Books




Face of Winifred May Davies
Latest topics
» Why Jesus Is Not God
Mon 17 Apr 2017 - 0:09 by Karen

» The Fourth Reich
Fri 14 Apr 2017 - 14:14 by Karen

» Allah, The Real Serpent of the Garden
Tue 7 Mar 2017 - 11:45 by Karen

» THE INNOCENCE OF JEWS
Sat 4 Mar 2017 - 12:06 by Karen

» Hillary Clinton (Hillroy Was Here)
Fri 28 Oct 2016 - 17:38 by Karen

» Alien on the Moon
Thu 20 Oct 2016 - 21:57 by Karen

» Martian Nonsense Repeats Itself
Thu 20 Oct 2016 - 18:43 by Karen

» Enlil and Enki
Fri 7 Oct 2016 - 17:11 by Karen

» Israel Shoots Down Drone - Peter Kucznir's Threat
Wed 24 Aug 2016 - 22:55 by Karen

» Rome is Babylon
Sun 24 Jul 2016 - 21:27 by Karen

Links












Gallery



Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Sat 27 Feb 2010 - 20:17

The Whitechapel Murders.

THREE MURDERS WITHIN THREE HUNDRED YARDS.

LONDON, September 7.

The fourth of a series of mysterious and brutal woman murders in London on September 8th threw the city into a great state of excitement. The first occurred on Whit Monday; the victim had 39 stabs. The second happened about the end of July; in this case, the woman's body was cut open. The third was on Friday, September 7th; the woman was disembowelled, and her head nearly severed from her body. The former case occurred as above mentioned. The body of the victim was found in an attic of Whitechapel, in the morning, disembowelled and with her throat cut. No outcry had been heard, and there were no visible sign of a violent struggle. The entire police force was mystified. The murderer is supposed by some to be a lunatic. The police were searching for a certain person nicknamed "Leather Apron," who is said to consort with the lowest class of women, whom he blackmails. A woman's arm found in the Thames, near Pimlico, Sept. 11, gave rise to the belief that a fifth murder had been committed. There is, so far, no solution to the ghastly mystery of these murders. The police are vainly endeavouring to solve it.
A German named Ludwig was arrested on suspicion, Sept. 14, of being the perpetrator of these murders. He had threatened a fallen woman in Whitechapel with a long knife. In his pockets were found a razor and a pair of scissors. He cannot speak English, and had only been in the country three months.
Another arrest was made on the 19th. A young woman was found murdered near Gateshead, on Sept. 23, exactly after the Whitechapel method. The body was discovered at daybreak in the street.
The P.M.G. has taken up the subject con amore. Here are the principal facts as sensationally dressed up by Mr. Stead's young men:
Scarcely has the horror and sensation caused by the discovery of the murdered woman in Whitechapel some short time ago had time to abate, when another discovery is made, which, for the brutality exercised on the victim, is even more shocking, and will no doubt create as great a sensation in the vicinity as its predecessor. What adds so much horror to the mystery is that the murder, in the early hours of Friday morning last, of the woman now known as Mary Ann Nicholls, has so many points of similarity with the murder of the two other women in the same neighbourhood - one Martha Turner, as recently as August 7th, and the other less than twelve months previously - that the police admit their belief that the three crimes are the work of one individual. All three women were of the class called "unfortunates," each so very poor that robbery could have formed no motive for the crime, and each was murdered in such a similar fashion that doubt as to the crime being the work of one and the same villain almost vanishes, particularly when it is remembered that all three murders were committed within a distance of three hundred yards from each other. These facts have led the police to almost abandon the idea of a gang being abroad to wreak vengeance on women of this class for not supplying them with money.

THE DISCOVERY OF THE MUTILATED BODY.

The facts of the latest of the three mysteries are that as Constable John Neil was walking down Buck's-row, Thomas-street, Whitechapel, about a quarter to four o'clock on Friday morning, he discovered a woman between thirty-five and forty years of age lying at the side of the street with her throat cut right open from ear to ear, the instrument with which the deed was done tracing the throat from left to right. As the corpse lies in the mortuary it presents a ghastly sight. The victim seems to be between thirty-five and forty years of age, and measure five feet two inches in height. The hair is dark - features small. The hands are bruised, and bear evidence of having been engaged in a severe struggle. There is the impression of a ring having been worn on one of deceased's fingers, but there is nothing to show that it had been wrenched from her in a struggle. Some of the front teeth have also been knocked out, and the face is bruised on both cheeks and very much discoloured. Deceased wore a rough brown ulster with large buttons in front, a brown dress, and a petticoat which bears the name of the Lambeth workhouse.
Dr. Llewellyn has made a statement, in which he says he was called to Buck's-row about five minutes to four on Friday morning by Police-constable Thane, who said a woman had been murdered. He found deceased lying on the ground in front of the stable-yard door. She was lying on her back, with her legs out straight, as though she had been laid down. Police-constable Neil told him that the body had not been touched. The throat was cut from ear to ear, and the woman was quite dead. The extremities of the body were still warm, showing that death had not long ensued. There was a very small pool of blood on the pathway, which had trickled from the wound in the throat, not more than half a pint at the outside. This fact, and the way in which the deceased was lying, made him think at the time that it was at least probable that the murder was committed elsewhere, and the body conveyed to Buck's-row. At half-past five he was summoned to the mortuary by the police, and was astonished at finding the other wounds. He had seen many horrible cases, but never such a brutal affair as this. There is a gash under the left ear reaching nearly to the centre of the throat, and another cut, apparently starting from the right ear. The neck is severed back to the vertebra, which is also slightly injured. The abdominal wounds are extraordinary for their length and the severity with which they have been inflicted. One cut extends from the base of the abdomen to the breast bone. Deceased's clothes were loose, and the wounds could have been inflicted while she was dressed.

THE SCENE OF THE MURDER.

BUCK'S-ROW, where the body was found, is a narrow passage running out of Thomas-street, and contains a dozen houses of a very low class. It would appear as if the murder had been committed in a house, and the body afterwards removed to the place where it was found, the nature of the abdominal wounds being such that it would be hardly possible for them to be inflicted whilst the deceased was dressed.
When Police-constable Neil discovered the body he roused the people living in the house immediately opposite where the body was found, but none of them had heard any sounds of a struggle. A general belief prevails that the spot where the body was found was not the scene of the murder, and this belief is supported by the fact that what appeared to be blood-stains have been traced at irregular distances on the footpath in Brady-street, which adjoins Buck's-row. Several persons living in Brady-street state that early in the morning they heard screams, but this is by no means an uncommon incident in the neighbourhood; and with one exception nobody seems to have paid any particular attention to what was probably the death struggle of an unfortunate woman. The exception was a Mrs. Colville, who lives only a short distance from the foot of Buck's-row. She says she was awakened in the morning by a woman screaming "Murder! police!" five or six times. The voice faded away as though the woman was going in the direction of Buck's-row, and all was quiet. She only heard the steps of one person.
Inspector Helstone has however since stated that the report that blood-stains were found leading from Brady-street to Buck's-row was not true. The place was examined by Sergeant Enright and himself on Friday morning, and neither blood-stains nor wheelmarks found to indicate that the body had been deposited where found, the murder being committed elsewhere. Both himself and Inspector Abberline indeed had come to the conclusion that it was committed on the spot. That conclusion was fortified by the post-mortem examination made by Dr. Llewellyn. At first the small quantity of blood found on the spot suggested that at woman was murdered in a neighbouring house. Dr. Llewellyn, however, is understood to have satisfied himself that the great quantity of blood which must have followed the gashes in the abdomen flowed into the abdominal cavity, but he maintains his opinion that the first wounds were those in the throat, and they would have effectually prevented any screaming. It is, moreover, considered unlikely that the woman could have entered a house, have been murdered, and have been removed to Buck's-row within a period of an hour and a quarter.

IDENTIFICATION OF THE DECEASED BY HER HUSBAND.

The murdered woman was identified in the course of the day as Mary Ann, or Polly, Nicholls, by several of the women with whom the deceased lived in a common lodging-house at 18, Trawl-street, Spitalfields. Women from that place were fetched, and they identified the deceased as "Polly," who had shared a room with three other women in the place on the usual terms of such houses - nightly payment of 4d. each, each woman having a separate bed. The deceased had lodged in the house only for about three weeks. The husband visited the mortuary on Saturday and on viewing the corpse, identified it as that of his wife, from whom he had been separated eight years. He stated that she was nearly forty-four years of age. The husband, who was greatly affected, exclaimed on recoginsing the body, "I forgive you, as you are, for what you have been to me."

WHEN SHE WAS LAST SEEN ALIVE.

Nothing more was known of her but she presented herself for her lodging on Thursday night; she was turned away by the deputy because she had not the money. She was then the worse for drink, but not drunk, and turned away lauging, saying, "I'll soon get my "doss"money; see what a jolly bonnet I've got now." She was wearing a bonnet which she had not been seen with before, and left the lodging-house door. A woman of the neighbourhood saw her as late as half-past two the following morning in Whitechapel-road, opposite the church, and at the corner of Osborne-street. Mary Ann Monk, an inmate of Lambeth Workhouse, was taken to the mortuary, and identified the body as that of "Polly" Nicholls. She knew her, she said, as they were inmates of the Lambeth Workhouse together in April and May, the deceased having been passed there from another workhouse. On May 12, according to Monk, Nicholls left the workhouse to take a situation as servant at Ingleside, Wandsworth Common. It afterwards became known that Nicholls betrayed her trust as domestic servant by stealing 3 pounds from her employer and abconding. From that time she had been wandering about. Monk met her, she said, about six weeks ago, when herself out of the workhouse, and drank with her.

THE INQUEST.

The inquest upon the murdered woman was opened by Mr. Wynne E. Baxter, the coroner, on Saturday, continued on Monday, and then adjourned till the 17th inst. Eward Walker, the father of the deceased, living at 16, Maidwood-street, Albany-road, Camberwell, identified the body lying in the mortuary as being to the best his belief his daughter. He had not seen her for 3 years. He recognised her from her general appearance and by a mark on her forehead which she had had since she was a child. His daughter's married name was Mary Ann Nicholls. She had been married quite twenty-two years. Her husband's name was William Nicholls, and he was alive. His occupation was printer's machinist. They had been living apart for seven or eight years. He had not seen her alive since June, 1886. She was leading a respectable life, he believed, then. He saw her at a funeral. He did not speak to her, as they were not friendly. She was not always sober, and that was why they did not agree. He had no idea that she was "fast." He did not turn his daughter out of doors, but they had a few words one night, and she left him the next morning. He added: She had no business to be like this now, as I had a home for her. His daughter's husband left the deceased. While deceased was being confined the husband paid some attention to her nurse, which caused some unpleasantness between them, and they separated. Her husband afterwards lived with this woman, by whom he had another family. The deceased had five children, the eldest is twenty-one and the youngest about eight. She left her husband when the youngest child was about a year old. One of the children lived with witness, the other four being with their father. Witness believed that three or four years ago deceased was living with a man of the name Drew, in York-street, Walworth. He had not heard of any other man that deceased had anything to do with. He thought his daughter was in service still at Wandsworth. The deceased was in the Lambeth Workhouse in April last, and went from there to the situation at Wandsworth. The deceased's husband lived at Coberg-road, Old Kent-road. He did not think his daughter had any bad friends. She was too good for that. Her only fault was being too good to others and ignoring herself.

A FRESH OUTRAGE AND A POSSIBLE CLUE.

The evidence at the inquest did not, it will be seen, throw any light on the mystery. But another desperate assault, which stopped only short of murder, was committed upon a woman in Whitechapel on Saturday night. The victim was leaving the Foresters' Music-hall, Cambridge Heath-road, where she had been spending the evening with a sea captain, when she was accosted by a well-dressed man, who requested her to walk a short distance with him, as he wanted to meet a friend. They had reached a point near to the scene of the murder of the woman Nicholls, when the man violently seized her by the throat and dragged her down a court. He was immediately joined by a gang of women and bullies, who stripped the unfortunate woman of necklace, earrings, and brooch. Her purse was also taken, and she was brutally assaulted. Upon her attempting to shout for aid one of the gang laid a large knife across her throat, remarking, "We will serve you as we did the others." She was, however, eventually released. The police have been informed, and are prosecuting inquiries into the matter, it being regarded as a probable clue to the previous tragedies.

THE STORY OF "MACBETH" RETOLD.

Up to the present time, however, no definite clue has been obtained; and meanwhile the terror in the neighbourhood is, as might be expected, very great. "At every street corner," says a correspondent of the "Daily News," gossips cluster around anybody who could give the fullest particulars of the inquest, and the end of Buck's-row, the spot on which the body had been found, is the scene of eager debate as to the probabilities of discovering the criminal. Groups of hard-featured, sorrowful-looking women clustered together and bent over what they supposed to be the blood-stained paving-stones, and told strange stories of the difficulties credibly reported to be always experienced in obliterating the marks of human gore. One thin-faced, blue-eyed little old man, who no doubt at some point in his threescore years and ten had on the stage seen Lady Macbeth trying to wash her hands of the life blood of King Duncan and still retained some vague outlines of the story, recounted what he could remember as an actual historical fact. The narrative, distorted almost out of recognition, was listened to with the keenest interest, and was unhesitatingly accepted in collaboration of the general belief as to the ineradicable nature of blood stains."

THE "SHUDDERING DREAD" IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD.

"People in the neighbourhood seem very much divided in opinion," continues the same correspondent, "as to the probability of its being the work of one person or several. The women for the most part appear to incline to the belief that it is a gang that has done this and the other murders, and the shuddering dread of being abroad in the streets after nightfall, expressed by the more nervous of them, is pitiable. "Thank God, I needn't be out after dark," ejaculated one woman. "No more needn't I," said another; "but my two girls have got to come home latish, and I'm all of a fidget till they comes." Very rarely has anything occurred even in this quarter of London that has created so profound a sensation, and seldom have the police in this part been so appalled by a sense of insecurity. There seems to be prevalent confidence that the police are doing all in their power to discover the criminal, but there is at least an equally general conviction that until this mysterious assassin is taken the neighbourhood should have a stronger contingent of police for its protection. "Life ain't no great thing with many on us," said one little woman, whose sprightly manner and rosy cherub face rather belied her pessimism, "but we don't want to be murdered, and if things go on like this it won't be safe for nobody to put their 'eads out o' doors."

Source: Te Aroha News, Volume VI, Issue 309, 20 October 1888, Page 6


Last edited by Karen on Fri 15 Mar 2013 - 5:35; edited 2 times in total
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Sun 12 Jun 2011 - 20:54

THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER.
(FROM THE "PALL MALL GAZETTE.")

THE SCENE OF THE MURDER.

Buck's-Row, where the body was found, is a narrow passage running out of Thomas-street, and contains a dozen houses of a very low class. It would appear as if the murder had been committed in a house, and the body afterwards removed to the place where it was found, the nature of the abdominal wounds being such that it would be hardly possible for them to be inflicted whilst the deceased was dressed.
When police-constable Neil discovered the body he roused the people living in the house immediately opposite where the body was found, but none of them had heard any sounds of a struggle. A general belief prevails that the spot where the body was found was not the scene of the murder, and this belief is supported by the fact that what appeared to be blood-stains have been traced at irregular distances on the foot-path in Brady-street, which adjoins Buck's-row. Several persons living in Brady-street state that early in the morning they heard screams, but this is by no means an uncommon incident in the neighbourhood; and with one exception nobody seems to have paid any particular attention to what was probably the death struggle of an unfortunate woman. The exception was a Mrs. Colville, who lives only a short distance from the foot of Buck's-row. She says she was awakened in the morning by a woman screaming "Murder! police!" five or six times. The voice faded away as though the woman was going in the direction of Buck's-row, and all was quiet. She only heard the steps of one person.
Inspector Helstone has however since stated that the report that blood-stains were found leading from Brady-street to Buck's-row was not true. The place was examined by Sergeant Enright and himself on Friday morning, and neither bloodstains nor wheelmarks found to indicate that the body had been deposited where found, the murder being committed elsewhere. Both himself and Inspector Abberline, indeed, had come to the conclusion that it was committed on the spot. That conclusion was fortified by the post-mortem examination made by Dr. Llewellyn. At first the small quantity of blood found on the spot suggested that the woman was murdered in a neighbouring house. Dr. Llewellyn, however, is understood to have satisfied himself that the great quantity of blood which must have followed the gashes in the abdomen flowed into the abdominal cavity, but he maintains his opinion that the first wounds were those in the throat, and they would have effectually prevented any screaming. It is, moreover, considered unlikely that the woman could have entered a house, have been murdered, and have been removed to Buck's-row within a period of an hour and a quarter.

IDENTIFICATION OF THE DECEASED BY HER HUSBAND.

The murdered woman was identified in the course of the day as Mary Ann, or Polly, Nicholls, by several of the women with whom the deceased lived in a common lodging-house at 18, Thrawl-street, Spitalfields. Women from that place were fetched, and they identified the deceased as "Polly," who had shared a room with three other women in the place on the usual terms of such houses - nightly payment of 4d. each, each woman having a separate bed. The deceased had lodged in the house only for about three weeks. The husband visited the mortuary on Saturday and on viewing the corpse, identified it as that of his wife, from whom he had been separated eight years. He stated that she was nearly forty-four years of age. The husband, who was greatly affected, exclaimed on recognizing the body, "I forgive you, as you are, for what you have been to me."

WHEN SHE WAS LAST SEEN ALIVE.

Nothing more was known of her but she presented herself for her lodging on Thursday night; she was turned away by the deputy because she had not the money. She was then the worse for drink, but not drunk, and turned away laughing, saying, "I'll soon get my "doss" money; see what a jolly bonnet I've got now." She was wearing a bonnet which she had not been seen with before, and left the lodging-house door. A woman of the neighbourhood saw her as late as half-past two the following morning in Whitechapel-road, opposite the church, and at the corner of Osborne-street. Mary Ann Monk, an inmate of Lambeth Workhouse, was taken to the mortuary, and identified the body as that of "Polly" Nicholls. She knew her, she said, as they were inmates of the Lambeth Workhouse together in April and May, the deceased having been passed there from another workhouse. On May 12, according to Monk, Nicholls left the workhouse to take a situation as servant at Ingleside, Wandsworth Common. It afterwards became known that Nicholls betrayed her trust as domestic servant by stealing 3 pounds from her employer and absconding. From that time she had been wandering about. Monk met her, she said, about six weeks ago, when herself out of the workhouse, and drank with her.

