr Fletcher Rogers....If a typical Victorian married woman had ten pregnancies during her life, then having seventeen children from two wives is not as remarkable as it first appears. Indeed, what is remarkable is not the number of children, but that so many survived.

I am convinced Florence did not kill James, but if you read detailed accounts of the Inquest, then you will understand why the jury found her guilty. The case against her was very strong (Sir Charles Russell later described it as formidable). No evidence was put forward by her lawyers to defend her at the Inquest. James' arsenic use was not discussed at all. Fletcher Rogers' role at the Inquest is mentioned quite extensively in some local contemporary press reports. He appears to have acted fairly and honourably. He could only go on what was actually presented at the Inquest.

Fletcher Rogers is an interesting man, but I do not expect to be organising the Trial of Fletcher Rogers this May in Liverpool. Mind you, if it helps raise money for kids rugby.....

Have attached a photo from the new Maybrick website (hopefully). It is of old Garston Police Station. Florence was held here briefly during the Inquest. Had a private tour of it a few weeks ago. Very interesting. It is supposed to be haunted....... I didn't see a ghost, but in the cellars.......

Best wishes, Chris Jones

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

[SirRobertAnderson]

I'm thrilled you are joining in here Mr. Jones, and hope you understand that this is all good natured debate and banter. Someone did write the darned thing, and it wasn't Mike Barrett. I favor casting a wide net for suspects.


A girl in my school recently told me that she sleeps in Jack the Ripper's room! ...... Could she have written the Diary (in-between homework assignments and doing her hair)? Or would common sense dictate that a mere connection with Battlecrease does not put you in the frame to be the illusive diarist. We need to filter out the people who obviously do not fit the profile of a possible diarist and that in my opinion includes Fletcher Rogers.

I think that anyone living in Battlecrease from 1888 onwards has to be on our list. (I'll give a pass to your student.) And if there was even a tangential connection to a coroner, all the better.

As for Mr Fletcher Rogers....If a typical Victorian married woman had ten pregnancies during her life, then having seventeen children from two wives is not as remarkable as it first appears. Indeed, what is remarkable is not the number of children, but that so many survived.

See, the economist in me would ask how many pregnancies there must have been to produce 17 living children.....

[Christopher Jones]

[QUOTE=SirRobertAnderson;38908]I'm thrilled you are joining in here Mr. Jones, and hope you understand that this is all good natured debate and banter. Someone did write the darned thing, and it wasn't Mike Barrett. I favor casting a wide net for suspects.

Dear Sir Robert,

Didn't intend to sound rude, sorry if came across that way. My background is a history teacher (though these days I spend most of time on admin and dealing with problems) and as much as I love historical speculation, I feel that all theories must have at least some factual basis.

Have spent much of the last 9 months going through local newspapers trying to get an understanding of the contemporary view of the trial and the people involved. I wanted to filter out fact from fiction. For example, there was a rumour that James Maybrick poisoned some dogs near Battlecrease. This story is repeated in some books as though it is a fact. From looking at very local papers from Aigburth and Garston, I am certain that the story is not true. As for poor Florence, her solicitor Richard Cleaver, did not have his first meeting with her alone until Thursday 23rd May! Prior to May 1889, the Cleaver Brothers had had no knowledge or previous dealings with Florence or the Maybrick family. All of this put her very much at a disadvantage at the inquest. I have come to the conclusion that both James and Florence have been much misrepresented in some modern books. Florence was much quieter and domestic than is usually portrayed. Until late 1888, she rarely went out to parties or social functions. Have tried to put all my ideas on paper in my Maybrick A to Z. Want to get the Liverpool angle; what the man or women on the omnibus actually thought as they went to work.

Best wishes and keep up the banter, (a repentant) Chris Jones

[Paul Butler]

Hi Chris.

I'd just like to agree with Sir Bob, when he says it's great to see you here. The Maybricks, with or without the damned diary, have a fascinating story to be told, and new angles on this are always worth listening to.

This is JTR territory, where people are accused of being Jack with absolutely no indication that they could ever have had a serial killer in their make up, so you'll have to excuse the inclusion of Mr Fletcher-Rogers in the list of possible diary authors until such a time as we can positively exclude him! One thing I will bet on though, is that as and when the author of the diary is discovered, it will be someone who we never suspected and who doesn't seem the sort of person who would do such a thing.

I'm intrigued that you feel the case against Florrie was a strong one. It has always seemed to me to be quite the opposite. With no cause of death ever established, and insufficient arsenic found after two P.Ms on James' body, I'm astonished the trial ever went ahead.

I certainly agree that she should have not been found guilty, and that her imprisonment was a travesty of justice.

Despite what you say Chris, you can be sure that there will be plenty of interest in your Maybrick site from the contributors here. I'm really looking forward to seeing it, (and continuing with the Maybrick discussion here on JTR forums too).

Regards.

Paul

[A.P. Wolf]

History is a rare creature of many ambitions.
What I like here is that it is entirely likely and possible that James Maybrick was being treated by Francis Tumblety at some point in his addiction.
That is just history.

[SirRobertAnderson]

it is entirely likely and possible that James Maybrick was being treated by Francis Tumblety at some point in his addiction.


That's a new and fascinating twist. I'd love to hear more as to why you believe these two "gents" crossed paths.

[R.J.Palmer]

it is entirely likely and possible that James Maybrick was being treated by Francis Tumblety at some point in his addiction. That is just history.

I'd have to recheck my notes, AP, but I believe Maybrick was living in Norfolk, Virigina, in 1874-1876, so I seriously doubt it.

