Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Files On Mary Ann Austin * The Discussion Thread

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

  • #16
    Your article will hold up a lot longer than 14 years, RC....I hope people take the time to read it.
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact [email protected]

    Comment


    • #17
      Schulty?

      It's Schultz, surely?

      Comment


      • #18
        Schultz?

        It’s most easily seen in this extract from the Vine Street report where the ‘y’ of ‘Stepney’ is clearly different from the last letter of the witness’s name:

        4CA50A64-14FB-48B5-B57D-4663A526E33E.jpeg

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
          It's Schultz, surely?
          Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
          It’s most easily seen in this extract from the Vine Street report where the ‘y’ of ‘Stepney’ is clearly different from the last letter of the witness’s name:

          [ATTACH]19281[/ATTACH]
          Maybe. I will have to see if I have any notes on it. It always looked like Schulty to me. I stand to be corrected.

          Rob

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Rob Clack View Post
            Maybe. I will have to see if I have any notes on it. It always looked like Schulty to me. I stand to be corrected.

            Rob
            Thanks, Rob.

            Did you track the man down?

            Post 26 appears to be a note written on the back of a telegram:

            Wooldham
            Chelsea Laundress 28


            Is Wooldham explained anywhere?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Rob Clack View Post
              Thanks How, after 14 years I think it still holds up fairly well.
              Indeed it does, Rob. It’s what I always turn to when I need a reminder of the facts of the case.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                The accusations against Charles White are reminiscent of the denunciation of Pizer in Church Street.

                The two women each have two addresses - one has two names!
                So we have Mary Ann Butcher and Annie Hickey/Casey either causing mischief for the sake of it or attempting to frame an innocent man.

                I’ve found a Mary Butcher living in Paternoster Row in 1901. And an Annie Hickey living at 12, Station Place😱 some time later. Both approx the right age

                Can’t be sure either of them are the right ones, though.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                  Thanks, Rob.

                  Did you track the man down?

                  Post 26 appears to be a note written on the back of a telegram:

                  Wooldham
                  Chelsea Laundress 28


                  Is Wooldham explained anywhere?
                  Re Schulty/Schultz

                  I have just had a look at my notes. There is no mention of him, so I presume I did not find him. I would have had a look as I tracked down some of the other witnesses who might have been important.
                  I probably went for Schulty as the last letter went way under the line which I thought would be odd for a 'Z'

                  I didn't find out anything about Wooldham. It is an odd one and don't know why it is there.

                  This is the front of the telegram for convenience.

                  11 MEPO 3_162 28 May 1901.jpg

                  When I sent the images to Howard the telegrams and files got mixed in together. They were suppose to be separate. My error. There are only 26 Telegrams and after the 1 June there is only one more.

                  Rob

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Mary Ann Austin from Lloyd's Weekly News, Sunday 9 June 1901

                    Mary Ann Austin from Lloyds Weekly News Sunday 9 June 1901.jpg

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      The following is a post from the William Maher thread.

                      I'm still of the opinion that the conversation Schultzy overheard described a relationship that predated Mary Ann Mealey's marriage to William Austin.

                      The McCarthy could have been anyone of that name, but it seems likely that the man in question was an Eastender.

                      The last piece of the puzzle - for now at least - is the conversation supposedly overheard by the witness James Schulty in the Princess Alice pub on Commercial Street shortly after the murder of Mary Ann Austin (ńee Mealey):


                      'I tell you McCarthy was with her before the husband.'

                      'What you mean the Dorset Street murder?'

                      'Yes and I know McCarthy was with her.'


                      The first time I read that I took it to mean that a man named McCarthy had had a relationship with Mary Ann Mealey before she met/married William Austin rather than being a reference to someone being with her on the night of the murder. The Chelsea-born Emily Mealey found by Rob Clack working in a Shoreditch pub in 1891 is very likely the woman we are interested in and it seems her parents were married in Stepney, so she may well have had a relationship with an East End McCarthy before she married.

                      Obviously any mention of the name McCarthy in a Dorset Street context immediately brings John/Jack to mind. But without the Christian name it could have been a reference to any McCarthy - John's brother, Daniel, for example.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Could the stonemason have been James Edward Scally, living Leyton in 1901?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                          The following is a post from the William Maher thread.

                          I'm still of the opinion that the conversation Schultzy overheard described a relationship that predated Mary Ann Mealey's marriage to William Austin.

                          The McCarthy could have been anyone of that name, but it seems likely that the man in question was an Eastender.

                          The last piece of the puzzle - for now at least - is the conversation supposedly overheard by the witness James Schulty in the Princess Alice pub on Commercial Street shortly after the murder of Mary Ann Austin (ńee Mealey):


                          'I tell you McCarthy was with her before the husband.'

                          'What you mean the Dorset Street murder?'

                          'Yes and I know McCarthy was with her.'


                          The first time I read that I took it to mean that a man named McCarthy had had a relationship with Mary Ann Mealey before she met/married William Austin rather than being a reference to someone being with her on the night of the murder. The Chelsea-born Emily Mealey found by Rob Clack working in a Shoreditch pub in 1891 is very likely the woman we are interested in and it seems her parents were married in Stepney, so she may well have had a relationship with an East End McCarthy before she married.

                          Obviously any mention of the name McCarthy in a Dorset Street context immediately brings John/Jack to mind. But without the Christian name it could have been a reference to any McCarthy - John's brother, Daniel, for example.
                          That no first name was mentioned makes me believe that it was a specific McCarthy and that the person saying 'McCarthy' expected the other person to know who he was referring to. And I think John McCarthy was the most well known. Which is why I believe it was him. Also Mary Ann Austin stayed at 37 Dorset Street which was run by John McCarthy's wife. Just my opinion.

                          Rob

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Robert Linford View Post
                            Could the stonemason have been James Edward Scally, living Leyton in 1901?
                            I couldn't say for certain. Considering it was 1901 there was a serious lack of Schultz and Schulty's in the census. He did say he worked for the Stepney Borough. Which was not too far away.

                            Rob

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Rob Clack View Post
                              That no first name was mentioned makes me believe that it was a specific McCarthy and that the person saying 'McCarthy' expected the other person to know who he was referring to. And I think John McCarthy was the most well known. Which is why I believe it was him. Also Mary Ann Austin stayed at 37 Dorset Street which was run by John McCarthy's wife. Just my opinion.

                              Rob
                              How do you know 37 was run by McCarthy’s wife?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                                How do you know 37 was run by McCarthy’s wife?
                                Good question. Part of it was William Austin's statement:

                                On the 28th inst I went to the mortuary at London Hospital, and there identified the deceased woman, as my wife, we have been married eight years, and have had three children, two girls are now alive, Elizabeth age 4, and Francis age 3. We had been living at No. 37 Dorset St, for about 3 months.
                                On or about the 15th I found her in a public house, under the influence of drink in the company of some navvies, we had a quarrel and I left her on that date, taking Elizabeth with me, leaving Francis with her, she was addicted to drink and under its influence was quarrelsome. When I left. I paid Mrs McCarthy the rent that was due 2/-: I have never seen my wife or youngest child since then.
                                William Austin

                                This was my thinking from 2005. I didn't know Debs then, much to my chagrin. Research has probably changed things since then. There was probably something else but I didn't keep extensive footnotes.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X