THE INQUEST.

The inquest upon the murdered woman was opened by Mr. Wynne E. Baxter, the coroner, on Saturday, continued on Monday, and then adjourned till the 17th inst. Edward Walker, the father of the deceased, living at 16, Maidwood-street, Albany-road, Camberwell, identified the body lying in the mortuary as being to the best of his belief his daughter. He had not seen her for 3 years. He recognised her from her general appearance and by a mark on her forehead which she had had since she was a child. His daughter's married name was Mary Ann Nicholls. She had been married quite twenty-two years. Her husband's name was William Nicholls, and he was alive. His occupation was a printer's machinist. They had been living apart for seven or eight years. He had not seen her alive since June, 1886. She was leading a respectable life, he believed, then. He saw her at a funeral. He did not speak to her, as they were not friendly. She was not always sober, and that was why they did not agree. He had no idea that she was "fast." He did not turn his daughter out of doors, but they had a few words one night, and she left him the next morning. He added: She had no business to be like this now, as I had a home for her. His daughter's husband left the deceased. While deceased was being confined the husband paid some attention to her nurse, which caused some unpleasantness between them, and they separated. Her husband afterwards lived with this woman, by whom he had another family. The deceased had five children; the eldest is twenty-one and the youngest about eight. She left her husband when the youngest child was about a year old. One of the children lived with witness, the other four being with their father. Witness believed that three or four years ago deceased was living with a man of the name of Drew, in York-street, Walworth. He had not heard of any other man that deceased had anything to do with. He thought his daughter was in service still at Wandsworth. The deceased was in the Lambeth Workhouse in April last, and went from there to the situation at Wandsworth. The deceased's husband lived at Coberg-road, Old Kent-road. He did not think his daughter had any bad friends. She was too good for that. Her only fault was being too good to others and ignoring herself.

A FRESH OUTRAGE AND A POSSIBLE CLUE.

The evidence at the inquest did not, it will be seen, throw any light on the mystery. But another desperate assault, which stopped only short of murder, was committed upon a woman in Whitechapel on Saturday night. The victim was leaving the Foresters' Music-hall, Cambridge Heath-road, where she had been spending the evening with a sea captain, when she was accosted by a well-dressed man, who requested her to walk a short distance with him, as he wanted to meet a friend. They had reached a point near to the scene of the murder of the woman Nicholls, when the man violently seized her by the throat and dragged her down a court. He was immediately joined by a gang of women and bullies, who stripped the unfortunate woman of necklace, earrings, and brooch. Her purse was also taken, and she was brutally assaulted. Upon her attempting to shout for aid one of the gang laid a large knife across her throat, remarking, "We will serve you as we did the others." She was, however, eventually released. The police have been informed, and are prosecuting inquiries into the matter, it being regarded as a probable clue to the previous tragedies.

THE STORY OF "MACBETH" RETOLD.

Up to the present time, however, no definite clue has been obtained; and meanwhile the terror in the neighbourhood is, as might be expected, very great. "At every street corner," says a correspondent of the "Daily News," "gossips cluster around anybody who could give the fullest particulars of the inquest, and the end of Buck's-row, the spot on which the body had been found, is the scene of eager debate as to the probabilities of discovering the criminal. Groups of hard-featured, sorrowful-looking women clustered together and bent over what they supposed to be the blood-stained paving-stones, and told strange stories of the difficulties credibly reported to be always experienced in obliterating the marks of human gore. One thin-faced, blue-eyed little old man, who no doubt at some point in his threescore years and ten had on the stage seen Lady Macbeth trying to wash her hands of the life blood of King Duncan and still retained some vague outlines of the story, recounted what he could remember as an actual historical fact. The narrative, distorted almost out of recognition, was listened to with the keenest interest, and was unhesitatingly accepted in corroboration of the general belief as to the ineradicable nature of blood stains."

THE "SHUDDERING DREAD" IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD.

"People in the neighbourhood seem very much divided in opinion," continues the same correspondent, "as to the probability of its being the work of one person or several. The women for the most part appear to incline to the belief that it is a gang that has done this and the other murders, and the shuddering dread of being abroad in the streets after nightfall, expressed by the more nervous of them, is pitiable. "Thank God, I needn't be out after dark," ejaculated one woman. "No more needn't I," said another; "but my two girls have got to come home latish, and I'm all of a fidget till they comes."
Very rarely has anything occurred even in this quarter of London that has created so profound a sensation, and seldom have the police in this part been so appalled by a sense of insecurity. There seems to be prevalent confidence that the police are doing all in their power to discover the criminal, but there is at least an equally general conviction that until this mysterious assassin is taken the neighbourhood should have a stronger contingent of police for its protection. "Life ain't no great thing with many on us," said one little woman, whose sprightly manner and rosy cherub face rather belied her pessimism, "but we don't want to be murdered, and if things go on like this it won't be safe for nobody to put their 'eads out o' doors."

Source: Auckland Star, Volume XIX, Issue 244, 16 October 1888, Page 5

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Mon 20 Jun 2011 - 9:47

FEARFUL MURDER OF A WOMAN.

NEW YORK, Sept. 1 - The Times London special says a strangely horrible murder took place at Whitechapel yesterday morning. The victim was a woman who at three o'clock was knocked down by some man unknown and attacked with a knife. She attempted to get up and ran a hundred yards, her cries for help being heard by several persons in adjacent houses. No attention was paid to her cries, however, and when found at daybreak she was lying dead in another street several hundred yards from the scene of the attack. Her head was nearly severed from her body, which was literally cut to pieces, one gash reaching from the pelvis to the breast bone. This is the third murder of the kind which has been done lately. In the last one, two weeks ago, the victim was stabbed thirty-nine times; in the case before it some months ago the victim was stabbed with a stick which was forced through the body. All three victims have been women of the lowest class; all three murders have taken place in the same district at about the same hour and have been characterized by the same inhuman and ghoul like brutality. The police have concluded that the same man did all three murders and the most dangerous kind of lunatic is at large. The excitement is intense over the matter.

Source: The Montreal Daily Witness, Saturday September 1, 1888, Page 1

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 26 Oct 2011 - 6:38

[img][/img]

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 26 Oct 2011 - 6:39

ANOTHER AWFUL MURDER IN WHITECHAPEL.

A WOMAN FOUND BRUTALLY HACKED TO DEATH IN THE STREET.

A murder excelling in atrocity any that has disgraced even the East-end was discovered on Friday in a street off Whitechapel-road. Between three and four in the morning the body of a murdered woman was found lying in the gutter in Buck's-row. It presented a horrible spectacle. The throat had been cut right open from ear to ear, the instrument with which the deed was done tracing the throat from left to right. The wound was about two inches wide and blood was flowing profusely. She was immediately conveyed to the Whitechapel mortuary, when it was found that besides the wound in the throat the lower part of the abdomen was completely ripped open with the bowels protruding. The wound extended nearly to her breast, and must have been effected with a large knife. The body was warm when discovered.
The brutality of the murder is beyond conception and beyond description. The throat was cut in two gashes, the instrument having been a sharp one, but used in a most ferocious and reckless way. There was a gash under the left ear, reaching nearly to the centre of the throat. Along half its length, however, it was accompanied by another one which reached around under the other ear, making a wide and horrible hole, and nearly severing the head from the body. The ghastliness of this cut, however, paled into insignificance alongside the other. No murder was ever more ferociously and more brutally done. The knife, which must have been a large and sharp one, was jobbed into the deceased at the lower part of the abdomen, and then drawn upwards twice. It was early evident that the murder was committed some distance from the place where the body was found. This was in Buck's-row, about midway down its length. Buck's-row is a short street occupied half by factories and half by dwellings. Half-way down the street is the house of Mrs. Green. Next to it is a large stable-yard, whose wide closed gateway is next to the house. In front of this gateway the woman was found. Constable Neill, who was the first policeman to see the body, immediately after woke the Green family, and asked them if they had heard any unusual noise. Neither Mrs. Green, her son, or her daughter, all of whom were sleeping within a few feet of where the body lay, had heard any outcry. All agreed that the night was unusually quiet.
"I should have heard it had there been any, I think," said Mrs. Green, when interviewed, "for I have trouble with my heart, and am a very light sleeper. My son went down as soon as the body was taken away and washed away the bloodstains on the pavement. There was quite a little pool, though I understand most of it soaked into the woman's dress. I looked out and saw the body as it lay there. It was lying straight across the gateway, its head towards me. It was not lying in a heap as if it had fallen, but on its back and straight as if it had been laid there. I could not tell at first whether it was a man or a woman; but James, my son, who went downstairs, returned and told me it was a woman. This was four o'clock on Friday morning."
Across the row lives a Mr. Perkins, whose wife is not very well. They sleep in the front room, and either Mr. Perkins or his wife was awake at short intervals up to four o'clock on Friday morning. Neither heard the slightest sound in the street, and both agreed that it was an unusually quiet night, as there are sometimes brawls and fights or drunken men passing the house, which disturb their sleep. They were sure that there was no outcry loud enough to be heard a few feet away. The watchman in Schneider's factory, just above the Perkins's, heard nothing.
The detectives at once searched the stable-yard and every vacant space in the vicinity in the hope of discovering some clue. None appeared, however. They kept a sharp look-out for the knife with which the deed was done, but found no trace of it. Everything seemed to indicate that the murder was actually committed some distance away. The people living in Brady-street were thrown into a state of excitement on the terrible new spreading. Brady-street is a long thoroughfare that runs to the left from the bottom of Buck's-row. Early on Friday morning fresh blood stains were observed for quite a distance along the side walks. There would be drop after drop two or three feet and sometimes six feet apart for a distance, and then a larger pool or splash. As soon as the murder became known a lively interest was taken in these blood-stains, and they began to be traced. They were soon found to be on both sides of the street, and it was afterwards seen that the bleeding person had travelled or been carried in a zig-zag line. The trail was easily followed down Brady-street for 150 yards to Honey's-mews. In front of the gateway there was a large stain, looking as if the bleeding person had fallen against the wall and lain there. From here to the foot of Buck's-row, in which the body was found, the trail of blood was clearly marked. It was wet on Friday morning, and at noon, although the sun had dried it, and there had been many feet passing over it, it was still plainly discernible. The zig-zag direction it took crossing and recrossing the street was and is a matter of mystery. In the space of a hundred yards the woman crossed the narrow street twice, and whenever she crossed a larger stain of blood in place of the drops indicated that she had stopped.
Although neither Mrs. Green nor Mr. Perkins heard any noise, there are a number of people who early on Friday morning heard the screams of the victim. None of them paid any particular attention to them, however, except Mrs. Colwell, who lives midway between Buck's-row and the next turning. She said, "I was awakened early on Friday morning by my little girl, who said someone was trying to get into the house. I listened, and heard screams. They were in a woman's voice, and, though frightened, were faint-like, as would be natural if she were running. She was screaming, "Murder, police! Murder, police! Murder, police!" She screamed this five or six times, and seemed to be getting further and further away (toward the bottom of Buck's-row) all the time. I heard no other voice and no other steps. She seemed to be all alone. I think I would have heard the steps if anybody had been running after her, unless they were running on tiptoe."
Shortly after noon on Friday some men while searching the pavement in Buck's-row, above the gateway, in a different direction to that from which the woman came, or was brought, found two large spots of blood, and each about the size of a shilling. The first was about 25 feet from the gateway and the second 10 feet beyond. Both were a few inches from the kerb in the roadway and clearly defined. It was at once agreed they came either from the hands or the clothing of the murderer as he went away, and they resulted from the squeezing out some blood-soaked clothing. Our representative discovered, however, on making inquiries the same night, that at a house near where the blood spots were a man, early on the morning of the tragedy, had made a murderous assault on his wife and cut her throat. She was carried to the London hospital, and it is very probable some blood dripped from her.

IDENTIFICATION OF THE BODY.

After the body was removed to the mortuary of the parish, in Old Montagu-street, Whitechapel, steps were taken to secure, if possible, identification, but at first with little prospect of success. The clothing was of a common description, but the skirt of one petticoat and the band of another article bore the stencil stamp of Lambeth workhouse. The only articles in the pockets were a comb and a piece of looking-glass. The latter led the police to conclude that the murdered woman was an inhabitant of the numerous lodging-houses of the neighbourhood, and officers were despatched to make inquiries about, as well as other officers to Lambeth to get the matron to see the body, with a view to identification. The latter, however, could not do so, and said that the clothing might have been issued any time during the past two or three years. As the news of the murder spread, however, first one woman and then another came forward to view the body, and at length it was found that a woman answering the description of the murdered woman had lodged in a common lodging-house, 18, Thrawl-street, Spitalfields. Women from that place were fetched, and they identified the deceased as "Polly," who had shared a room with three other women in the place on the usual terms of such houses - nightly payment of 4d. each, each woman having a separate bed. It was gathered that the deceased had led the life of an "unfortunate" whilst lodging in the house, which was only for about three weeks past. Nothing more was known of her by them, but when she presented herself for her lodging on Thursday night she was turned away because she had not the money. She was then the worse for drink but not drunk, and turned away laughing, saying, "I'll soon get my "doss" money. See what a jolly bonnet I've got now." She was wearing a bonnet which she had not been seen with before, and left the lodging-house door. A woman of the neighbourhood saw her later - she told the police even as late as 2:30 on Friday morning, in Whitechapel-road, opposite the church, and at the corner of Osborne-street - and at a quarter to four she was found within 500 yards of the spot, murdered. The people of the lodging-house knew her as "Polly," but about half-past seven on Friday evening a woman named Mary Anne Monk, at present an inmate of Lambeth workhouse, was taken to the mortuary and identified the body as that of Mary Ann Nicholls, also called "Polly" Nicholls. She knew her, she said, as they were inmates of the Lambeth workhouse together in April and May last, the deceased having been passed there from another workhouse. On the 12th of May, according to Monk, Nicholls left the workhouse to take a situation as servant at Ingleside, Wandsworth-common. It afterwards became known that Nicholls betrayed her trust as domestic servant, by stealing 3 pounds from her employer, and absconding. From that time she had been wandering about. Monk met her, she said, about six weeks ago, when herself out of the workhouse, and drank with her. She was sure the deceased was "Polly" Nicholls, and having twice viewed the features as it lay in a shell, maintained her opinion. Yesterday the father went and viewed the body, and formally identified it as that of Mary Ann Nicholls, aged 42.

THEORY OF THE CRIME.

According to one correspondent: The police theory is that a sort of "high rip" gang exists in the neighbourhood, which, "blackmailing" women of the "unfortunate" class, takes vengeance on those who do not find money for them. They base that surmise on the fact that within 12 months two other women have been murdered in the district by almost similar means - one as recently as the 6th of August last - and left in the gutter of the street in the early hours of the morning. A second theory is that the woman was murdered in a house where she had gone on an immoral errand, and killed whilst undressed, her clothes being huddled on the body, which was afterwards conveyed out to be deposited in the street. Colour is lent to this by the small quantity, comparatively, of blood found in the clothes, and by the fact that the clothes are not cut. If the woman was murdered on the spot where the body was found, it is almost impossible to believe she would not have aroused the neighbourhood by her screams; Buck's-row being a street tenanted all down one side by a respectable class, superior to many of the surrounding streets, the other side having a blank wall bounding a warehouse. An interview was had with Dr. Llewellyn, who was formerly a house surgeon of the London hospital, and he most courteously gave his opinion of the manner of the murder. In effect he said that the woman was killed by the cuts in the throat - there are two, and the throat is divided back to the vertebrae. He had called the attention of the police to the smallness of the quantity of blood on the spot where he saw the body, and yet the gashes in the abdomen laid the body right open. The weapon used would scarcely have been a sailor's jack knife but a pointed weapon with a stout back, such as a cork cutter's or shoemaker's knife. In Dr. Llewellyn's opinion it was not an exceptionally long-bladed weapon. He does not believe that the woman was seized from behind and her throat cut, but thinks a hand was held across her mouth, and the knife then used, possibly by a left-handed man, as the bruising on the face of deceased is such as would result from the mouth being covered with the right hand. He made a second examination of the body in the mortuary, and on that based his conclusion.

A LITTLE GIRL'S STORY.

Charlotte Colville, who lives about the middle of Brady-street, made the following statement to our representative on Friday night: - I am 11 years of age, and sleep with my mother. Early this (Friday) morning, before it was light, I heard terrible cries of "Murder! Murder! Police! Police! Murder!" They seemed a good way down Brady-street to the right, where the marks of bloody hands are. Then the sounds came up the street towards our house, and I heard a scuffling and bumping against our shutters. I got out of bed and woke my mother. The woman kept on calling out "Murder! Police!" and the sounds went on in the direction of Buck's-row, where the body was found. I am sure the first sounds seemed to come from where the blood-stains of hands are on the wall.
Mrs. Colville said that her little girl woke her, and she heard the woman's cries, but the rows go on every night, and people are constantly being knocked down and robbed by the fearful gangs about. It would not be safe for anyone to get out of their beds to go and interfere. People have done so, and only been terribly ill-treated.

REMARKABLE STATEMENT.

On Friday night Mr. Robert Paul, a carman, on his return from work, made the following statement to our representative. He said: - It was exactly a quarter to four when I passed up Buck's-row to my work as a carman for Covent-garden market. It was dark, and I was hurrying along, when I saw a man standing where the woman was. He came a little towards me, but as I knew the dangerous character of the locality I tried to give him a wide berth. Few people like to come up and down here without being on their guard, for there are such terrible gangs about. There have been many knocked down and robbed at that spot. The man, however, came towards me and said, "Come and look at this woman." I went and found the woman lying on her back. I laid hold of her wrist and found that she was dead and the hands cold. It was too dark to see the blood about her. I thought that she had been outraged, and had died in the struggle. I was obliged to be punctual at my work, so I went on and told the other man I would send the first policeman I saw. I saw one in Church-row, just at the top of Buck's-row, who was going round calling people up, and I told him what I had seen, and I asked him to come, but he did not say whether he should come or not. He continued calling the people up, which I thought was a great shame, after I had told him the woman was dead. The woman was so cold that she must have been dead some time, and either she had been lying there, left to die, or she must have been murdered somewhere else and carried there. If she had been lying there long enough to get so cold as she was when I saw her, it shows that no policeman on the beat had been down there for a long time. If a policeman had been there he must have seen her, for she was plain enough to see. Her bonnet was lying about two feet from her head.

