Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PC E. Newberry (Retired) in 1911 Claimed To Have Locked up Kelly For Drunkenness

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

  • Only the reprint

    Comment


    • Leave the latch off for Gary.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Edward Stow View Post
        If she wasn't known to the police at all, then they weren't very good at their basic beat work, and the Kelly arrested with Kerby must have been someone else.
        But what do you mean by "known" exactly? There was only a name ("Mary Jane Kelley") which could have been cross-referenced with the name by which the Miller's Court victim was known to her contemporaries. There would, for obvious reasons, not have been a reliable identification by which Newberry would have been able to clinch it. So there would have been the name and possibly a check up with Jeremiah David Kirby to confirm his fellow-"arrestee" was indeed the woman who had previously walked the larger Pennington Street area as a prostitute. I guess any internal search for Kelly would likely not have extended too far beyond such a quick search, if it would have been conducted at all. All we really know is that Newberry appeared to be convinced that the Kelly he had once locked up for drunkenness, was the same as the Miller's Court Mary Kelly. On what basis he would have concluded such a thing, is anyone's guess, although I think it likely that either it was brought to his attention in the wake of the murder, or he made the connection himself at some point after November 9.

        Comment


        • He would have locked lots of people up for drunkeness and Mary Kelly was a common alias.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Edward Stow View Post
            He would have locked lots of people up for drunkeness and Mary Kelly was a common alias.
            You may very well be right, but this has yet to be determined. As we have established that Newberry was inducted into the force in May 1886, we should be able to find out in the LMA how many Mary Jane Kellies Newberry would or would not have locked up.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Edward Stow View Post
              He would have locked lots of people up for drunkeness and Mary Kelly was a common alias.
              To the nearest thousand, how many MJK’s were brought before the Thames beaks in 1888 for drunkenness?

              I have a figure in mind. Just seeking confirmation.

              Comment


              • That doesn't really advance things Gary - we know Eddowes called herself Mary Kelly when arrested for being drunk. I doubt she was the only one.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Edward Stow View Post
                  That doesn't really advance things Gary - we know Eddowes called herself Mary Kelly when arrested for being drunk. I doubt she was the only one.
                  Having trawled through the 1888 Thames registers and found only 1 Mary Kell(e)y, and that a Mary Jane Kelley arrested, by the looks of it, alongside a Pennington Street resident, I’m not currently feeling the ubiquitous Mary Kelly alias vibe.




                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post

                    Having trawled through the 1888 Thames registers and found only 1 Mary Kell(e)y, and that a Mary Jane Kelley arrested, by the looks of it, alongside a Pennington Street resident, I’m not currently feeling the ubiquitous Mary Kelly alias vibe.
                    I’m sensing that if we were to find a dozen or so MJK or MK D&D cases heard at the Thames Court in 1885/6, that might be put down to it being a common alias.

                    When you find a record of someone with fairly common first and last names it’s often the addition of a middle name that brings greater assurance that you have the right person. I would hazard a guess that there were probably dozens (hundreds? thousands?) of Charles Crosses for every single Charles Allen Cross - to use just one example.

                    Comment


                    • Oh that's a good example.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post

                        Having trawled through the 1888 Thames registers and found only 1 Mary Kell(e)y, and that a Mary Jane Kelley arrested, by the looks of it, alongside a Pennington Street resident, I’m not currently feeling the ubiquitous Mary Kelly alias vibe.



                        And even if there were more cases involving prostitutes calling themselves Mary Jane Kell(e)y locked up for drunkenness at the TMC between May '86 & November '88, the point is which one of those involved an arresting constable named Edward Newberry? That's what I'm curious about.
                        Regardless, I'm convinced the name Mary Jane Kelly as adopted by the Miller's Court victim was indeed an alias- or nom de plume- in any case, albeit one she had used for at least two years prior to her death- possibly longer.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Jurriaan Maessen View Post

                          And even if there were more cases involving prostitutes calling themselves Mary Jane Kell(e)y locked up for drunkenness at the TMC between May '86 & November '88, the point is which one of those involved an arresting constable named Edward Newberry? That's what I'm curious about.
                          Regardless, I'm convinced the name Mary Jane Kelly as adopted by the Miller's Court victim was indeed an alias- or nom de plume- in any case.

                          You may be right, but doesn’t the fact that she received letters from her family while she was with McCarthy argue against that? Unless her family were in on the ruse.

                          After we’d discovered who Alice McKenzie was I went through the motions of seeing whether she could have been found just using the minimal info that had come down to us from John McCormack. She could have, and quite easily.

                          I worked on the assumption that while those on the lower rungs of society often had reason to adopt a false surname, they generally kept their forename. The name Alice was nowhere near as common as Mary, and the number of Alices born between 1845 and 1855 in Peterborough is limited. The city only had a population of around 7,000 in those days. Looking for Alices of that age In Peterborough via the censuses or birth indexes produces a manageable list and only one of those was the daughter of a postman: Alice Pitts. It’s easy to say with hindsight, but Alice could have been found in an afternoon without the benefit of the press reports that revealed her real name.

                          I’m sure that if that could be replicated for Kelly, it would have been done already. For a start, Mary was one of the most common names at the time, especially among families with an Irish background.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Jurriaan Maessen View Post

                            Yes, very probably. When I search on 127 Pennington St. via the Electoral registers the only name that keeps popping up, throughout the entire 1880's, is John Foley.
                            John Foley and his family were at No. 127 for at least twenty years--the earliest sign I've seen being January 1871 when their lodger Cornelius Buckley beat a man to death with a broomstick.

                            Another lodger, George Smith, (who was with them at the time of the 1881 Census) was charged with assault during an argument over his wages in 1882.

                            There is a third lodger living with them on the day of the 1871 Census, so, all things considered, I imagine that Jeremiah Kirby was a lodger, too.

                            Foley is listed as being born in Cork so maybe a prior association with Kirby (?) if not simply a not very striking coincidence


                            Foley's Lodger A.jpg
                            3 June 1883.jpg

                            I remember when "having a scramble" referred to breakfast rather than beating someone's brains out

                            Comment


                            • Thanks for those, RJ.


                              For reference, 127 PS was just to the left of the nearer lamppost in this photo, the last house in the terrace before the taller Pennington (Street) Buildings. Opposite that is the point where the London Dock and Tobacco Dock met and where there was possibly an entrance into the London Dock, just behind and to the right of the horse and cart. On the map the red dot is 127 and the blue smudge presumably the ‘gate’ referred to
                              Attached Files

                              Comment


                              • The same view today and the gate.

                                Attached Files

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X