Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Identifying Whitechapel Vigilance Committee's members

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Jose Oranto View Post


    ​​​​​​Well seen, Kattrup!
    Perhaps my comments about those different reports on Casebook could have been clearer. There are three reports - one found by RJ in 1889, another found by Howard, also from 1889, and then the other from 1905 that was the original subject of the thread. Howard's report is the one that mentions the wife and daughter seeing to the business, and also the claim that the man was a member of the Vigilance Committee:
    https://www.jtrforums.com/forum/vict...pinchin-street

    RJ's was very similar and also refers to him neglecting his business:
    https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...233#post192233

    Personally, I think this sounds as though it could have been his wife and a teenage daughter (on that Casebook thread I did note that Solomon De Leeuw had a daughter who would have been 13 at the time).

    On the other hand, if it did refer to the same man as the 1905 report (which is not so clear, though again he sounds quite similar), then he is definitely stated to have been in business in the City of London (i.e. the "Square Mile").

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post

      Perhaps my comments about those different reports on Casebook could have been clearer. There are three reports - one found by RJ in 1889, another found by Howard, also from 1889, and then the other from 1905 that was the original subject of the thread. Howard's report is the one that mentions the wife and daughter seeing to the business, and also the claim that the man was a member of the Vigilance Committee:
      https://www.jtrforums.com/forum/vict...pinchin-street

      RJ's was very similar and also refers to him neglecting his business:
      https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...233#post192233

      Personally, I think this sounds as though it could have been his wife and a teenage daughter (on that Casebook thread I did note that Solomon De Leeuw had a daughter who would have been 13 at the time).

      On the other hand, if it did refer to the same man as the 1905 report (which is not so clear, though again he sounds quite similar), then he is definitely stated to have been in business in the City of London (i.e. the "Square Mile").

      Thank you, Chris

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Jose Oranto
        S. Jacobs, 77 Lauriston Road, South Hackney - nothing]
        There was an Esther Jacobs associated with that address for a number of years. In 1891 she is listed as a widow. It looks like her husband's name might have been Jacob Jacobs, but 'S. Jacobs' is evidently a relative of some sort. This is 77 Lauriston Road below.


        Click image for larger version

Name:	Esther Jacobs.jpg
Views:	67
Size:	55.0 KB
ID:	595444

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by R. J. Palmer View Post

          There was an Esther Jacobs associated with that address for a number of years. In 1891 she is listed as a widow. It looks like her husband's name might have been Jacob Jacobs, but 'S. Jacobs' is evidently a relative of some sort. This is 77 Lauriston Road below.

          Brilliant, R. J.!

          I really appreciate your help. Little by little we will finish getting them all.
          By the way, I have already ordered the birth certificate of the young Charles Benjamin Harris, son of Benjamin Harris (slipper maker from Poland, who was living on two streets leading to White Horse Lane). I have little doubt that we have the right man, but I can't write it if I don't have the source to confirm it. Hopefully the address we expect will appear on the birth certificate.

          Thanks again

          Comment


          • #35
            Charles Reeves from the book 'Take it for a Fact'

            Click image for larger version

Name:	Charles Reeves.jpg
Views:	46
Size:	468.8 KB
ID:	595452

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Rob Clack View Post
              Charles Reeves from the book 'Take it for a Fact'

              Click image for larger version  Name:	Charles Reeves.jpg Views:	3 Size:	468.8 KB ID:	595452

              Thanks Rob. I found his grave. Hope to post some pics over the weekend.

              Comment


              • #37
                12th November 1888 Hull Daily Mail

                At the Kelly inquest, Mr. Vanderhart represented the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee.

                His name was Isaac Vanderhout.

                Here's his family.

                Click image for larger version  Name:	VANDERHOUT FAMILY.jpg Views:	0 Size:	29.6 KB ID:	595455

                Simon

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
                  12th November 1888 Hull Daily Mail

                  At the Kelly inquest, Mr. Vanderhart represented the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee.

                  His name was Isaac Vanderhout.

                  Here's his family.