OPENING OF THE INQUEST.

Mr. Baxter opened an inquiry at the Working Lads' institute, Whitechapel-road, yesterday, into the circumstances attending the death of the woman.
- Inspector Helston, who has the case in hand, attended, with other officers, on behalf of the Criminal Investigation department. - After being sworn in the jury proceeded to view the body, which lay in the parish mortuary close by.

IDENTIFIED BY THE FATHER.

Edward Walker was the first witness called, and said: - I live at 15, Maidwell-street, Albany-road, Camberwell, and I have no occupation. I was a smith when I was at work, but I am not now. I have seen the body in the mortuary, and to the best of my belief it is my daughter, but I have not seen her for three years. I recognise her by her general appearance and by a little mark she had on her forehead when a child. She also had either one or two teeth out, the same as the woman I have just seen. My daughter's name was Mary Ann Nicholls, and she had been married 22 years, being 42 years of age. Her husband's name was William Nicholls, and he is alive. He is a machinist, and lives at Coburg-road, Old Kent-road. They have been living apart for some length of time, about seven or eight years. I last heard of her before Easter. She wrote to me.
The letter, which was dated April 17, 1888, was read by the coroner, and referred to a place which the deceased had gone to at Wandsworth.
The Coroner: When did you last see her alive?
Witness: Two years ago last June.
Was she then in a good situation? - I don't know.
I was on speaking terms with her. She had been living with me three or four years previously, but thought she could do better herself, so I let her go.
What did she do after she left you? - I don't know.
This letter seems to suggest that she was in a decent situation. - She had only just gone there
Was she a sober woman? - Well, at times she drank, and that was why we did not agree.
Was she fast? - No; I never heard of anything of that sort. She used to go with some young women and men that she knew, but I never heard of anything improper.
Have you any idea what she has been doing lately? - I have not the slightest idea.
She must have drank heavily for you to turn her out of doors? - I never turned her out. She had no need to be like this while I had a home for her.
How is it that she and her husband were not living together?
Witness: When she was confined her husband took on with the young woman who came to nurse her, and they parted, he living with the nurse, by whom he has another family.
The Coroner: Have you any reasonable doubt that this is your daughter?
Witness: No, I have not. I know nothing about her acquaintance, or what she had been doing for a living. I had no idea she was over here in this part of the town. She has had five children, the eldest being 21 years old, and the youngest eight or nine years. One of them lives with me, and the other four are with their father.
The Coroner: Has she ever lived with anybody since she left her husband?
Witness: I believe she was once stopping with a man in York-street, Walworth. His name was Drew, and he was a smith by trade. He is living there now, I believe. The parish of Lambeth summoned her husband for the keep of the children, but the summons was dismissed, as it was proved that she was then living with another man. I don't know who that man was.
The Coroner: Was she ever in the workhouse?
Witness: Yes, sir - Lambeth workhouse, in April last, and from there to a situation at Wandsworth.
By the Jury: The husband resides at Coburg-road, Old Kent-road. I don't know if he knows of her death.
Coroner: Is there anything you know of likely to throw any light upon this affair?
Witness: No; I don't think she had any enemies; she was too good for that. She had been more good to others than herself.

THE POLICEMAN'S EVIDENCE.

John Neill, police constable 97 J, was sworn, and said: Yesterday morning I was proceeding down Buck's-row, Whitechapel, going towards Brady-street. There was not a soul about. I had been round there half an hour previous, and I saw no one then. I was on the left hand side of the street, when I noticed a figure lying in the street. It was dark at the time, though there was a street lamp shining at the end of the row. I went across and found the deceased lying outside a gateway, her head towards the east. The gateway was closed. It was about nine or ten feet high, and led to some stables. There were houses from the gateway eastward, and the School Board school occupies the westward. On the opposite side of the road is Essex wharf. Deceased was lying lengthways along the street, her left hand touching the gate. I examined the body by the aid of my lamp, and noticed blood oozing from a wound in the throat. She was lying on her back, with her clothes disarranged. I felt her arm, which was quite warm from the joints upwards. Her eyes were wide open. Her bonnet was off and lying at her side, close to the left hand. I heard a constable passing Brady-street, so I called him. I did not whistle. I said to him, "Run at once for Dr. Llewellyn," and seeing another constable in Baker's-row, I immediately sent for the ambulance. The doctor arrived in a very short time. I had in the meantime rung the bell at Essex wharf, and asked if any disturbance had been heard. The reply was "No." Serjeant Kirby came after, and he knocked. The doctor looked at the woman, and then said, "Move the woman to the mortuary. She is dead, and I will make a further examination of her." We then placed her on the ambulance, and moved her there. Inspector Spratley came to the mortuary, and while taking a description of the deceased examined her clothes, and found that she was disembowelled. This had not been noticed by any of them before. On the body was found a piece of comb and a bit of looking-glass. No money was found, but an unmarked white handkerchief was found in her pocket. There was a pool of blood just where her neck was lying. The blood was then running from the wound in her neck.
The Coroner: Did you hear any noise that night?
Witness: No, I heard nothing. The farthest I had been that night was just through the Whitechapel-road and up Baker's-row. I was never far away from the spot.
The Coroner: Whitechapel-road is busy in the early morning, I believe. Could anybody have escaped that way?
Witness: Oh, yes, sir. I saw a number of women in the main road going home. At that time anyone could have got away.
The Coroner: Someone searched the ground, I believe?
Witness: Yes, I examined it while the doctor was being sent for.
Inspector Spratley: I examined the road, sir, in daylight.
A Juryman (to witness): Did you see a trap in the road at all?
Witness: No.
Juryman: Knowing that the body was warm, did it not strike you that it might just have been laid there, and that the woman was killed elsewhere?
Witness: I examined the road, but did not see the mark of wheels. The first to arrive on the scene after I had discovered the body were two men who work at a slaughter-house opposite. They said they knew nothing of the affair, and that they had not heard any screams. I had previously seen the men at work. That would be about a quarter-past three, or half-an-hour before I found the body.

THE DOCTOR DESCRIBES THE WOUNDS.

Henry Llewellyn, 152, Whitechapel-road, surgeon, was next called, and said: On Friday morning I was called by the last witness to Buck's-row at about four o'clock. The constable told me what I was wanted for. On reaching Buck's-row I found the deceased woman lying flat on her back in the pathway, her legs extended. I found she was quite dead, and that she had severe injuries to her throat. Her hands and wrists were cold, but the body and lower extremities were quite warm. I examined her chest and felt her heart. It was dark at the time. I believe that she had not been dead more than half an hour. I am quite certain that the injuries to her neck were not self-inflicted. There was very little blood round the neck. There were no marks of any struggle or of blood, as if the body had been dragged. I told the police to take her to the mortuary, and I would make another examination. About an hour later I was sent for by the inspector to see the injuries he had discovered on the body. I went, and saw that the abdomen was cut very extensively. I have this (Saturday) morning made a post-mortem of the body. I found it to be that of a female about 40 or 45 years. Five of the teeth are missing, and there is a slight laceration of the tongue. On the right side of the face there was a bruise running along the lower part of the jaw. It might have been caused by a blow with the fist or pressure by the thumb. On the left side of the face there was a circular bruise, which also might have been done by the pressure of the fingers. On the left side of the neck, about an inch below the jaw, there was an incision about four inches long and running from a point immediately below the ear. An inch below on the same side, and commencing about an inch in front of it, was a circular incision terminating at a point about three inches below the right jaw. This incision completely severs all the tissues down to the vertebrae. The large vessels of the neck on both sides were severed. The incision is about eight inches long. These cuts must have been caused with a long-bladed knife, moderately sharp, and used with great violence. No blood at all was found on the breast, either of the body or clothes. There were no injuries about the body till just about the lower part of the abdomen. Two or three inches from the left side was a wound running in a jagged manner. It was a very deep wound, and the tissues were cut through. There were several incisions running across the abdomen. On the right side there were also three or four similar cuts running downwards. All these had been caused by a knife, which had been used violently and been used downwards. The injuries were from left to right, and might have been done by a left-handed person. All the injuries had been done by the same instrument and possibly by a left-handed man.
A Juror: How long should you think anyone would be inflicting such injuries? - About five minutes.
Should you think the murder was committed by anyone who understood anatomy? - I should think by someone who knew something of it; for whoever did it has attacked all the vital parts.
A Juror: Should you think it was done by a clasp knife or a butcher's knife, or what? - It must have been a strong knife. I cannot say what kind of knife.
Coroner: There was no smell of drink? - No; and there was none in the stomach.
Coroner: Must she of necessity have screamed? - No; I think the wound would have caused instantaneous death.
The coroner said it was a most shocking case.
The inquest was then adjourned till Monday.

Source: Lloyd's Weekly London Newspaper, September 2, 1888, Page 7

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 26 Oct 2011 - 6:40

HORRIBLE MURDER IN WHITECHAPEL.

WOMAN SHOCKINGLY MUTILATED.
HEAD NEARLY CUT OFF.

A tragedy, even more revolting in its details than that of George-yard, and surrounded apparently with circumstances fully as mysterious, has just occurred at Buck's-row, a low-class neighbourhood adjoining Whitechapel-road. Passing the Essex Wharf, in Buck's-row, at about 4:30 this morning, Constable Neale, 97 J, found lying on the pavement there the dead body of a woman. On further examination, her head was found to have been very nearly severed from her body. A horrible gash, fully an inch in width, extending from one side of the neck to the other, completely severing the windpipe. The lower portion of the abdomen also was completely ripped open, causing the bowels to protrude. The woman was at once conveyed to the mortuary, where she now lies. She is apparently about five and thirty years of age, with dark hair, of medium height, and with small features. Her clothing, which was examined by Inspector Helson, is scanty, consisting only of a threadbare cloak with a hood, a brown dress, and a petticoat, which bears the mark of the Lambeth Workhouse. The woman has not yet been identified.
It is thought that the woman was assailed by some man with whom she had been in company. Her front teeth had been knocked out, the woman probably having received a kick in the mouth from her assailant.

LATER ACCOUNT.

No more revolting crime has ever been committed in Whitechapel than that which occurred in Buck's-row, Thomas-street, a comparatively unfrequented thoroughfare - especially at night - lying at the back of the Whitechapel-road. As Police-constable Neil was leaving his beat in that locality, he saw what he at first thought was a drunken woman. A closer investigation made the officer arrive at a different conclusion, for, upon stooping down, he observed that the woman's throat was literally cut from ear to ear, and her head nearly severed. The wounds in her neck extended to the spinal column. Dr. Llewellyn, of the Bethnal-green-road, was at once called. He could only pronounce it as a case of murder. It is presumed that death took place about two o'clock, for the discovery was not made until shortly before four, and the body was then warm.

THE TERRIBLE WOUNDS.

Inspector Helston, Detective-Sergeant Enwright, and Sergeant Godley were soon on the spot, and made a diligent search for any weapon which might have been used in the perpetration of the crime. Their efforts in that respect were futile, but, from the nature of the injuries, it is conjectured that a knife such as would be used by butchers was wielded in the murderer's hand.
When the body of the unfortunate creature - not yet identified - was taken to the mortuary, a more minute examination showed that the actual wounds were of a character too horrible to mention in detail. As a Criminal Investigation officer remarked this afternoon, "The injuries were such that they could only have been inflicted by a madman."

SEARCHING FOR IDENTIFICATION.

When the body was searched, a comb and a piece of soap were found in one of the woman's pockets, and the only clue as to her previous place of abode was found on her garments, one of which showed that she had, at some time or other, been a workhouse inmate. Her life, it is thought, had been that of an immoral woman.

NOTHING UNUSUAL HEARD.

The deceased was lying just inside the gateway of the Essex Wharf - at the corner of Buck's-row, where there is a night watchman, who, it is said, heard nothing unusual occurring in the neighbourhood last night. It is thought not improbable that the woman was murdered some little distance off, and that her body was then taken to Buck's-row and thrown inside the gateway.

POLICE RESEARCHES.

Not only the police officers immediately engaged in the case, but the whole of the available detective force in the East-end are making a search for the slightest possible clue to the tragedy, and their investigations are materially aided by the advice of Inspector Reid, whose latest experience in crime of the kind was the dreadful affair at George-yard-buildings, when Martha Turner died from injuries, some of which are very similar in character to those inflicted upon the unknown woman found in Buck's-row. It is surmised by the detective authorities that several of the undiscovered crimes of a hideous character have been

INFLICTED BY ONE PERSON

whom they think is a madman. Another theory advanced is that the deceased was mistaken for another woman, and was murdered from motives of jealousy. A feature incomprehensible to the medical man and police engaged in the case, and one only to be accounted for by classing her murderer as a maniac, is the fact that the wounds in the woman's throat were alone sufficient to cause death. Yet there were various injuries to her body, which could only have been perpetrated for purposes of mutilation. It is this which makes the police think that the deceased was the victim of a criminal who has, while suffering from some special form of madness, wandered about London and committed crime of a mysterious nature. There is yet another suggestion, that these murders may be the work of a gang of scoundrels who seek to levy blackmail upon unfortunate women. But it is hardly possible to believe them to have been the work of sane, however depraved, people.

THE VICTIM'S DRESS.

The deceased was dressed in a brown ulster, with metal buttons, having upon them the figure of a woman on horseback, and a man standing at the side. She had lost one tooth, but there is no appearance of any struggle, the clothes not being torn in any way. This adds to the mystery, because it is extraordinary how such wounds could be inflicted without considerable struggling. The police, who are making the most careful investigation into the matter, express an opinion that the deceased was killed by a left-handed person, judging from the nature of the injuries. Naturally, the occurrence has caused great excitement in the crowded district in which it happened, and the scene of the tragedy was surrounded this morning by a large crowd.

Source: The Echo, Friday August 31, 1888, Page 3

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 26 Oct 2011 - 6:42

THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER.

EXPECTED CONFESSION AND ARREST.

The authorities now investigating this mysterious case assert that they have a clue, but in what direction they are not permitted to make the faintest allusion. "If we did," remarked one of the officers, "justice would be undoubtedly frustrated." But the chain of evidence is , it is alleged, being fast drawn round the persons implicated - for it is believed there are more than one concerned - but the persons watched will not at present be arrested unless they make an effort to leave the district. The reason of this is explained by the fact that further sworn evidence which might be lost by precipitate action is likely to reveal the criminal at the forthcoming Coroner's inquiry. To complete the investigation no steps are being left unturned by Inspector Abberline, Inspector Helson, Inspector Spratling, Detective-sergeant Enright, and the numerous other officers engaged in making the necessary inquiries. It is not improbable that one man, not immediately concerned in the crime, but who has a knowledge of the circumstances, may make a confession, and thus shield himself from serious consequences which might otherwise ensue.

POLICE HAVE SOME CLUE.

The murder of Mary Ann Nicholls still excites the keenest interest in Whitechapel. Some malicious persons have actually chalked a libellous statement on the gate of the slaughter-house where the three men were engaged on the night of the tragedy, one of whom gave evidence at the adjourned inquest yesterday, while the statements of his two comrades - Brittain and Mumford - were reserved for the concluding hearing before Mr. Wynne Baxter, the Coroner. These three slaughter-house men are considerably annoyed at the slanderous insinuations conveyed in the expression written on the gate as stated.
Our reporter visited this slaughter-house - a block of extensive premises - this afternoon, where he was courteously shown over by a representative of the firm, who wished him to give publicity to the reiterated statements of the men as to their utter abhorrence of the crime in Buck's-row. The business carried on at the place is mainly confined to the killing of horses and boiling their flesh, which is afterwards sold to cat's-meat men. There are two descriptions of knives used in the killing and cutting-up process, one having a long tapering blade, while the other has one about five inches in length, with a strong wooden handle - a weapon, in fact, very similar to those originally employed for killing pigs.

THE SLAUGHTERMAN'S STORY.

James Mumford, one of the men engaged there, who was left in charge of the premises on the night of the murder while his two comrades went out for an hour's walk, made the following statement this afternoon: - "I am at work here all hours of the night, and don't go out of the premises until I am done. My time to come in of an evening is a quarter-past eight o'clock. Then I am here until the governor comes down in the morning, which is sometimes six and sometimes half-past." Then Mr. Mumford, indignant, suddenly burst forth, "I don't know why that should be wrote on the gate against our chaps."
"What is written on the gate?" asked the reporter.
"Why, 'This is where the murder was done,'" exclaimed Mr. Mumford, "which is a great untruth; and if you can put it right, as you say, I don't mind telling you what our work is."
"No one, of course, even hints anything against you men," remarked the interviewer; "but did you hear any screams that night?"
"Screams! I never heard no screams. I never took one step out of the yard; never one step all that night - except when my mates heard from a policeman that there had been a murder committed. Why don't the police go to some of the lodging-houses so well known about here; instead of coming down to Winthrop-street?"
"They are, I hear, making inquiries in the district," was interposed.
"And so they ought. Well, my mates, when they heard that, went off at once. They were gone ten minutes before I left, because I had the water turned on at the boiler, and could not leave. My work is to boil the meat."
"Is that all? Don't you kill horses?"
"We all kill horses, but I'm left to attend to the boilers when my mates are away at night. They always go up the top to the Grave Maurice" (a publichouse half a minute's walk from the slaughter-house, and about a minute's walk from the gateway of Essex Wharf).
"What time?"
"About twenty minutes after twelve they usually start."
"But the house closes then, does it not?"
"No, not till half-past. They go there and have their refreshment, and bring me some back. I am not supposed to leave the place, and I don't do so. They take a crust of bread-and-cheese with them, and if they haven't time to eat it in the house they keep outside and have a blow. These chaps are very much upset about what the police are doing."
"Do they take their knives with them?"
"Knives! No, they don't take 'em."
"What sort are they?"
"Well, large and small; the same as butchers use.
"How many horses did you kill altogether on Thursday night?"
"I can't tell - three or four, perhaps. I helped to do the killing of 'em with my mates before they went. Then I attended to the boilers, as I tell you, and did not leave until they came back; and not then, not till after the constable came, and said a murder had been committed in Buck's-row. Let the police go to the lodging-houses. There are five or six about this part, and they are known well."