What you should really be doing, AP, if you don't mind me suggesting, is finding Tumblety's office in East London in the mid-1880s. My guess is that he was no a stranger to those haunts, but its going to take someone with the ELO and the ELA and a hell of a lot of patience to sort it out. We Yankee Dollar wavers haven't been given access yet by the Queen; there's no doubt whatsoever that we should have stuck with Lizzy Borden. Wrong side of the pond and all that.

[A.P. Wolf]

But, RJP, you have that pesky court case from December of 1873 involving the Great American Doctor, Tumblety, and the young lad, Henry Carr, where Tumblety hauls the lad off to Liverpool, indicating that he spent most of that year in Liverpool.

[A.P. Wolf]

And then, RJP, this of course:

First name (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_result.php?sort=desc&type=first&p_first_name=james&p_last_name=maybrick&co_code=&o_code=&m_mid=&m_arr_date_end=1912&m_arr_date_start=1830)Last namehttp://www.castlegarden.org/assets/arrow_sort_up.png (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_result.php?sort=desc&type=last&p_first_name=james&p_last_name=maybrick&co_code=&o_code=&m_mid=&m_arr_date_end=1912&m_arr_date_start=1830)Occupation (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_result.php?sort=desc&type=occupation&p_first_name=james&p_last_name=maybrick&co_code=&o_code=&m_mid=&m_arr_date_end=1912&m_arr_date_start=1830)Age (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_result.php?sort=desc&type=age&p_first_name=james&p_last_name=maybrick&co_code=&o_code=&m_mid=&m_arr_date_end=1912&m_arr_date_start=1830)Sex (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_result.php?sort=desc&type=sex&p_first_name=james&p_last_name=maybrick&co_code=&o_code=&m_mid=&m_arr_date_end=1912&m_arr_date_start=1830)Arrived (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_result.php?sort=desc&type=arrived&p_first_name=james&p_last_name=maybrick&co_code=&o_code=&m_mid=&m_arr_date_end=1912&m_arr_date_start=1830)Origin (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_result.php?sort=desc&type=origin&p_first_name=james&p_last_name=maybrick&co_code=&o_code=&m_mid=&m_arr_date_end=1912&m_arr_date_start=1830)Ship (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_result.php?sort=desc&type=ship&p_first_name=james&p_last_name=maybrick&co_code=&o_code=&m_mid=&m_arr_date_end=1912&m_arr_date_start=1830)JAMESMAYBRICK (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_detail.php?p_id=9428268)MERCHANT34M28 Sep 1874GREAT BRITAINCITY OF CHESTERJAMESMAYBRICK (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_detail.php?p_id=9428269)MERCHANT34M11 Jan 1869GREAT BRITAINCHINAJAMESMAYBRICK (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_detail.php?p_id=9428270)GENTLEMAN42M8 Sep 1879GREAT BRITAINGERMANICJAMESMAYBRICK (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_detail.php?p_id=9530212)MERCHANT32M14 Apr 1871GREAT BRITAINCUBA


Back to top (http://www.castlegarden.org/quick_search_result.php?p_first_name=james&p_last_name=maybrick&m_arr_date_start=1820&m_arrival_end=1913&submit.x=57&submit.y=18#wrapper)
© 2005 CastleGarden.Org

| Contact Us (http://www.castlegarden.org/contact.html)
| Terms of Use (http://www.castlegarden.org/terms.html)

[A.P. Wolf]

And then there is always this, from 'Reynold's', October 23rd, 1892.
Scroll down and wonder who the 'American Doctor' was who Maybrick made his confession to.

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

[Stephen Leece]

I'll tell you what's weird about the above article- it has a review of Le Caron's memoirs. Le Caron was one of our top secret agents and was chummy with Sir. Robert Anderson and Littlechild. Now that's weird!

[Chris G.]

I also like the case of the Catholic priest in the right column with its mention of "Vigilance Societies" -- obviously at that date anti-vice vigilance societies.

Chris

[SirRobertAnderson]

And then there is always this, from 'Reynold's', October 23rd, 1892.
Scroll down and wonder who the 'American Doctor' was who Maybrick made his confession to.

Very interesting......

Caz - do we have any idea of the identity of this doctor ?

[Chris G.]

And then there is always this, from 'Reynold's', October 23rd, 1892.
Scroll down and wonder who the 'American Doctor' was who Maybrick made his confession to.

Very interesting......

Caz - do we have any idea of the identity of this doctor ?


I might be wrong but quite possibly it was a doctor in Norfolk, Virginia, where Maybrick had an office, rather than an American doctor in England.

Chris

[SirRobertAnderson]

Here's an oldie but moldy. This 'lead' has gone quiet. But I still find Fletcher's actions to be rather odd.



Fletcher Rogers has become a 'person of interest' in the Battlecrease investigation.

Mr. Rogers died in 1891.

Was he the author of the Maybrick Diary ? (My question.)

(The snippet from the Marion Daily Star is from the Casebook.)

Marion Daily Star
Ohio, USA
7 December 1889

The Maybrick Residence

It is a curious coincidence, a London paper notes, that Battlecrease house, the residence of the Maybricks, should have already found a new tenant, and that no other than Fletcher Rogers, the foreman of the coroner's jury before which the inquiry into the death of the late James Maybrick was conducted. The house, which is finely situated near the Mersey, has been thoroughly redecorated.

[How Brown]

From the:

Daily Confederation
Montgomery,Alabama....:playball:
April 7th,1860
Page 2

[Chris G.]

From the:

Daily Confederation
Montgomery,Alabama....:playball:
April 7th,1860
Page 2

Hey, Howard, I think most definitely a different Fletcher Rogers. Delete your post and mine to prevent confusing the thread??

Chris

[How Brown]

No chance that its the same person? I put it on here in case this Rogers was from Alabama, like Mrs. Maybrick.