                  Simon

                  Thank you very much Simon, this will be very useful later. I hope all goes well with the 3rd edition.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Jose Oranto
                    Henry A. Harris, 6 - 13 Mile End Road - nothing
                    This should help narrow him down. Henry Augustus Harris; his other address 107 Whitechapel Road was near London Hospital


                    Click image for larger version

Name:	Henry Augustus Harris.jpg
Views:	46
Size:	17.8 KB
ID:	595459

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by R. J. Palmer View Post

                      This should help narrow him down. Henry Augustus Harris; his other address 107 Whitechapel Road was near London Hospital


                      Click image for larger version  Name:	Henry Augustus Harris.jpg Views:	12 Size:	17.8 KB ID:	595459

                      With this name it should be easy to locate him... how many Henry Augustus could there have been in London? one?
                      ​​​​​​If we get nothing else, this is more than enough. The address fits and we have the full name and profession. Thank you very much again R.J.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        It is interesting that the address 107 Whitechapel Road was associated with a penny museum that received numerous complaints in 1889 and 1890 for, among other things, displays of the 'Whitechapel Horrors.' The proprietor Thomas Barry was tried at the Old Bailey in February 1889 and received a hefty fine.

                        Harris must have been a tenant in the same building (?) The article came out a little blurry. Apologies.


                        Click image for larger version

Name:	107 Whitechapel Road.jpg
Views:	45
Size:	56.7 KB
ID:	595466

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by R. J. Palmer View Post
                          It is interesting that the address 107 Whitechapel Road was associated with a penny museum that received numerous complaints in 1889 and 1890 for, among other things, displays of the 'Whitechapel Horrors.' The proprietor Thomas Barry was tried at the Old Bailey in February 1889 and received a hefty fine.

                          Harris must have been a tenant in the same building (?) The article came out a little blurry. Apologies.

                          From memory, 106 was occupied by Mrs. Roberts [?] (Barry's daughter) and her husband; and 108 was a cheese shop that appeared in the 1881 and 1891 census... I spent ages trying to find a name for Mrs. Roberts and her husband but it was useless.

                          When I saw '107' I didn't associate it. Thank you R. J. for pointing it out. Some time ago I was looking for all the showmen, circus artists and 'novelty dealers' that could be in the area. It's really interesting that our man lived or worked here, or what's more, that he was the landlord. If we can find out more, I will definitely include it when I talk about the WVC.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            I have checked the 1887, 1888 and 1889 for the 106-107 Whitechapel Rd, and this is what we have:

                            Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2022-08-06 at 01.11.30.png
Views:	45
Size:	155.9 KB
ID:	595473 Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2022-08-06 at 02.00.24.png
Views:	39
Size:	214.5 KB
ID:	595474 Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2022-08-06 at 02.04.51.png
Views:	40
Size:	181.3 KB
ID:	595475

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Jose Oranto View Post
                              I have checked the 1887, 1888 and 1889 for the 106-107 Whitechapel Rd, and this is what we have]
                              That's interesting, Jose, because Thomas Barry is listed there in the electoral registers, 1885-1889. As you can see, it is listed as a tenement. He was still at that address in early 1890, if I recall.

                              Click image for larger version

Name:	Thomas Barry.jpg
Views:	34
Size:	35.3 KB
ID:	595477

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by R. J. Palmer View Post

                                That's interesting, Jose, because Thomas Barry is listed there in the electoral registers, 1885-1889. As you can see, it is listed as a tenement. He was still at that address in early 1890, if I recall.

                                ​​​​​​According to newspaper reports, I seem to remember, he was in 107 for around 7 years [5?], and his daughter ran her own business in 106, but she is not listed.

                                "South Yorkshire Provision Co"... I have a feeling this is going to get us nowhere.

                                But I have good news... B. Barnett, it can only be Bearon Barnett of 2 Leslie Street (instead of number 18); next door neighbor of Michael Mitchell.

                                This still doesn't hold up, but I think there's a chance he was an Australian leather trader who had his own store in Mile End. But I have to look at this more closely. I hope we are on the right track.
                                Attached Files

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X