SUPPOSED CHILD MURDER.

The body of a female child was found in the garden of No. 22, Dagmar-road, Hackney, yesterday. It was wrapped up in a piece of brown paper. The child had evidently been dead for some time, the body being slightly decomposed. The medical man who examined it states that the child was well nourished, and that he found a bruise on the frontal bone. A Coroner's Jury today inquired into the death, and returned an open verdict.

MR. MUNRO'S APPOINTMENT.

WILL SIR C. WARREN RETIRE?

It is rumoured that Mr. James Monro, C.B., the late Chief of the Criminal Investigation Department at Scotland-yard, has received an important appointment at the Home Office, and assumed the duties of his new post yesterday. It is further stated that Colonel Wilkinson has been appointed Mr. Monro's assistant, and that both gentlemen were busily engaged at the Home Office during the day. The unofficial announcement of Mr. Monro's appointment has caused considerable surprise at Scotland-yard and in social circles generally, and much curiosity is felt as to the duties connected with his new post. On this point the authorities absolutely refuse to give any information, but there is reason to believe that Mr. Monro's work will be of a character similar to that formerly performed by Mr. Jenkinson. Mr. Robert Anderson, the new chief of the Criminal Investigation Department recently taken over the duties of his office. It is persistently rumoured that Sir Charles Warren will shortly retire from Scotland-yard, and that he will be appointed to succeed Sir Hercules Robinson as Her Majesty's Elgin Commissioner in South Africa.



Source: The Echo, Tuesday September 4, 1888, Page 3

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 26 Oct 2011 - 6:44

THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER.

Up to a late hour last evening the police had obtained no clue to the perpetrator of the latest of the three murders which have so recently taken place in Whitechapel, and there is, it must be acknowledged, after their exhaustive investigation of the facts, no ground for blaming the officers in charge should they fail in unravelling the mystery surrounding the crime.
The murder, in the early hours of Friday morning last, of the woman now known as Mary Ann Nicholls, has so many points of similarity with the murder of two other women in the same neighbourhood -- one Martha Tabram, as recently as August 7, and the other less than 12 months previously -- that the police admit their belief that the three crimes are the work of one individual. All three women were of the class called "unfortunates," each so very poor, that robbery could have formed no motive for the crime, and each was murdered in such a similar fashion, that doubt as to the crime being the work of one and the same villain almost vanishes, particularly when it is remembered that all three murders were committed within a distance of 300 yards from each other.
These facts have led the police to almost abandon the idea of a gang being abroad to wreak vengeance on women of this class for not supplying them with money. Detective Inspectors Abberline, of the Criminal Investigation Department, and Detective Inspector Helson, J Division, are both of opinion that only one person, and that a man, had a hand in the latest murder. It is understood that the investigation into the George-yard mystery is proceeding hand-in-hand with that of Buck's Row. It is considered unlikely that the woman could have entered a house, been murdered, and removed to Buck's Row within a period of one hour and a quarter.
The woman who last saw her alive, and whose name is Nelly Holland, was a fellow-lodger with the deceased in Thrawl Street, and is positive as to the time being 2:30. Police Constable Neil, 79J, who found the body, reports the time as 3:45. Buck's Row is a secluded place, from having tenements on one side only. The constable has been severely questioned as to his "working" of his "beat" on that night, and states that he was last on the spot where he found the body not more than half an hour previously - that is to say, at 3:15.
The beat is a very short one, and quickly walked over would not occupy more than 12 minutes. He neither heard a cry nor saw anyone. Moreover, there are three watchmen on duty at night close to the spot, and neither one heard a cry to cause alarm. It is not true, says Constable Neil, who is a man of nearly 20 years' service, that he was called to the body by two men. He came upon it as he walked, and flashing his lantern to examine it, he was answered by the lights from two other constables at either end of the street. The officers had seen no man leaving the spot to attract attention, and the mystery is most complete. The utmost efforts are being used, a number of plain-clothes men being out making inquiries in the neighbourhood, and Sergeants Enright and Godley have interviewed many persons who might, it was thought, assist in giving a clue.
On Saturday afternoon Mr. Wynne E. Baxter, coroner for the South-Eastern Division of Middlesex, opened his inquiry at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel Road, respecting the death of MARY ANN NICHOLS, whose dead body was found on the pavement in Buck's-row, Whitechapel, on Friday morning.
Detective Inspectors Abberline and Helston and Sergeants Enright and Godley watched the case on behalf of the Criminal Investigation Department.
The jury having been sworn and having viewed the body of the dead woman, which was lying in a shell in the Whitechapel Mortuary.
Edward Walker, of 16 Maidswood-road, Camberwell, deposed that he was now of no occupation, but had formerly been a smith. He had seen the body in the mortuary, and to the best of his belief it was that of his daughter, whom he had not seen for two years. He recognized the body by its general appearance and by some of the front teeth being missing. Deceased also had a scar on the forehead which was caused by a fall when she was young. There was a scar on the body of the woman then lying in the mortuary.
His daughter's name was Mary Ann Nichols, and she had been married quite 22 years. Her husband's name was William Nichols, a printer's machinist, and he was still alive.They had been living apart for seven or eight years. Deceased was about 42 years of age. The last time witness heard of the deceased was about Easter, when she wrote him a letter. He produced the letter, which was in the handwriting of the deceased. It spoke of a situation she was in, and which, she said, she liked very much. He answered that letter, but had not since heard from the deceased.
The last time he saw deceased was in June, 1886, when she was respectably dressed. That was at the funeral of his son, who was burnt to death through the explosion of a paraffin lamp. Some three or four years previous to that the deceased lived with witness; but he was unable to say what she had since been doing.
Deceased was not a particularly sober woman, and that was the reason why they could not agree. He did not think she was "fast" with men, and she was not in the habit of staying out late at night while she was living with him. He had no idea what deceased had been doing since she left him. He did not turn the deceased out of doors. They simply had a few words, and the following morning she left home.
The reason deceased parted from her husband was that he went and lived with the woman who nursed his wife during her confinement. Witness knew nothing of his daughter's acquaintances, or what she had been doing for a living. Deceased was not 5ft. 4in. in height. She had five children, the eldest of whom was 21 years of age and the youngest eight or nine. She left her husband when the youngest child was only one or two years of age. The eldest was now lodging with witness.
He was unable to say if deceased had recently been living with any one; but some three or four years ago he heard she was living with a man named Drew, who was a house smith by trade and had a shop of his own in York Street, Walworth. Witness believed he was still living there. The husband of the deceased had been summoned for the keep of the children, but the charge was dismissed owing to the fact that she was then living with another man. Deceased was in the Lambeth Workhouse in April last, when she left to go to a situation. Her husband was still living at Coburg-road, Old Kent Road, but witness was not aware if he was acquainted with his wife's death. Witness did not think the deceased had any enemies, as she was too good for that.
Police Constable John Neil, 97J, deposed that on Friday morning he was passing down Buck's Row, Whitechapel, and going in the direction of Brady Street, and he did not notice any one about. He had been round the same place some half an hour previous to that and did not see any one. He was walking along the right-hand side of the street when he noticed a figure lying in the street. It was dark at the time, although a street lamp was shining at the end of the row.
He walked across and found the deceased lying outside a gateway, which was about 9ft. or 10ft. in height and led to some stables, was closed. Houses ran eastward from the gateway, while the Board School was westward of the spot. On the other side of the road was the Essex Wharf. The deceased was lying lengthways, and her left hand touched the gate. With the aid of his lamp he examined the body and saw blood oozing from a wound in the throat. Deceased was lying upon her back with her clothes disarranged. Witness felt her arm, which was quite warm from the joint upwards, while her eyes were wide open. Her bonnet was off her head and was lying by her right side, close by the left hand. Witness then heard a constable passing Brady Street, and he called to him. Witness said to him, "Run at once for Dr. Llewellyn." Seeing another constable in Baker's Row, witness despatched him for the ambulance. Dr. Llewellyn arrived in a very short time. In the meantime witness had rung the bell of Essex Wharf and inquired if any disturbance had been heard. He was told "No." Sergeant Kerby then came, and he knocked.
The doctor, having looked at the woman, said --
"Move the woman to the mortuary; she is dead. I will make a further examination of her." They then placed the deceased on the ambulance and removed her to the mortuary. Inspector Spratley came to the mortuary, and while taking a description of deceased lifted up her clothes and discovered she was disemboweled. That had not been noticed before. On the deceased was found a piece of comb and a bit of looking glass, but no money was found. In the pocket an unmarked white pocket handkerchief was found. There was a pool of blood where the neck of deceased was lying in Buck's Row.
He had not heard any disturbance that night. The farthest he had been that night was up Baker's Row to the Whitechapel Road, and was never far away from the spot. The Whitechapel-road was a busy thoroughfare in the early morning, and he saw a number of women in that road, apparently on their way home. At that time any one could have got away. Witness examined the ground while the doctor was being sent for. In answer to a juryman, the witness said he did not see any marks of wheels.
The first persons who arrived on the spot after he had discovered the body were two men who worked at a slaughterhouse opposite. They stated that they knew nothing of the affair, nor had they heard any screams. Witness had previously seen the men at work. That would be a quarter past 3, or half an hour before he found the body.
Mr. Henry Llewellyn, surgeon, of 152, Whitechapel Road, stated that at 4 o'clock on Friday morning he was called by the last witness to Buck's Row. The officer told him what he was wanted for. On reaching Buck's Row he found deceased lying flat on her back on the pathway, her legs being extended. Deceased was quite dead, and she had severe injuries to her throat. Her hands and wrists were cold, but the lower extremities were quite warm. Witness examined her chest and felt the heart.
It was dark at the time. He should say the deceased had not been dead more than half an hour. He was certain that the injuries to the neck were not self-inflicted. There was very little blood round the neck, and there were no marks of any struggle, or blood as though the body had been dragged. Witness gave the police directions to take the body to the mortuary, where he would make another examination. About an hour afterwards he was sent for by the inspector to see the other injuries he had discovered on the body. Witness went, and saw that the abdomen was cut very extensively. That morning he made a postmortem examination of the body.

It was that of a female of about 40 or 45 years. Five of the teeth were missing, and there was a slight laceration of the tongue. There was a bruise running along the lower part of the jaw on the right side of the face. That might have been caused by a blow from a fist or pressure from a thumb. There was a circular bruise on the left side of the face, which also might have been inflicted by the pressure of the fingers. On the left side of the neck, about 1in, below the jaw, there was an incision about 4in. in length, and ran from a point immediately below the ear.
On the same side, but an inch below, and commencing about 1in. in front of it, was a circular incision, which terminated in a point about 3in. below the right jaw. That incision completely severed all the tissues down to the vertebrae. The large vessels of the neck on both sides were severed. The incision was about 8in. in length. The cuts must have been caused by a long-bladed knife, moderately sharp, and used with great violence.
No blood was found on the breast, either of the body or clothes. There were no injuries about the body until just below the lower part of the abdomen. Two or three inches from the left side was a wound running in a jagged manner. The wound was a very deep one, and the tissues were cut through. There were several incisions running across the abdomen. There were also three or four similar cuts, running downwards, on the right side, all of which had been caused by a knife which had been used violently and downwards. The injuries were from left to right, and might have been done by a left-handed person. All the injuries had been caused by the same instrument.
At this stage, Mr. Wynne Baxter adjourned the inquiry until this morning.

Source: The London Times, September 3, 1888

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 26 Oct 2011 - 6:45

THE BUCK'S ROW TRAGEDY.

RESUMED INQUEST.

Mr. Baxter continued his inquiry at the Working Lads' institute, Whitechapel-road, on Monday, into the death of the woman, Mary Ann Nicholls, aged 42, who was found brutally murdered in Buck's-row, Whitechapel, on the previous Friday morning.
Inspector John Spratling, J division, deposed that he first heard of the murder of the woman about half-past four on Friday morning, while he was in Hackney-road. He proceeded to Buck's-row, where he saw Police-constable Thain, who showed him the place where the deceased had been found. He noticed a blood stain on the footpath. The body of deceased had bee removed to the mortuary in Old Montague-street, where witness had an opportunity of preparing a description. The skin presented the appearance of not having been washed for some time previous to the murder. On his arrival Dr. Llewellyn made an examination of the body, which lasted about 10 minutes. Witness said he next saw the body when it was stripped.
Detective-serjeant Enright: That was done by two of the workhouse officials.
The Coroner: Had they any authority to strip the body?
Witness: No, sir; I gave them no instructions to strip it. In fact, I told them to leave it as it was.
The Coroner: I don't object to their stripping the body, but we ought to have evidence about the clothes.
Serjeant Enright, continuing, said the clothes, which were lying in a heap in the yard, consisted of a reddish-brown ulster, with seven large brass buttons, and a brown dress, which looked new. There were also a woollen and a flannel petticoat, belonging to the workhouse. Inspector Helson had cut out pieces marked "P.R., Princes-road," with a view to tracing the body. There was also a pair of stays, in fairly good condition, but witness did not notice how they were adjusted.
The coroner said he considered it important to know the exact state in which the stays were found.
On the suggestion of Inspector Aberline, the clothes were sent for.
The foreman of the jury asked whether the stays were fastened on the body.
Inspector Spratling replied that he could not say for certain. There was blood on the upper part of the dress body, and also on the ulster, but he only saw a little on the under-linen, and that might have happened after the removal of the body from Buck's-row. The clothes were fastened when he first saw the body. The stays did not fit very tightly, for he was able to see the wounds without unfastening them. About six o'clock that day he made an examination at Buck's-row and Brady-street, which ran across Baker's-row, but he failed to trace any marks of blood. He subsequently examined, in company with Sergeant Godley, the East London and District railway lines and embankment, and also the Great Eastern Railway yard, without, however, finding any traces. A watchman of the Great Eastern railway, whose box was 50 or 60 yards from the spot where the body was discovered, heard nothing particular on the night of the murder. Witness also visited half-a-dozen persons living in the same neighbourhood, none of whom had noticed anything at all suspicious. One of these, Mrs. Purkiss, had not gone to bed at the time the body of deceased was found, and her husband was of opinion that if there had been any screaming in Buck's-row they would have heard it. A Mrs. Green, whose window looked out upon the very spot where the body was discovered, said nothing had attracted her attention on the Friday morning.
Replying to a question from one of the jury, witness said Constable Neil was the only one whose duty it was to pass through Buck's-row; but another constable passing along Broad-street from time to time would be within hearing distance.
In reply to a juryman, witness said it was his firm belief that the woman had her clothes on at the time she was murdered.

A HORSE SLAUGHTERER'S EVIDENCE.

Henry Tomkins, horse-slaughterer, 12, Coventry-street, Bethnal-green, was the next witness. He deposed that he was in the employ of Messrs. Barber, and was working in the slaughterhouse, Winthrop-street, from between eight and nine o'clock on Thursday evening till 20 minutes past four on Friday morning. He and his fellow workmen usually went home upon finishing their work, but on that morning they did not do so. They went to see the dead woman, Police-constable Thain having passed the slaughterhouse at about a quarter-past four, and told them that a murder had been committed in Buck's-row. Two other men, James Mumford and Charles Britten, had been working in the slaughterhouse. He (witness) and Britten left the slaughterhouse for one hour between midnight and one o'clock in the morning, but not afterward till they went to see the body. The distance from Winthrop-street to Buck's-row was not great.
The Coroner: Is your work noisy?
Witness: No, sir, very quiet.
The Coroner: Was it quiet on Friday morning, say after two o'clock?
Witness: Yes, sir, quite quiet. The gates were open and we heard no cry.
The Coroner: Did anybody come to the slaughterhouse that night?
Witness: Nobody passed except the policeman.
The Coroner: Are there any women about there?
Witness: Oh! I know nothing about them, I don't like 'em.
The Coroner: I did not ask you whether you like them; I asked you whether there were any about that night.
Witness: I did not see any.
The Coroner: Not in Whitechapel-road?
Witness: Oh, yes, there, of all sorts and sizes; it's a rough neighbourhood, I can tell you. Witness, in reply to further questions, said the slaughter-house was too far away from the spot where deceased was found to have heard if anybody had called for assistance. When he arrived at Buck's-row the doctor and two or three policemen were there. He believed that two other men, whom he did not know, were also there. He waited till the body was taken away, previous to which about a dozen men came up. He heard no statement as to how the deceased came to be in Buck's-row.
The Coroner: You say you believe there were two men there when you got there. Were there? - I believe so.
Coroner: You believe so! You know whether there were or not. I don't say I believe I am talking to you, I know I am. Were there two men there or not? - Well, yes, there were two men there.
The Coroner: Have you read any statement in the newspapers that there were two people, besides the police and the doctor, in Buck's-row, when you arrived?
Witness: I cannot read, sir.
The Coroner: Then you did not see a soul from one o'clock on Friday morning till a quarter-past four, when a policeman passed your slaughterhouse?
Witness: No, sir.
Would you have heard it if there had been one? - Yes, sir.
Where did you go between 20 minutes past 12 and one o'clock? - I and my mate went to the front of the road.
Is not your usual hour for leaving off work six o'clock in the morning, and not four? - No; it is according to what we have to do. Sometimes it is one time and sometimes another.
What made the constable come and tell you about the murder? - He called for his cape.
Inspector Jos. Helson deposed that he first received information about the murder at a quarter before seven on Friday morning. He afterwards went to the mortuary, where he saw the body with the clothes still on it. The dress was fastened in front, with the exception of a few buttons; the stays, which were attached with clasps, were also fastened. He notice blood on the hair, and on the collars of the dress and ulster, but not on the back of the skirts. There were no cuts in the clothes, and no indications of any struggle having taken place. The only suspicious mark discovered in the neighbourhood of Buck's-row was in Broad-street, where there was a stain which might have been blood. Witness was of opinion that the body had not been carried to Buck's-row, but that the murder was committed on the spot.
Police-constable Mizen said that at a quarter to four o'clock on Friday morning he was at the crossing, Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a carman who passed in company with another man informed him that he was wanted by a policeman in Buck's-row, where a woman was lying. When he arrived there Constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body.

