I didn't consider Blotchy when I was putting the post on the boards this morning...there's several errors in the article and I didn't focus on what you mentioned....I just wanted to find a photo to accompany the article.
To tell you the truth, I'm not so sure that that's a reference to Blotchy, but rather a reference to Astrachan Man....or someone similar to that.
You know Neems... people think Hutchinson just pulled that description out of thin air and ran with it...but I have had this feeling that the description of this character presented here in an Ohio paper the following day was already in the wind in Whitechapel and that's where Hutchinson may have picked it up...and then ran with it. In short, the Astrachan Man didn't originate with him, but was improvised upon by him.
Strange how the article refers to her as Lizzie Fisher
After a little searching, I found an old post by RJ Palmer which points out that Catherine Eddowes' sister was called Lizzie Fisher and a name appearing in one of the Thames torso's clothing Elizabeth Jackson) was LE Fisher
However, the Wikipaedia entry for Mary Kelly states that a number of American (New York) reports of the November 1888 murder have Mary as the mother of a small boy, living on the second floor, and also refer to her as Lizzie Fisher
It is stated that "Fisher" was a woman who lived on the second floor in 26 Dorset St and had a 12 year old son
A report of the 1888 London press of Kelly being a mother has led a minority of Ripperologists to suggest the birth of a younger Davies between 1879 and 1882. The story, however, contains several factual errors, including the claim that she supposedly lived on the second floor. It is likely that news reports initially identifying Lizzie Fisher (or Fraser) as the victim are the source for the rumour. Fisher did live on the second floor and did have a 12-year-old son.
In the second article,they drop any reference to Lizzie Fisher and previous miscues were corrected.
This Paumier story is another intriguing scenario. Make you wonder whether the reference to the man who "accosted the victim and offered her money" from the first article is in reality an element within the Paumier story applied to Kelly.
I think the Mrs Paumier story is an area that could stand more research.
Regarding the descriptions of the man seen with Kelly:
The Echo, Thursday November 15, 1888
While Hutchinson's veracity is not questioned, it is considered a remarkable thing that no one else in Dorset-street saw such an uncommon stranger - for that locality - as the person described by the groom.
However:
Dave
"From Hull, Hell and Halifax, Good Lord deliver us."
I think the well dressed man must be the one reported by Sarah Lewis at the inquest though she doesn't appear to have related this tale until the inquest
“About Wednesday night at 8 O’clock I was going along Bethnal Green Road with another female and a Gentleman passed us he turned back & spoke to us, he asked us to follow him, and asked one of us he did not mind which, [to go with him] we refused. He went away, and came back & said if we would follow him he would treat us – he asked us to go down a passage – he had a bag he put it down saying what are you frightened of – he then undid his coat and felt for something and we ran away –
He was short, pale faced, with a black small moustache, about forty years of age – the bag he had was about a foot or nine inches long – he had on a round high hat – he had a brownish long overcoat and a short black coat underneath – and pepper & salt trousers.
On our running away we did not look after the man - On the Friday morning about half past two when I was coming to Miller’s Court I met the same man with a female – in Commercial Street near Mr Ringers Public House – He had then no overcoat on – but he had the bag & the same hat trousers & undercoat.
That report from Cleveland says the man Mrs Paulmier saw was carrying a black dog! - lol
Seems a bit strange as he was asked "What have you got in the black dog"
I recall Sam Flynn making a remark in the past about the trustworthiness of foreign ( non UK ) newspaper accounts...as they often contained errors, such as the Cleveland paper, which started off this thread.
However, might it not be a case of untrustworthy local sources which provided the press, such as in Cleveland, with the "facts" about Kelly's head being removed, etc ?
In fact, in this case of the Cleveland paper, the comment about a respectably dressed gentleman being reported as approaching Kelly on the night in question, may be of value.
Could not this story...of the respectably dressed gent... come from Hutchinson himself prior to going to the police...and in a moment of clarity in the interim between mentioning it and going to the police...decided to go tell it to the police or better yet, had heard that the police were looking for the person who originated the "respectably dressed gent" story and wanted to see him.
I think I posted on one of the other threads something along those lines, How. I have a feeling that the press agencies sent out 'early' reports, lacking in details such as names, then a follow up with names.
There are several examples in the Hutch story which appear to indicate that Hutch's statement confirms another witness statement, whereas, Hutch's statement IS the original. (Does that make sense?)
Some do, however, say something on the lines of Hutch's statement backing up the description of 'the woman Maxwell'.
Dave
"From Hull, Hell and Halifax, Good Lord deliver us."
Comment