WHO FIRST FOUND THE BODY.

Charles Andrew Cross, carman, said he had been in the employment of Messrs. Pickford and Co. for over 20 years. About half-past three on Friday he left his home to go to work, and he passed through Buck's-row. He discerned on the opposite side something lying against the gateway, but he could not at once make out what it was. He thought it was a tarpaulin sheet. He walked into the middle of the road, and saw that it was the figure of a woman. He then heard the footsteps of a man going up Buck's-row, about 40 yards away, in the direction that he himself had come from. When he came up witness said to him, "Come and look over here; there is a woman lying on the pavement." They both crossed over to the body, and the witness then took hold of the woman's hands, which were cold and limp. Witness said, "I believe she is dead." He touched her face, which felt warm. The other man, placing his hand on her heart, said, "I think she is breathing, but very little if she is." Witness suggested that they should give her a prop, but his companion refused to touch her. Just then they heard a policeman coming. Witness did not notice that her throat was cut, the night being very dark. He and the other man left the deceased, and in Baker's-row they met the last witness, whom they informed that they had seen a woman lying in Buck's-row. Witness said, "She looks to me to be either dead or drunk; but for my part I think she is dead." The policeman said, "All right," and then walked on. The other man left witness soon after. Witness had never seen him before.
Replying to the coroner, witness denied having seen Police-constable Neil in Buck's-row. There was nobody there when he and the other man left. In his opinion deceased looked as if she had been outraged and gone off in a swoon; but he had no idea that there were any serious injuries.
The Coroner: Did the other man tell you who he was?
Witness: No, sir; he merely said that he would have fetched a policeman, only he was behind time. I was behind time myself.
A Juryman: Did you tell Constable Mizen that another constable wanted him in Buck's-row?
Witness: No, because I did not see a policeman in Buck's-row.
William Nicholls, printer's machinist, Coburg-road, Old Kent-road, said deceased was his wife, but they had lived apart for eight years. He last saw her alive about three years ago, and had not heard from her since. He did not know what she had been doing in the meantime.
A Juryman: It is said that you were summoned by the Lambeth union for her maintenance, and you pleaded that she was living with another man. Was he the blacksmith whom she had lived with?
Witness: No; it was not the same; it was another man. I had her watched. Witness further deposed that he did not leave his wife, but that she left him of her own accord. She had no occasion for so doing. If it had not been for her drinking habits they would have got on all right together.
Emily Holland, a married woman, living at 18, Thrawl-street, said deceased had stayed at her lodgings for about six weeks, but had not been there during the last 10 days or so. About half-past two on Friday morning witness saw deceased walking down Osborne-street, Whitechapel-road. She was alone, and very much the worse for drink. She informed witness that where she had been living they would not allow her to return because she could not pay for her room. Witness persuaded her to go home. She refused, adding that she had earned her lodging money three times that day. She then went along the Whitechapel-road. Witness did not know in what way she obtained a living. She always seemed to be a quiet woman, and kept very much to herself. In reply to further questions witness said she had never seen deceased quarrel with anybody. She gave her the impression of being weighed down by trouble. When she left the witness at the corner of Osborne-street she said she would soon be back.
Mary Ann Monk was the last witness examined. She deposed to having seen deceased about seven o'clock entering a public-house in the New Kent-road. She had seen her before in the workhouse, and had no knowledge of her means of livelihood.
The inquiry was then adjourned until Sept. 17.

WHO IS "LEATHER APRON"?

Whitechapel has been loud in its indignation in the past week over the seeming inactivity of the police, they have failed to make one arrest. Among other things the people wish to know why the police do not arrest "Leather Apron."
When the tragedy was first discovered on Friday the hapless females who haunt the East-end freely denounced a particular individual whom they style "Leather Apron." "Leather Apron" by himself is, it appears, quite an unpleasant character. He has ranged Whitechapel for a long time. He exercises over the unfortunates who ply their trade after 12 o'clock at night a sway that is based on universal terror. He has kicked, injured, bruised, and terrified a hundred of them who are ready to testify to the outrages. He has made a certain threat, too literally horribly carried out in the case of the woman Nicholls. He carries a razor-like knife, and two weeks ago drew it on a woman called "Widow Annie" as she was crossing the square near London hospital, threatening at the same time, with an ugly grin and his malignant eyes, to do her harm. He is a character so much like the invention of a story writer that the accounts of him given by all the streetwalkers of the Whitechapel district seem like romances. The remarkable thing is, however, that they all agree. From all accounts he is five feet four or five inches in height, and wears a dark, close-fitting cap. He is thickset, and has an unusually thick neck. His hair is black, and closely clipped, his age being about 38 or 40. He has a small, black moustache. The distinguishing feature of his costume is a leather apron, which he always wears, and from which he gets his nickname. His expression is sinister, and seems to be full of terror for the women who describe it. His eyes are small and glittering. His lips are usually parted in a grin which is not only not reassuring, but excessively repellant. He is a slipper maker by trade, but does not work. He has never cut anybody so far as known, but carries a knife, presumably as sharp as leather knives are wont to be. This knife a number of the women have seen. His name nobody knows, but all are united in the belief that he is a Jew, or of Jewish parentage, his face being of a marked Hebrew type. But the most singular characteristic of the man, and one which tends to identify him closely with the Friday night's work, is the universal statement that in moving about he never makes any noise - he moves noiselessly. His uncanny peculiarity to them is that they never see him or know of his presence until he is close by them.

STRANGE STORY ABOUT THE POLICE.

A party signing himself "Eye-witness" writes: -
I live not many minutes' walk from the place of the murder, and I though probably an incident which I witnessed on Sunday between half-past four and a quarter-past five p.m. would throw a little light on it. Coming from school at the time above stated, I was just about to turn in to Albert-street, by Cohen's Sugar refinery, when a woman rushed across the street and screamed out, "There goes "Leather Apron," the Whitechapel murderer," to the policeman standing at the corner of the turning. "Run after him," she shouted: "now you have a chance of catching him, you won't try. There he goes," pointing to a low, villainous looking man. The constable then mustered up courage to run after the man, who seemed to be in a hurry. After about 400 yards' run he caught the man, whereupon two other constables put in their appearance, and inquired what the matter was. The woman who had run with the policeman up to the man at once began to accuse him of being the man the police were looking for - "Leather Apron." This she repeated about 20 times without receiving a single denial from the man. She said she knew the man well by sight. This the man denied by saying he had never seen the woman before, but later on he said to one of the other constables that this woman was constantly annoying him like this; she should be careful what she was saying. She thereupon said she knew two women, and could bring them, who saw him pacing up and down Baker's-row with the murdered woman about two hours before the murder took place. She further accused him of cruelly ill-using two poor unfortunates in a common lodging-house in City-road one night last week; and, further, she said that among the unfortunates of Whitechapel he was well known as a cruel wretch. These accusations the man simply met with a sneer, and said she did not know what she was talking about. But she stuck to her point. But, to crown it all, the policeman then let the man go.
At first the police attached little importance to the story of "Leather Apron," but after the appearance of the above letter the detectives showed their regret at the stupidity of the constable in failing to arrest him by eagerly searching different lodging-houses and casual wards for this "Leather Apron." A chase has now begun in earnest. He was last seen outside the Leigh Hoy public-house in Spitalfields. In addition to being known as "Leather Apron" he is also known as the "Mad Snob." The police description of him is: - Aged 30 years, height, 5ft. 3in,; complexion, dark, sallow; hair and moustache black; thick set; dressed in old and dirty clothing; and is of Jewish appearance. The inquiries of our special representative led to the discovery that he is the son of a fairly well-to-do Russian Jew, but he is discarded by the Jewish fraternities as one who is a disgrace to their tribe.
The case has been placed in the hands of the most skilled detectives. Chief-inspector Aberline, who was for many years the chief detective inspector of the district, but who was promoted to Scotland-yard for his clever capture of the dynamitards, Burton and Cunningham, in Whitehcapel, has been sent down on purpose. With him are Inspectors Helson and Spratling, Detective-sergeant Enright, who also know the worst haunts of Whitechapel, and have done good service in this rough locality, and assisting is Detective-serjeant Godley.

A NEIGHBOUR WHO HEARD SCREAMS.

An important statement, throwing considerable light on a point hitherto surrounded with some uncertainty - the time the crime was committed in Buck's-row, or the body deposited there - was made on Thursday by Mrs. Harriet Lilly, who lives two doors from the spot where the deceased was discovered. Mrs. Lilley said: I slept in the front of the house, and could hear everything that occurred in the street. On that Thursday night I was somehow very restless. Well, I heard something I mentioned to my husband in the morning. It was a painful moan - two or three faint gasps - and then it passed away. It was dark, but a luggage train went by as I heard the sounds. There was, too, a sound as of whispers underneath the window. I distinctly heard voices, but cannot say what was said - it was too faint. I then woke my husband, and said to him, "I don't know what possesses me, but I cannot sleep tonight." Mrs. Lilley added that as soon as she heard of the murder she came to the conclusion that the voices she heard were in some way connected with it. The cries were very different from those of an ordinary street brawl.
It has been ascertained that on the morning of the date of the murder a goods train passed on the East London railway at about half-past three - the 3.7 out from New-cross - which was probably the time when Mary Ann Nicholls was either killed or placed in Buck's-row.

LETTER FROM THE HUSBAND.

TO THE EDITOR OF "LLOYD'S NEWSPAPER." -
DEAR SIR, - I hope you will correct an error in your Sunday Edition in reference to the Whitechapel murder. It is stated that I did not know my own son. That is not so. He left home of his own accord two years and a half ago, and I have always been on speaking terms with him. Only two or three months ago I saw him, and last week received two letters from him, asking me if I knew of any work for him. I did not leave my wife during her confinement and go away with a nurse girl. The deceased woman deserted me four or five times, if not six. The last time she left me without any home, and five children, the youngest one year and four months'. I kept myself with the children where I was living for two and a half years before I took on with anybody, and not till after it was proved at Lambeth police-court that she had misconducted herself. - Yours respectfully, W. NICHOLLS.

The funeral of the unfortunate woman, Mary Ann Nicholls took place on Thursday at Ilford cemetery. The mourners were Mr. Edward Walker, the father of deceased, and his grandson, together with two of deceased's children. The procession proceeded along Baker's-row, and past the corner of Buck's-row into the main road, where the police were stationed every few yards. The houses in the neighbourhood had the blinds drawn, and much sympathy was expressed for the relations. The husband, although paying the expenses of the funeral, was not present.

RUFFIANISM IN WHITECHAPEL.

Another desperate assault, which stopped only just short of murder, was committed upon a woman in Whitechapel on Saturday night. The victim was leaving the Foresters' music-hall, Cambridge-heath-road, where she had been spending the evening with a sea captain, when she was accosted by a well-dressed man, who requested her to walk a short distance with him, as he wanted to meet a friend. They had reached a point near to the scene of the murder of the woman Nicholls, when the man violently seized her by the throat and dragged her down a court. He was immediately joined by a gang of women and bullies, who stripped the unfortunate woman of necklace, earrings, and brooch. Her purse was also taken, and she was brutally assaulted. Upon her attempting to shout for aid one of the gang laid a large knife across her throat, remarking, "We will serve you as we did the others." She was, however, eventually released. The police have been informed, and are prosecuting inquiries into the matter, it being regarded as a probable clue to the previous tragedies.

THE HOME OFFICE AND SCOTLAND-YARD.

The Central News is in a position to furnish the following additional particulars respecting the state of affairs at Scotland-yard: - Friction between the Home Secretary and Sir Charles Warren commenced about the time of the Trafalgar-square disturbances, the immediate cause being that Mr. Matthews showed favour to the receiver of the Metropolitan district, against whom the Chief commissioner had brought charges of disregarding police regulations and giving orders to superintendents without consulting his official superiors. Sir Charles Warren protested against the course pursued by the Secretary of State, and finally threatened to resign, a threat which was repeated later on. It became necessary at length to bring the matter under the notice of the Cabinet, and Mr. W.H. Smith and Mr. Goschen were deputed by their colleagues to bring about a settlement of the points in dispute. Early in May, Mr. Smith, Mr. Goschen, Mr. Matthews, and Sir Charles Warren met in Downing-street, and as the result of a conference which lasted nearly all the afternoon, the Chief commissioner was adjudged to have made out his case.

Source: Lloyd's Weekly London Newspaper, September 9, 1888, Page 3

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 26 Oct 2011 - 6:46

THE WHITECHAPEL MURDERS.

THE BUCK'S ROW INQUEST.

Mr. Wynne Baxter resumed the inquest yesterday afternoon at the Working Lads' institute, into the death of Mrs. Mary Ann Nicholls, who was found murdered in Buck's-row, on Saturday morning, the 1st inst.
Mr. Thomas Ede, a signalman, was the first witness called, and said that since the last hearing (Monday) he had seen a man who he at first thought had a wooden arm, and whom the police had arrested on another charge. - The coroner said that that case had been fully inquired into; the man was a well-known character, but from inquiries made by the police they were satisfied that he was innocent of any complicity in this case. The man alluded to was the man that Mr. Ede saw with a large knife in the Cambridge-heath-road. He lives in Clara-street, Bethnal-green, and is said to be a harmless lunatic. He has, however, on various occasions exhibited a knife in a menacing manner, but as to why he is allowed to go at large with it there was no explanation.
Dr. Llewellyn stated, in reply to a juror, that no part of the body was missing.
A member of the jury pointed out that it was stated in the newspapers that on the last occasion the Foreman of the Jury had offered a reward. The fact was it was not the Foreman of the Jury, but another gentleman.

THEORIES HELD BY THE CORONER.

The Coroner, in his summing up, referred to the necessity of a public mortuary in Whitechapel, and continued as follows: - The time at which the body was found cannot have been far from 3:45 a.m., as it is fixed by so many independent data. The condition in which the body was found appears to prove conclusively that the deceased was killed on the exact spot in which she was found. There is not a trace of blood anywhere, except at the spot where her neck was lying. I think we cannot altogether leave unnoticed the fact that the death you have been investigating is one of four presenting many points of similarity, all of which have occurred within the space of about five months, all within a very short distance of the place where we are sitting. All four victims were women of middle age, all were married and had lived apart from their husbands in consequence of intemperate habits, and were at the time of their death leading an irregular life, and eking out a miserable and precarious existence in common lodging-houses. In each case there were abdominal, as well as other injuries. In each case the injuries were inflicted after midnight, and in places of public resort, where it would appear impossible but that almost immediate detection should follow the crime, and in each case the inhuman and dastardly criminals are at large in society. Emma Elizabeth Smith, who received her injuries in Osborn-street on the early morning of Easter Tuesday, the 3rd of April, survived in the London hospital for upwards of 24 hours, and was able to state that she had been followed by some men, robbed and mutilated, and even to describe imperfectly one of them. Martha Tabram was found at three a.m., on Tuesday, the 7th of August, on the first floor landing of George-yard-buildings, Wentworth-street, with thirty-nine punctured wounds on her body. In addition to these, and the case under your consideration, there is the case of Annie Chapman, still in the hands of another jury. The instruments used in the two earlier cases are dissimilar. In the first it was a blunt instrument, such as a walking-stick; in the second, some of the wounds were thought to have been made by a dagger; but in the two recent cases the instruments suggested by the medical witnesses are not so different. Dr. Llewellyn says the injuries on Nicholls could have been produced by a strong bladed instrument, moderately sharp. Dr. Phillips is of opinion that those on Chapman were by a very sharp knife, probably with a thin narrow blade, at least six to eight inches in length, probably longer. The similarity of the injuries in the two cases is considerable. There are bruises about the face in both cases; the head is nearly severed from the body in both cases; and those injuries have again in each case been performed with anatomical knowledge. I suggest to you as a possibility that the two women - Nicholls and Chapman - may have been murdered by the same man with the same object, and that in the case of Nicholls the wretch was disturbed before he had accomplished his object, and having failed in the open street he tries again, within a week of his failure, in a more secluded place. If this should be correct, the audacity and daring is equal to its maniacal fanaticism and abhorrent wickedness. It now only remains for you to say by your verdict, how, when, and by what means the deceased came by her death.
The jury then retired to consider their verdict, and, after an absence of over 20 minutes, they returned.
The Coroner: Gentlemen, have you agreed upon your verdict?
The Foreman: Yes, sir. We are unanimously of opinion that we should give an open verdict of murder against some person or persons unknown, and we wish to thank you for your remarks with reference to the necessity for a mortuary, and for the very able way in which you have conducted the inquiry.

THE VARIOUS THEORIES.

No further arrest has been made this week in connection with the Whitechapel murder.
On Thursday Rosetta Anderson, a woman residing in Pearl-street, Spitalfields, made a statement to the effect that on the previous evening a "curious and mysterious man," as Mrs. Anderson describes him, placed himself on her doorstep, looked around him, and behaved in such an eccentric manner that she thought he was a maniac. He intently watched every woman as she passed, but, observing that he was himself an object of suspicion, he suddenly darted out of sight up a court near. Mrs. Anderson believes that this man was the murderer. His appearance, in almost every respect, answered to the description of the foreigner seen talking with the deceased woman in Hanbury-street on the morning of her death.
On Friday it was stated that the man who was arrested at Holloway on suspicion of being concerned in the Whitechapel murder, and subsequently removed and detained at the Bow asylum, would shortly be released. His brother had given satisfactory explanation as to his whereabouts on the morning of the murder. The authorities of the asylum would not allow the police to interrogate the patient whilst there, as it is against the rules laid down by the Lunacy commissioners.

WORK OF THE VIGILANCE COMMITTEE.

The Vigilance committee has so grown in numbers and its work so increased that the members for the future will transact their business at the Beaumont institution. They have just issued the following poster:

"The East-end Murders. - 50 pound Reward. - The above is offered as a preliminary reward to anyone who shall give such information as will lead to the detection of the author, or the authors, of the late murders in Whitechapel. - GEORGE LUSK, president; J. AARONS, treasurer; B. HARRIS, hon. secretary." The latest point settled is to organise a large public meeting, to which the local Parliamentary representatives and other important persons shall be invited, for the purpose of memorialising Government to offer the terms of a free pardon to any accomplice of the murderer whose evidence may lead to a conviction for the crime. Subscriptions are being promised, and the committee hope in the course of a few days to increase this reward by upwards of a hundred pounds."

THE PICCADILLY OUTRAGE.

On inquiry at St. George's hospital last night it was stated that Adelaide Rutter (not Rogers, as reported), who was knocked down in Piccadilly, was favourably progressing. She states she has a husband living, but varies in her statements as to whether she knows who her assailant was. Sometimes she says she does know who he was, and at others that she does not. The matter will be further inquired into when she gets stronger.

THE CANONBURY MURDER.

ARREST AND EXAMINATION AT THE COURT.

Henry Glennie, 24, a hot-water fitter, refusing to state his address, was charged, on suspicion, at Clerkenwell police-court, on Friday, with having been concerned, with other persons not in custody, in wilfully murdering Frances Maria Wright, aged 71, at the house 19, Canonbury-terrace, on May 16 last.
Detective-serjeant Merroney, of the G division, said: From instructions I received from Detective-inspector Peel, on Wednesday night I went with Detective-serjeants Fordham and Robinson to the King's-cross railway station, on the Underground. At a quarter to 10 that night we saw the prisoner standing near the corner of Caledonian-road, opposite the station, and Serjeant Fordham went across to him, and took hold of him. I also took hold of him, and we put him into a four-wheeled cab. I said to him, "We are police-officers, and we apprehend you for being concerned with another man with breaking into some premises at Islington on Tuesday night, and stealing a quantity of satin; also on suspicion of being concerned in the murder of Mrs. Wright at Canonbury-terrace." After a short time the prisoner said, "I shan't say anything. I can prove what I am and what I do." We conveyed him to the Upper-street police-station, where he was detained, his name being taken by the inspector on duty. He declined to give any address, but said that he was a "hot water fitter." The next day, the 20th, at a quarter to 11 o'clock, I and Inspector Glass saw the prisoner again. I said to him, "The Inspector has directed me to ask you if you can refer me to any person who can prove where you were when Mrs. Wright was murdered at No. 19, Canonbury-terrace. It happened about ten minutes past three on the afternoon of the 16th of May last." He then said, "Well; I can't say where I was. I think I was with my sister, Mrs. Swallow, at a confectioner's shop, Kingsbury-road, Neasden. I think I was there for about 14 minutes. My friend can tell you where I was better than I can." At a quarter-past 10 last (Thursday) night I saw the prisoner again. I showed him a carpet bag (produced) and said, "This is the bag that was dropped by a man who was seen running away from Canonbury-terrace. I have obtained information that this bag belongs to you." He took it in his hand and examined it, and I said to him, "I have shown that bag to George Mack, of 14, Storey-street, Caledonian-road, and to Thomas Crook, of 26, Freeling-street. They both say that you had a bag like that, and that they believe it belongs to you." The prisoner became very pale and agitated, and, after hesitating, said, "Well, I admit that is my bag - or, rather, it was mine. I sold it with some tools to a man in the Star and Garter public-house, Caledonian-road. I don't know who he is, or how much I sold them for." I asked him if he could give any further information, and he said, "I can't tell you any more." Glennie made the above statement straight off, and not in answer to questions. This (Friday) morning, at a quarter to 11, I and the other officers saw the prisoner again, and asked him whether he could give any further information or description of the man to whom he sold the bag of tools. He said, "No; but I sold them the Friday after I left the Eagle Range and Foundry works in Regent-street." Today (Friday), when he was charged formally at the station with being concerned in the murder, the prisoner made no reply.
Police-inspector Glass said the police had other evidence, which they would call when the prisoner was again brought up. The witnesses were not all in attendance.
John Jones, of No. 16, Marylebone-lane, a carman, was, however, called, and said: On the day - a Wednesday afternoon in May - I was standing at the corner of Alwyne-road and Canonbury-road, and I saw a man walking down from the direction of Canonbury-terrace. He passed me, and after he had gone by about 10 or 15 yards I saw a lady coming from the same direction, and she called out twice to me, "that man." I asked her what he had done, and she did not say. I found that she could not speak English, and the man turned round and looked back, and as soon as he saw the lady he started running. He carried a bag on his shoulder, a similar one to the bag produced. I went a few yards after him, but turned back. I cannot positively swear to the man, but on Thursday I picked the prisoner out from among 16 other men assembled at the Upper-street police-station. He is like the man I saw that Wednesday.
Mr. Saunders, the magistrate, said there was, at present, hardly sufficient evidence to detain the prisoner. However, this was so grave a charge that he would remand the prisoner. - The prisoner was remanded till Thursday.

LATEST PARTICULARS.

The accused man, Henry Glennie, who is under remand charged on suspicion with the murder of Mrs. Frances Maria Wright in May last, has secured the professional assistance of Mr. C. Bowker, solicitor, of Seymour-place, Marylebone, who will defend him at the next hearing. - Mr. Bowker visited the accused yesterday at Holloway, and had an interview with him. Glennie asserts that he is a respectable man and has never been convicted. He bitterly complains of the frequent interrogations he is subjected to by the police, the object of which he asserts is to entrap him into saying something which will bolster up the case for the prosecution, and at the same time make it appear that he is guilty of the offence charged against him. He also complains of what he regards as the exceptional method adopted to secure his identification. Persons wholly dissimilar to himself in appearance have been selected to stand by him when people have come to inspect him, and so make identification easy. At least eight or nine people have been brought to see him, and they have failed to recognise him as the person "wanted." He further demurs to having been five or six times placed in the prison yard alongside men 6ft. high, while is very short, for the purposes of identification. He most strenuously protests his innocence of the crime with which he is charged.

Source: Lloyd's Weekly London Newspaper, September 23, 1888, Page 7

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 26 Oct 2011 - 6:48

THE EAST END MURDERS.

INQUEST ON MARY ANN NICHOLLS.

Mr. Baxter resumed the inquest at the Working Lads' institute, Whitechapel-road, on Monday, relative to the death of Mary Ann Nicholls, the victim of the Buck's-row tragedy, on Friday morning, Aug. 31.
Dr. Llewellyn, recalled, said he had re-examined the body and there was no part of the viscera missing.
Emma Green, who lives in the cottage next to the scene of the murder in Buck's-row, stated that she had heard no unusual sound during the night.
Thomas Ede, a signalman in the employ of the East London Railway company, said he saw a man with a knife on the morning of the 8th.
The coroner was of opinion that this incident could have no reference to the present inquiry, as the 8th was the day of the Hanbury-street murder. He would, however, accept the evidence.
Witness then said: On Saturday, the 8th inst., at noon, I was coming down the Cambridge-heath-road, and when near the Foresters' Arms I saw a man on the other side of the street. His peculiar appearance made me take notice of him. He seemed to have a wooden arm. I watched him until level with the Foresters' Arms, and then he put his hand to his trousers pocket, and I saw about four inches of a knife. I followed him, but he quickened his pace, and I lost sight of him.
Inspector Helson, in reply to the coroner, stated that the man had not been found.
Witness described the man as 5ft. 8in. high, about 35 years of age, with a dark moustache and whiskers. He wore a double-peaked cap, a short dark brown jacket, and a pair of clean white overalls over dark trousers. The man walked as though he had a stiff knee, and he had a fearful look about the eyes. He seemed to be a mechanic.
By the Jury: He was not a muscular man.
Walter Purkess, manager, residing at Essex wharf, deposed that his house fronted Buck's-row, opposite the gates where deceased was discovered. He slept in the front room on the second floor, and had heard no sound, neither had his wife.
Alfred Malshaw, a night watchman in Winthorpe-street, had also heard no cries or noise. He admitted he sometimes dozed.
The Coroner: I suppose your watching is not up to much?
The Witness: I don't know. It is 13 long hours for 3s., and find your own coke.
By the Jury: In a straight line I was about 30 yards from the spot where the deceased was found.
Police-constable John Thail stated that the nearest point on his beat to Buck's-row was Brady-street. He passed the end every 30 minutes on the Thursday night, and nothing attracted his attention until 3:45 a.m., when he was signalled be the flash of the lantern of another constable (Neale). He went to him, and found Neale standing by the body of the deceased, and witness was dispatched for a doctor. About ten minutes after he had fetched the surgeon he saw two workmen standing with Neale. He did not know who they were. The body was taken to the mortuary, and witness remained on the spot. Witness searched Essex wharf, the Great Eastern railway arches, the East London railway line, and the District railway as far as Thames-street, and detected no marks of blood or anything of a suspicious character.
By the Juror: When I went to the horse-slaughterer's for my cape I did not say that I was going to fetch a doctor, as a murder had been committed. Another constable had taken my cape there.
By the Coroner: There were one or two working men going down Brady-street shortly before I was called by Neale.
Robert Baul, 30, Forster-street, Whitechapel, carman, said as he was going to work at Cobbett's-court, Spitalfields, he saw in Buck's-row a man standing in the middle of the road. As witness drew closer he walked towards the pavement, and he (Baul) stepped in the roadway to pass him. The man touched witness on the shoulder and asked him to look at the woman, who was lying across the gateway. He felt her hands and face, and they were cold. The clothes were disarranged, and he helped to pull them down. Before he did so he detected a slight movement as of breathing, but very faint. The man walked with him to Montague-street, and there they saw a policeman. Not more than four minutes had elapsed from the time he first saw the woman. Before he reached Buck's-row he had seen no one running away.
Robert Mann, the keeper of the mortuary, said the police came to the workhouse, of which he was an inmate. He went, in consequence, to the mortuary at five a.m. He saw the body placed there, and then locked the place up and kept the keys. After breakfast witness and Hatfield, another inmate of the workhouse, undressed the woman.
The police were not present? - No; there was no one present. Inspector Helson was not there.
Had you been told not to touch it? - No.
Did you see Inspector Helson? - I can't say.
Was he present? - I can't say.
You cannot describe where the blood was? - No, sir; I cannot.
How did you get the clothes off? - Hatfield had to cut them down the front.
A Juryman: Was the body undressed in the mortuary or in the yard? - In the mortuary.
The Coroner: It appears the mortuary-keeper is subject to fits, and neither his memory nor statements are reliable.
James Hatfield, an inmate of the Whitechapel workhouse, said he accompanied Mann, the last witness, to the mortuary, and undressed the deceased. Inspector Helson was not there.
Who was there? - Only me and my mate.
What did you take off first - An ulster, which I put aside on the ground. We then took the jacket off, and put it in the same place. The outside dress was loose, and we did not cut it. The bands of the petticoats were cut, and I then tore them down with my hand. I tore the chemise down the front. There were no stays.
Who gave you instructions to do all this? - No one gave us any. We did it to have the body ready for the doctor.
Who told you a doctor was coming? - I heard someone speak about it.
Was anyone present whilst you were undressing the body? - Not as I was aware of.
Having finished, did you make the post-mortem examination? - No, the police came.
Oh, it was not necessary for you to go on with it! The police came? - Yes, they examined the petticoats, and found the words "Lambeth workhouse" on the bands.
It was cut out? - I cut it out.
Who told you to do it? - Inspector Helson.
Is that the first time you saw Inspector Helson on that morning? - Yes; I arrived at about half-past six.
Would you be surprised to find that there were stays? - No.
A Juryman: Did you not try the stays on in the afternoon to show me how short they were? - I forgot it.
The Coroner: He admits his memory is bad.
Witness: Yes.
The Coroner: We cannot do more. (To the police): There was a man who passed down Buck's-row when the doctor was examining the body. Have you heard anything of him?
Inspector Abberline: We have not been able to find him.
Inspector Spratley, J division, stated he had made inquiries in Buck's-row, but not at all of the houses.
The Coroner: That will have to be done.
Witness added that he made inquiries at Green's, the wharf, Snider's factory, and also at the Great Eastern wharf, and no one had heard anything unusual on the morning of the murder. He had not called at any of the houses in Buck's-row, excepting at Mrs. Green's. He saw the Board school keeper.
The Coroner: Is there not a gateman at the Great Eastern railway? - I thought we should have had him here.
Witness: I saw him that morning, but he said he had heard nothing.
The witness added that when at the mortuary he had given instructions that the body was not to be touched.
The Coroner: Is there any other evidence?
Inspector Helson: No; not at present.
The foreman thought that had a reward been offered by the Government, after the murder in George-yard, very probably the two later murders would not have been perpetrated. It mattered little into whose hands the money went so long as they could find out the monster in their midst, who was terrorising everybody, and making people ill. There were four horrible murders remaining undiscovered.
The coroner considered the first one the worst, and it had attracted the least attention.
The foreman intimated that he knew a gentleman who would be willing to give 25 pounds himself, and he hoped that the Government would offer a reward. These poor people had souls like anybody else.
The coroner understood that no rewards were now offered in any case. It mattered not whether the victims were rich or poor. There was no surety that a rich person would not be the next.
The Foreman: If that should be, then there will be a large reward.
The inquiry was adjourned until Saturday.

Source: Lloyd's Weekly London Newspaper, September 23, 1888, Page 8

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 26 Oct 2011 - 6:51

Coverage Of Mary Ann Nichols' murder in the Police Illustrated News:

[img][/img]

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 26 Oct 2011 - 7:23

A good deal of excitement has been aroused in Whitechapel by the murder of a woman, whose dead body was found by a policeman in the early hours of Friday morning, lying in the pathway of Buck's-row with the throat cut and with wounds in the abdomen. The woman has been identified as Mary Ann Nicholls, aged forty-two, who has for a few years been living apart from her husband, a printer's machinist. She was so poor that it is believed that robbery could not have been a motive for the crime. As yet no clue whatever has been found as to the murderer, and the mystery is increased by the fact that within the last twelve months two other women of ill fame have been murdered within 300 yards of the spot. The police believe that all three crimes are the work of one and the same man.

Source: The Guardian, September 5, 1888, Page 1307

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 26 Oct 2011 - 7:48

TOUCH-AND-GO PAPERS.
HUNTING THE MURDERER.

Like a good many others, I have taken my turn at trying to discover the murderer of the poor woman in Hanbury-street, Spitalfields.
Don't for a moment suppose that I have been hunting for the "leather apron." I will leave half tipsy women and reporters in search of sensation to look after him. If all the men who wear leather aprons and knives, and have ugly faces, and walk noiselessly because their boots are worn out, and attempt occasionally to blackmail women, are to be arrested as murderers, we shall have nearly all the station-houses in the district filled with journeymen cabinetmakers - good, bad, and indifferent.
Firstly, then, after careful inquiry, I find there is nothing whatever to indicate that the same man killed her as killed Mary Ann Nicholls. There was almost unquestionably a bayonet wound in Mary Ann Nicholls's body, and many other signs pointed directly to her brutal assassination having been the work of one or more drunken soldiers. It was clear, moreover, that the attempt to murder Mary Ann Nicholls was not the desire for plunder. Robbery had nothing to do with that murder.
Annie Chapman, on the other hand, was killed for the sake of three bogus rings she wore. Her throat was cut and her rings wrenched off first, and if then her brutal murderer ripped her up, it was probably because the details of Mary Ann Nicholls's death were in his mind and he felt an impulse to imitate them.
I know the districts in which these two murders have been committed exceedingly well. There are in it any number of low lodging-houses, where men and women get beds for the night at rates varying from threepence to sixpence. In arrangement they are all alike. There is a large kitchen, or general room, in which a big fire is kept up, and which is filled with seats, a long deal table, and a few pegs on which to hang things. This room is always well-lighted; a man covered with blood, as the murderer of Annie Chapman must have been, could not enter such a place without being seen.
Upstairs the various rooms are fitted with little narrow beds, probably about two feet or two feet three inches wide, placed close to each other. In each room there is a police notice up, notifying the number of people who may occupy the apartment. These rooms are invariably nearly full. Their occupants are the sharpest-eyed people in the world. A man covered with blood could not enter there without being noticed.
But he could not pass the door, in the first place, without being seen, for at it a man always sits or stands to note the outgoers and to take money of the incomers; and he is lynx-eyed enough, in all conscience. Nobody covered with blood could pass him unseen.
Having, then, gone all over the ground carefully, I have come to these conclusions: -
Firstly, that the man who killed Annie Chapman is a man who lives habitually in one or more lodging-houses.
Secondly, that he is at this moment well known to the keeper at least of that house, if not to one or two of the inmates as the murderer.
Thirdly, that he is not far away from the scene of the crime, and that he has no pecuniary means of escape.
Fourthly, that he had nothing whatever to do with the Mary Ann Nicholls murder, and simply killed Annie Chapman for the sake of her rings.
Fifthly, that a police notification to the effect that concealers of the murderer, after a certain date, would be indicted when discovered as accessories after the fact, and that a reward of 200 pounds would be given for news of the murderer, would produce this scoundrel in a very short time.
Sixthly, that the man whom Taylor saw with blood on his hands is not likely to be the man who is wanted. The murder was committed much earlier - at least two hours - than is commonly supposed, and the murderer got to shelter very soon afterwards - before daylight broke, at any rate.
Seventhly, that the murder is owing in large part to the very inefficient police protection of the district. In going about the streets, I saw only one or two policemen when I ought to have passed a dozen, at least. And I wondered not that Annie Chapman had been killed, but that many more had not been done to death in like manner.

ABOUT TOWN.

Source: The Echo, Monday September 10, 1888

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Thu 27 Oct 2011 - 0:26

THE YEAR 1888.
HOME EVENTS: CALAMITIES AND CRIMES.

The list of calamities at home and abroad in 1888 is a heavy one, and some startling crimes have been recorded. The body of Mr. Archibald M'Neil, a London journalist, was found on the beach at Boulogne under circumstances which pointed to murder, on the 6th of January, after the unfortunate gentleman had been mysteriously missing for some three weeks. Over a million deaths were occasioned by the overflowing of the Yellow River in China just after the new year. On the 4th of January the Bolton Theatre was destroyed by fire. Surgeon Major Cross was hanged at Cork on the 10th for the murder of his wife. A fatal fire occurred in Houndsditch on the 20th; and on the 4th of the month following a serious riot occurred in the Spanish copper mines at Rio Tinto. Thirty-one persons lost their lives through a cyclone in Illinois on February 19th, and on the 27th 27 persons were killed by a steam-ferry explosion in San Francisco Bay. The Banquet Theatre was burned down on March 20th, 50 people perishing in the flames. Two hundred people met with an awful fate in New York on the 12th of the same month in a terrific snowstorm. Earthquake shocks were experienced in North Wales on April 12th. On the 16th the steamer Vena was run down off the Goodwins, 12 persons being drowned. The Grantham Theatre was destroyed by fire on the 22nd, and on the 28th 12 lives were lost through a collision off the Isle of Wight. Admiral Rider accidentally fell from Pimlico Pier on April 30th, and when he was recovered life was found to be extinct. On May 14th a colliery accident brought five persons in the Ogmore Valley, in Glamorganshire, to an untimely end. Mrs. Wright was murdered by daylight in her own dwelling, in Canonbury, on the 16th; Walter Webb was knocked on the head on the 22nd by the convict Jackson in Strangeways Gaol, the murderer afterwards effecting a sensational escape, and remaining, despite the hue and cry, unarrested for many days; and on the 24th a young man was stabbed to death by one of a gang of roughs in Regent's Park. Severe thunderstorms were experienced over England and Scotland on May 19th. On the 30th six shopwomen in the Edgware-road were burned to death as a result of the careless throwing down of a lighted match. A tragic explosion occurred on the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad earlier on in the same month, 30 passengers being injured and eight killed outright. In June heavy and disastrous outbursts of lightning and thunder broke over the south and west of England; and a church in Galicia was also struck by the electric current during divine service, many persons being more or less hurt. A swarm of locusts 12 miles long and six broad devastated part of the Algerian province of Constantine on June 13th. A great strike occurred in Pennsylvania on the 3rd of July, a sad fatal fire in the De Beers Mine at Kimberley on the 11th, and a dreadful volcanic eruption in Japan killed over a thousand people on the 29th. A collision off Table Island between two steamers caused the drowning of a hundred persons on August 14th, and a firework fatality of a painful character took place at Wandsworth on the 3rd; while on the evening of Bank Holiday a serious railway collision at Hampton Wick occasioned the deaths of six persons and injury to twenty-three others. Elland's Bank at Kettering suspended payment on August 3rd, and the murder at Surbiton on the 26th of Major Hare by his son, and the subsequent suicide of the latter created quite a shock in the neighbourhood. The same date witnessed the tragic end of the career of Mr. Simmons, the aeronaut at Maldon. On the 31st of this month Mary Ann Nichols was found foully murdered in Whitechapel; on the 8th of the month following another woman of the unfortunate class was discovered hacked to death in East London; on the 30th two other female corpses were found under horrible circumstances; and on the 9th of November yet another of these revolting crimes was perpetrated in the same neighbourhood, the victim being, as in some former cases, mutilated in a most fiendish manner. The atrocities roused the most profound feeling of alarm, and rewards were offered and promises of pardon held out to accomplices, but despite all this, and the strenuous endeavours of the police and local vigilance committees, the inhuman wretch or wretches concerned contrived to evade arrest, the crimes in each case being accomplished in such a manner as to leave no trace of the culprit.
An earthquake at Patras wrought much havoc to property, and caused the loss of several lives on September 9th, and destructive floods took place in Austria and Bavaria during the month; there was a fatal railway accident near Dijon on the 5th, and 80 lives were sacrificed by a collision on the 13th off Port Luz, in the Canaries. Serious inundations occurred in Switzerland and France on and about the 4th of October; a petroleum ship exploded with a terrific report in Calais Harbour on the 16th, killing four persons, while on the 10th a terrible catastrophe took place on the Lehigh Valley Railway, 61 poor people being killed and over 100 others injured. The mutilated trunk of a female was found in a vault of the new Police Office buildings being erected on the Thames Embankment on the 2nd, and afterwards an arm belonging to the body and other remains were discovered, but the mystery as to who the person was was not unravelled. Off the Isle of Wight a collision took place on November 4th, and a number of lives were lost; and during a heavy gale four brave lifeboats-men were drowned near Yarmouth. Several persons were killed by a naphtha explosion at Bristol on November 21st. On December 8th, a railway train, being ferried across the Haarlem river in America, was destroyed by fire, but fortunately all the passengers escaped. A serious collision occurred on December 8th on the Thames between the General Steam Navigation Company's Hawk, bound for Hamburg, and a collier from the north. Fifty passengers and the crew of the Hawk were saved by the captain running his vessel ashore in the fog, but from the collier a stowaway was drowned.

Source: Hornsey and Middlesex Messenger, Friday December 28, 1888


Last edited by Karen on Sun 1 Jul 2012 - 11:45; edited 1 time in total

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Sun 1 Jul 2012 - 11:44

THE WHITECHAPEL ATROCITY.

On Saturday Mr. Wynne E. Baxter, coroner for the South-East division of Middlesex, opened an inquiry at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel-road, into the circumstances relating to the death of a woman, who was most foully murdered early the previous morning by some unknown person or persons. The first witness was Edward Walker, of 15, Maidwell street, Albany-road, Camberwell, who deposed that to the best of his belief deceased was his daughter, Mary Ann Nicholls, but he had not seen her for three years. He recognised her by a little mark she had on her forehead when a child. His daughter was married 22 years ago to William Nicholls, a machinist, who was still alive; they had been living apart for seven or eight years. Deceased was forty-two years of age. In answer to the Coroner witness said, previous to June, 1886, deceased lived at his house, but in consequence of her intemperate habits they did not agree, and she left to try to better herself. When she was last confined her husband "took on" with the young woman who came to nurse her, and that was the cause of the separation. The Lambeth parish authorities had summoned the husband for the non-maintenance of the children, but the summons was dismissed because it was proved that deceased was living with another man. Deceased was an inmate of Lambeth Workhouse last April, and she went from there to a situation at Wandsworth. - P.C. Niel, 97 J, deposed that as he was proceeding down Buck's-row, Whitechapel, going towards Brady-street, early on Friday morning, he noticed a figure lying in the street. He crossed the row and found the body was that of a woman. She was lying outside a gateway, nine or ten feet high, which led to some stables. There were houses from the gateway eastward, whilst a Board School occupied the westward. By the aid of his lamp, the place being very dark, he detected blood oozing from a large wound in the throat. The woman was lying on her back with her clothes disarranged; her arm was quite warm from the joints upwards; her eyes were wide open; and her bonnet was lying by her side close to her left hand. Witness dispatched a constable, who was passing Brady-street, for Dr. Llewellyn, and also sent another policeman, who was in Baker-street, for the ambulance. When the doctor arrived he found the woman was dead and ordered her removal to the mortuary, which order was executed as soon as the ambulance arrived. Inspector Spratley came to the mortuary, and, while taking a description of the deceased, turned up her clothes and found that she was disembowelled. This had not been noticed before. No money was found, but there was an unmarked white handkerchief in her pocket. In answer to the Coroner witness said there was a pool of blood in Buck's-row just where deceased's neck was. Witness that night had never been far from the spot, and he walked through Buck's-row half-an-hour before he discovered the body. At that early time in the morning there are a number of people passing along Whitechapel-road, and anyone could easily make good his escape along there. In reply to a juryman, witness said he did not see a trap in the road at all that morning. The first to arrive on the scene after he had discovered the body were two men who worked at a slaughter-house opposite. They said they knew nothing of the affair, and they had heard no screams. Witness had previously seen them at work about a quarter past three, or half-an-hour before the discovery.
Mr. H. Llewellyn, surgeon, spoke to being called to Buck's-row about four o'clock on Friday morning, and to finding deceased dead. She had severe injuries to her throat. There were no marks of any struggle or of blood, as if the body had been dragged. An hour later he made a fuller examination of the body at the mortuary, and discovered that the abdomen was very extensively cut; there were several incisions running across the abdomen, and there were three or four similar on the right side running downwards. Two or three inches from the left side was a deep wound running in a jagged manner. The incised wound in the neck was eight inches long and completely severed all the tissues down to the vertebrae. All the injuries had been done by the same instrument, which must have been a long-bladed knife, moderately sharp and used with great violence. The inquest at this stage was adjourned until Monday.
Upon the inquiry being resumed, Inspector J. Spratling, J Division, deposed to taking a description of deceased's body whilst it lay stretched on the ambulance at the mortuary, Old Montague-street. He saw the intestines were exposed by injuries to the lower part of the body, and he then sent for Dr. Llewellyn. He noticed no blood marks on deceased's legs. Witness returned to the mortuary on Friday morning about noon, when he found the body stripped, and the clothes lying in a heap in the yard. There was amongst the clothes a flannel petticoat belonging to the Workhouse, and some pieces of it bearing the words, "Lambeth Workhouse, P.R." (Prince's road), had been cut out by Inspector Helson with the object of identifying the deceased. There was blood on the upper part of the dress body, on the ulster, and also on the front of the chemise. The walls and streets immediately surrounding the spot where the body was found had been carefully examined, but nothing relating to the crime could be discovered. None of the people living in Buck's-row whom witness had seen, heard anything unusual on the night in question. In answer to a juryman witness stated, that undoubtedly the woman was murdered with her clothes on.
Henry Tompkins, of Coventry-street, Bethnal Green, a horse slaughterer in the employ of Mr. Barber, stated that he was working in the slaughterhouse, Winthrop-street, adjoining Buck's-row, from eight o'clock on Thursday night till twenty minutes past four on Friday morning. He generally went home after leaving work, but that morning he had a walk. A police constable passed the slaughterhouse about a quarter past four, and told the men there that a woman had been murdered in Buck's-row. They then went to see the dead woman. Besides witness, two other men named James Mumford and Charles Britten, worked in the slaughterhouse. Witness and Britten had been out of the slaughterhouse previously that night, namely, from twenty minutes past twelve till one o'clock, but not afterwards till they went to see the body. It was not a great distance from the slaughterhouse to the spot where the deceased was found.
Detective Inspector Helson gave evidence corroborative of the testimony of Inspector Spratling. In his opinion the murder was committed on the spot where the body was found.
P.C. Mizen spoke to receiving information of the case from a carman, who was passing by the corner of Hanbury-street, and Baker's-row about a quarter to four on Friday morning.
Charles A. Cross, carman, employed by Messrs. Pickford and Co., said when he was going to work early on Friday morning along Buck's-row, he found the body of a woman. Another man came up and witness called his attention to the body. They did not move the woman, but witness told P.C. Mizen that a woman was lying in Buck's-row "either dead or drunk."
William Nicholls, printer's machinist, living in Coburg-road, Old Kent-road, identified deceased as his wife, who separated from him eight years ago last Easter. Witness denied that he took up with a nurse when his wife left him, and said she had no occasion to separate from him.
Emily Holland, married, of Thrawl-street, Spitalfields, an acquaintance of deceased's, spoke to seeing deceased about 2:30 on Friday morning staggering along Osborne-street into Whitechapel-road. Deceased was drunk, and said she was going to get some money to pay for her lodgings. The inquest was then adjourned for a fortnight, and it was arranged that the jury should inspect the clothes of the deceased at the mortuary.

LATEST.

The funeral of the unfortunate woman, Mary Ann Nichols, who was murdered in Buck's-row on Friday last, took place on Thursday. The arrangements were of a very simple character. The time at which the cortege was to start was kept a profound secret, and a ruse was perpetrated in order to get the body out of the mortuary where it has lain since the day of the murder. A pair-horsed closed hearse was observed making its way down Hanbury-street, and the crowds, which numbered some thousands, made way for it to go along Old Montague-street, but instead of it doing so it passed on into the Whitechapel-road, and, doubling back, entered the mortuary by the back gate, which is situated in Chapman's-court. No one was near besides the undertaker and his men, when the remains, placed in a polished elm coffin, bearing a plate with the inscription, "Mary Ann Nichols, aged 42, died August 31st, 1888," was removed to the hearse and driven to Hanbury-street, there to await the mourners. These were late in arriving, and the two coaches were kept waiting some time in a side street. By this time the news had spread that the body was in the hearse, and people flocked round to see the coffin, and examine the plate. In this they were, however, frustrated, for a body of police, under Inspector Helston, of the H Division, surrounded the hearse and prevented their approaching too near. At last the procession started towards Ilford, where the last scene in this unfortunate drama took place. The mourners were Mr. Edward Walker, the father of the victim, and two of her children. The procession proceeded along Baker's-row, and past the corner of Buck's-row into the main road, where policemen were stationed every few yards. The houses in the neighbourhood had the blinds drawn, and much sympathy was expressed for the relatives.
Up to a late hour last night no arrest had been made in connection with the murder.

Source: The Mercury, Saturday September 8, 1888, Page 2

N.B. Later in the evening on the day this article appeared in The Mercury, the murder and mutilation of Annie Chapman would occur in Hanbury Street.

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Fri 15 Mar 2013 - 5:36

EAST LONDON HORRORS.
VERDICT IN THE NICHOLLS' CASE.

On Saturday Mr. Wynne E. Baxter resumed the inquest upon the body ofsn Mary Ann Nicholls, aged 47, the victim in the Buck's-row murder, one of the series of Whitechapel tragedies. The inquiry was held at the Working Lads' Institute.
Signalman Eades was recalled to supplement his previous evidence to the effect that he had seen a man named John James carrying a knife near the scene of the murder. It transpired, however, that this man is a harmless lunatic who is well
known in the neighbourhood. The Coroner then summed up. Having reviewed the career of the deceased from the time she left her husband, and reminded the jury of the irregular life she had led for the last two years, Mr. Baxter proceeded to point
out that the unfortunate woman was last seen alive at half-past two o'clock on Saturday morning, September 1, by Mrs. Holland, who knew her well. Deceased was at that time much the worse for drink, and was endeavouring to walk eastward down Whitechapel.
What her exact movements were after this it was impossible to say; but in less than an hour and a quarter her dead body was discovered at a spot rather under three-quarters of a mile distant. The time at which the body was found cannot have been far from
3:45 a.m., as it is fixed by so many independent data. The condition of the body appeared to prove conclusively that the deceased was killed on the exact spot in which she was found. There was not a trace of blood anywhere, except at the spot where her neck
was lying, this circumstance being sufficient to justify the assumption that the injuries to the throat were committed when the woman was on the ground, while the state of her clothing and the absence of any blood about her legs suggested that the abdominal
injuries were inflicted whilst she was still in the same position. Coming to a consideration of the perpetrator of the murder, the Coroner said: It seems astonishing at first thought that the culprit should have escaped detection, for there must surely have been
marks of blood about his person. If, however, blood was principally on his hands, the presence of so many slaughter-houses in the neighbourhood would make the frequenters of this spot familiar with blood-stained clothes and hands, and his appearance might in that way
have failed to attract attention while he passed from Buck's-row in the twilight into Whitechapel-road, and was lost sight of in the morning's market traffic. We cannot altogether leave unnoticed the fact that the death that you have been investigating is one of four
presenting many points of similarity, all of which have occurred within the space of about five months, and all within a very short distance of the place where we are sitting. All four victims were women of middle age, all were married, and had lived apart from their
husbands in consequence of intemperate habits, and were at the time of their death leading an irregular life, and eking out a miserable and precarious existence in common lodging-houses. In each case there were abdominal as well as other injuries. In each case the injuries
were inflicted after midnight, and in places of public resort, where it would appear impossible but that almost immediate detection should follow the crime, and in each case the inhuman and dastardly criminals are at large in society. Emma Elizabeth Smith, who received her
injuries in Osborn-street on the early morning of Easter Tuesday, April 3, survived in the London Hospital for upwards of 24 hours, and was able to state that she had been followed by some men, robbed and mutilated, and even to describe imperfectly one of them. Martha Tabram
was found at three a.m. on Tuesday, August 7, on the first-floor landing of George-yard buildings, Wentworth-street, with 39 punctured wounds on her body. In addition to these, and the case under your consideration, there is the case of Annie Chapman, still in the hands of
another jury. The instruments used in the two earlier cases are dissimilar. In the first it was a blunt instrument, such as a walking-stick; in the second, some of the wounds were thought to have been made by a dagger; but in the two recent cases the instruments suggested by the
medical witnesses are not so different. Dr. Llewellyn says the injuries on Nicholls could have been produced by a strong bladed instrument, moderately sharp. Dr. Phillips is of opinion that those on Chapman were by a very sharp knife, probably with a thin, narrow blade, at least six
to eight inches in length, probably longer. The similarity of the injuries in the two cases is considerable. There are bruises about the face in both cases; the head is nearly severed from the body in both cases; there are other dreadful injuries in both cases; and those injuries, again,
have in each case been performed with anatomical knowledge. Dr. Llewellyn seems to incline to the opinion that the abdominal injuries were first, and caused instantaneous death; but, if so, it seems difficult to understand the object of such desperate injuries to the throat, or how it comes
about that there was so little bleeding from the several arteries, that the clothing on the upper surface was not stained, and, indeed, very much less bleeding from the abdomen than from the neck. Surely it may well be that, as in the case of Chapman, the dreadful wounds to the throat were inflicted
first and the others afterwards. This is a matter of some importance when we come to consider what possible motive there can be for all this ferocity. Robbery is out of the question; and there is nothing to suggest jealousy; there could not have been any quarrel, or it would have been heard.
I suggest to you as a possibility that these two women may have been murdered by the same man with the same object, and that in the case of Nicholls the wretch was disturbed before he had accomplished his object, and having failed in the open street he tries again, within a week of his failure, in a more
secluded place. If this should be correct, the audacity and daring is equal to its maniacal fanaticism and abhorrent wickedness. But this surmise may or may not be correct, the suggestive motive may be the wrong one; but one thing is very clear - that a murder of a most atrocious character has been committed.
The jury, after a short consultation, returned a verdict of "Wilful murder" against some person or persons unknown. A rider was added expressing the full coincidence of the jury with some remarks made by the coroner as to the need of a mortuary for Whitechapel.

Source: Aberdare Times, 29 September 1888, Page 2

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Fri 15 Mar 2013 - 5:36

THE WHITECHAPEL MURDERS.

The inquest as to the death of Mary Ann Nichols, whose shockingly mutilated body was found in a gateway, in Whitechapel, early on the morning of the 31st ult., was resumed on Monday. Not one of the witnesses was able to give any account of the circumstances immediately preceding the murder of the woman.
The inquiry was adjourned till Saturday. The Foreman of the Jury expressed the opinion that if a substantial reward had been offered, with regard to the first murder in the district, the last two murders would never have been perpetrated.
Prosecutor said that at three o'clock that morning he was standing at a coffee stall in Whitechapel, when the accused came up drunk and, in consequence, was refused to be served. He then said to prosecutor, "What are you looking at," and then pulled out a knife and tried to stab witness. Ludwig followed him round the stall
and made several attempts to stab him. A constable came up, and he was given into custody.
Constable 221 H said the prisoner was in a very excited condition, and witness had previously received information that prisoner was wanted in the City for attempting to cut a woman's throat with a razor. On the way to the station prisoner dropped a long-bladed open knife, and on him was found a long-bladed pair of scissors.
Inspector Pimley, H Division, asked the magistrate to remand the prisoner, as they had not had sufficient time to make the necessary inquiries concerning him.
A City constable, John Johnson, stated that early that morning he was on duty in the Minories, when he heard screams of murder proceeding from a dark court in which there were no lights. The court led to some railway arches, and was well known as a dangerous locality. On going into the court he found the prisoner with a prostitute.
The former appeared to be under the influence of drink. Witness asked what he was doing there, when he replied, "Nothing." The woman, who appeared to be in a very frightened and agitated condition said, "Oh, policeman, do take me out of this." The woman was so frightened that she could make no further statement then. He sent the man off
and walked with the woman to the end of his beat, when she said, "He frightened me very much when he pulled a big knife out." Witness said, "Why didn't you tell me that at the time," and she replied, "I was too much frightened." He then went and looked for the prisoner, but could not find him, and, therefore, warned several other constables of the occurrence.
Witness had been out all the morning trying to find the woman, but up to the present time without success. He should know her again. He believed prisoner worked in the neighbourhood.
The magistrate thereupon remanded prisoner.

Source: Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser, 21 September 1888, Page 2

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Tue 7 May 2013 - 10:57

REVOLTING MURDER IN WHITECHAPEL.

Another murder of a most revolting character was discovered early on the morning of the 31st ult. in Whitechapel. As a constable was walking through Buck's-row, Thomas-street, Whitechapel, at about a quarter to four, he found the body of a woman, between 35 and 40 years of age, lying at the side of the street, with her throat cut from ear to ear and her body mutilated in a shocking manner.
She was wearing some workhouse garments, and has been identified as having been in the lying-in ward at Lambeth.
At a quarter to four in the morning Police-constable Neil was on his beat in Buck's-row, Thomas-street, Whitechapel, when his attention was attracted to the body of a woman lying on the pavement close to the door of the stable-yard in connection with Essex Wharf. Buck's-row, like many minor thoroughfares in this and similar neighbourhoods, is not over-burdened with gas-lamps, and in the dim light
the constable at first thought that the woman had fallen down in a drunken stupor, and was sleeping off the effects of a night's debauch. With the aid of the light from his bullseye lantern Neil at once perceived that the woman had been the victim of some horrible outrage. Her livid face was stained with blood, and her throat cut from ear to ear. The constable at once alarmed the people living in the house
next to the stable-yard, occupied by a carter named Green and his family, and also knocked up Mr. Walter Perkins, the resident manager of the Essex Wharf, on the opposite side of the road, which is very narrow at this point. Neither Mr. Perkins nor any of the Green family, although the latter were sleeping within a few yards of where the body was discovered, had heard any sound of a struggle. Dr. Llewellyn, who lives
only a short distance away in Whitechapel-road, was at once sent for and promptly arrived on the scene. He found the body lying on its back across the gateway, and the briefest possible examination was sufficient to prove that life was extinct. Death had not long ensued, because the extremities were still warm. With the assistance of Police-sergeant Kirby and Police-constable Thane, the body was removed to the Whitechapel-road
mortuary, and it was not until the unfortunate woman's clothes were removed that the horrible nature of the attack which had been made upon her transpired. It was then discovered that in addition to the gash in her throat, which had nearly severed the head from the body, the lower part of the abdomen had been ripped up, and the bowels were protruding. The abdominal wall, the whole length of the body, had been cut open, and on either side
were two incised wounds, almost as severe as the centre one. This reached from the lower part of the abdomen to the breast bone. The instrument with which the wounds were inflicted must have been not only of the sharpness of a razor, but used with considerable ferocity. The murdered woman is about 45 years of age, and 5ft. 2in. in height. She had a dark complexion, brown eyes and brown hair, turning grey. At the time of her death she was wearing
a brown ulster fastened with seven large metal buttons with the figure of a horse and a man standing by its side stamped thereon. She had a brown lindsey frock and a grey woollen petticoat with flannel underclothing, close ribbed brown stays, black woollen stockings, side spring boots, black straw bonnet trimmed with black velvet. The mark "Lambeth Workhouse - R.R." was found stamped on the petticoat bands, and a hope is entertained that by this
deceased's identity may be discovered. A photograph of the body has been taken, and this will be circulated amongst the workhouse officials.

THE INQUEST.

Mr. Wynne Baxter, coroner for East Middlesex, opened the inquest on the 1st inst. at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel.
Edward Walker, an old man, residing at 16, Maidwood-street, Albany-road, Camberwell, said that he was formerly a smith. To the best of his belief the body at the mortuary was that of his daughter, whom he had not seen for three years. He recognised it by the general appearance, the loss of some front teeth, and a small mark on the forehead, caused when the deceased was a child. She was 42 years old. About 22 years ago she was married to a man named
William Nicholls, who was still alive. He was a printer's machinist. He and the deceased had been living apart for seven or eight years. The witness last heard of his daughter last Easter, when she wrote him the following letter, from a house in Wandsworth in which she had just before obtained a situation as domestic servant:
"I just write to say you will be glad to know that I am settled in my new place, and going on all right up to now. My people went out yesterday, and have not returned, so I am left in charge. It is a grand place inside, with trees and gardens back and front. All has been newly done up. They are teetotallers and religious, so I ought to get on. They are very nice people, and I have not too much to do. I hope you are all right and the boy has work. So good-bye for the present.
- From yours truly, "POLLY.
"Answer soon, please, and let me know how you are."
He replied to this letter, but had not heard from his daughter since. He last saw her alive two years ago, in June, 1886. She was apparently respectable then, but he did not speak to her. It was at a funeral. He was not friendly with her. She lived with him three or four years ago, and after a few words she left him. He did not know what she did afterwards. She was not particularly sober, and that was why they did not agree. He did not think that she was fast. He had no idea of such a thing.
She did not stay out particularly late at night. The worst he had seen of her was her keeping company with females of a certain class. After she wrote to him from Wandsworth he sent a kind letter back to her, but he did not see or hear anything of her until he was called to view the body. He had kept her letter because it was his habit to keep letters. It was not the case that he turned her out of doors. She had no cause to be "like this." He had always had a home for her. She had separated from her
husband because he "turned nasty" over another man. Her husband left her, and took another woman to live with. The deceased had had five children, of whom the eldest, a young man, was 21 years old, and the youngest 8. The eldest was living with the witness, and the other four children with their father. He believed that three or four years ago the deceased lived with a man who kept a smith's shop in York-street, Walworth. He did not know that she had lived with any other man; but on one occasion the parish
of Lambeth summoned her husband for her maintenance. His defence was that she was living with another man. She denied it, but the summons was dismissed. Until he heard of the murder he did not know that she had left the situation at Wandsworth. Just before taking it she was in Lambeth Workhouse. He knew of nothing likely to throw light on the inquiry. He was not aware that she had any enemies. She was always too good for that. Her only fault was being too good.
Police-constable John Neil deposed that he was going down Buck's-row, Whitechapel, from Thomas-street to Brady-street. Not a soul was about. He was round there about half an hour previously, and met nobody then. The first thing he saw was a figure lying on the footpath. It was dark, but there was a street lamp on the opposite side some distance away. The figure was lying alongside a gateway, of which the gate, nine or 10 feet high, was locked. It led to some stables belonging to a Mr. Brown. From the gateway eastward
the houses began, and westward there was a Board school. All the houses were occupied. The deceased's left hand was touching the gate. Directly he turned his lantern on the body he noticed blood was oozing from the woman's throat. She was lying on her back with her hands beside the body, the eyes wide open, the legs a little apart, and the hands open. Feeling her right arm he found it quite warm. Her bonnet was beside her on the ground. Without disturbing the body he called a constable who was passing along Brady-street.
He came, and the witness said to him, "Here's a woman has cut her throat. Run at once for Dr. Llewellyn." He did so, and the witness seeing another constable pass along Baker's-row, sent him for the ambulance. Dr. Llewellyn came in about ten minutes. In the meantime the witness rang the bell at Essex Wharf on the opposite side of the street. A man appeared at a window, and, in answer to a question, said he had not heard any unusual noise. Sergeant Kirby afterwards came and knocked at the door of New Cottage, adjoining the gateway.
Mrs. Green answered from an upper window, and said that she had not heard any unusual noise. When the doctor came he pronounced life extinct. The deceased was then placed on the ambulance and taken to the mortuary. There Inspector Spratling came to take a description of the body, which he found was disembowelled. They found no money on the woman; only a comb, a small piece of looking glass, and a white handkerchief, unmarked. When the witness found the body, there was a pool of blood beneath the neck. He had not heard any noise
that night. On the contrary, the place was unusually quiet, and nothing had aroused his suspicion. It was quite possible for anybody to have escaped through Brady-street or into Whitechapel-road, or through a passage in Queen's-buildings. He never saw the deceased before finding her dead. A quarter of an hour previously he was in Whitechapel-road, where he saw some people apparently going to market, and some women.
Replying to jurymen, the witness added that he examined the place where he found the deceased, and saw no track of blood. It did not strike him that somebody might have brought the body in a trap, with the intention of throwing it on to the adjoining railway line. There was a slaughterhouse near, in Winthorpe-street, and two men who had been working there all night, and whom he knew well, came into Buck's-row while the body was being put on the ambulance. They made no observation. With the exception of a man who had passed down Buck's-row
while the doctor was present, they were the first of the general public to arrive. They had just finished work, and were on their way home. He had seen them and another man at work in the slaughter-house when he passed it, about twenty minutes past three o'clock.
Dr. Llewellyn, 152, Whitechapel-road, deposed that he was called up by a policeman, with whom he went to Buck's-row. He there found the deceased lying on her back with her throat deeply cut; there was very little blood on the ground. She had apparently been dead about half an hour. He was quite certain that the injury to her throat was not self-inflicted. There was no mark of any struggle either on the body or near where it was found. About an hour afterwards he was sent for again by the police, and going to the mortuary to which the body had
been carried found most extensive injuries on the abdomen. At ten o'clock next morning, in the presence of his assistant, he began a post-mortem examination. On the right side of the face was a recent and strongly marked bruise, which was scarcely perceptible when he first saw the body. It might have been caused either by a blow from a fist or by pressure of the thumb. On the left side of the face was a circular bruise, which might have been produced in the same way. A small bruise was on the left side of the neck, and an abrasion on the right.
All must have been done at the same time. There were two cuts in the throat, one four inches long and the other eight, and both reaching to the vertebrae, which had also been penetrated. The wounds must have been inflicted with a strong-bladed knife, moderately sharp, and used with great violence. It appeared to have been held in the left hand of the person who had used it. No blood at all was found on the front of the woman's clothes. The body was fairly well nourished, and there was no smell of alcohol in the stomach. On the abdomen were some
severe cuts and stabs, which the witness described in detail. Nearly all the blood had drained out of the arteries and veins, and collected to a large extent in the loose tissues. The deceased's wounds were sufficient to cause instantaneous death.
Questioned by jurymen, the witness said the deceased was a strong woman. The murderer must have had some rough anatomical knowledge, for he seemed to have attacked all the vital parts. It was impossible to say whether the wounds were inflicted with a clasp-knife or a butcher's knife, but the instrument must have been a strong one. When he first saw the body life had not been out of it more than half-an-hour. The murder might have occupied four or five minutes. It could have been committed by one man so far as the wounds were concerned.

Inspector Spratling, of the J Division, was the first witness examined at the resumed inquest on the 3rd inst. He deposed that about half-past four in the morning he received information in the Hackney-road of the finding of the body. He at once proceeded to Buck's-row, and there saw Police-constable Thain, who pointed out to him the spot where he (Constable Thain) had found the deceased. The witness saw blood stains between the stones. He accompanied the constable to the mortuary and found the body of the deceased on the ambulance in the yard. While
there he took a description of the body, which was subsequently removed into the mortuary and placed on a slab on the floor. In taking a more accurate description of the clothing, he found the injuries to the abdomen. Finding these injuries, he did not proceed farther, but at once sent for Dr. Llewellyn. The doctor arrived shortly afterwards, and made an examination. The body was stripped by the workhouse inmates.
The Coroner complained of this, stating that some official ought to have been present in order that evidence could have been given as to the state of the clothing. Inspector Spratling said he had given no instructions for the body to be stripped.
The witness then proceeded to detail the articles of clothing found upon the deceased. The stays, he said, were of the ordinary size, and were not injured. (The coroner then sent a constable to fetch the stays).
Examination continued: Between five and six o'clock the same morning he directed Constable Thain to examine Buck's-row, and subsequently he (Inspector Spratling) examined it. There were no bloodstains whatever in the street. Afterwards he visited the Great Eastern Railway yard, the embankment, and other places in the vicinity, but found no weapon of any kind. There had been gatemen at the railway yard all night, but they had not heard any unusual noise. By a juror: The nearest constable was in Brady-street, and from time to time he would be within the sound
of the whistle of the constable in Buck's-row. The constable walking the Buck's-row beat would be there about every 20 minutes.
Henry Tomkins, of 12, Coventry-street, said he commenced work in the slaughter-house in Winthrop-street about nine o'clock on Thursday evening, and left off about 4:20 on Friday morning. He generally went home after work, but on Friday morning he and his fellows took a walk. A policeman having told them that a woman had been murdered they proceeded to Buck's-row. They went out of the slaughter-house at 20 minutes past twelve, and returned to work about one o'clock. No one left the yard between one and four o'clock. He believed that the murder was perpetrated
at about four o'clock in the morning. They were very quiet in the slaughter-house from about two o'clock. The gates of the yard were open all night, and anyone could obtain admittance to the slaughter-house; but he saw no one pass except the policeman about 4:15 a.m. He went to Buck's-row and remained there until the body of the deceased was removed to the mortuary.
Inspector Helson, of the J Division, said the deceased had on a long ulster, with large buttons, five of which were fastened. The bodice of the dress was buttoned, with the exception of two or three buttons at the neck. The stays were fastened up, and were fairly tight. The only part of the garments saturated with blood was the dress at the back of the neck; the hair at the back of the head was clotted with blood. There was no evidence of a recent washing of the parts of the body where the wounds had been inflicted in order to remove the blood. There were no cuts
in the clothing; but he believed the murder was committed while the deceased was wearing her clothes. With the exception of one spot in Brady-street, there were no blood stains in the vicinity. Police-constable Mizen gave corroborative evidence.
H. Charles Cross, a carman in the employ of Messrs. Pickford & Co., said he left home about 3:30 on the morning of the murder, and he reached Pickford's at about four o'clock. He went through Brady-street into Buck's-row, and as he was walking on the right hand side of Buck's-row he saw something lying on the other side of the road. It seemed to him like a dark figure. He walked out to the middle of the road, and saw that it was the figure of a woman. At the same time he heard a man coming up the street, in the same direction, and on the same side of the road as himself.
The witness waited until the person he had heard arrived, and then said, "Come a little nearer; there is a woman." He stood at the side of the body and took hold of the deceased's hand. The witness then said: "Why, I believe the woman's dead." The other man felt her heart, and said he believed she was dead. The witness's companion suggested that they should raise her, but the witness declined to do anything until a policeman arrived. The witness then described the position of the body. They found a constable and informed him of their discovery.
After an interval for luncheon,
William Nicholls, printer and machinist, of Coburg-road, Old Kent-road, was examined. The deceased was his wife. He had been separated from her for about eight years. He last heard of her about three years ago, but did not know what she had been doing. By a Juror: Several years ago he had been summoned for not supporting his wife, and pleaded that she had been living with another man. He had had her watched. It was not true that separation was due to his living with her nurse. They had been separated several times before the final separation, and he had forgiven her many times.
Ellen Holland, of Thrawl-street, lodging-house keeper, said the deceased had lodged with her for about six weeks. On the Friday morning she had been kept out late, and was coming home when she met the deceased, about half-past two o'clock, at the corner of Osborne-street and Whitechapel-road. The deceased was coming down Osborne-street by herself, and was the worse for drink. The witness tried to persuade the deceased to go home with her, but she refused. The witness did not know what the deceased did for a living. She was a woman who talked very little about her affairs. The deceased
always seemed very melancholy, as though some trouble was weighing upon her mind.
Mary Ann Monk, an inmate of Lambeth Workhouse, gave further evidence of identification, and the inquiry was adjourned for a fortnight.

Source: Cardigan Observer, and General Advertiser For the Counties of Cardigan, Carmarthen and Pembroke, 8 September, 1888, Page 2

There is little cause for surprise that great and widespread uneasiness should exist at the East-end of London on account of three mysterious and atrocious murders of women belonging to the same class having occurred in the district of Whitechapel within a short period of each other. The frightful atrocity of the murders seems to point to the existence of a gang of thugs, whom the utmost vigilance of the detective police will be required to unearth. The surgeon who examined the body of the latest victim, and who gave evidence at the coroner's inquest, was of opinion that the wounds
were inflicted by a left-handed man, and that the weapon used was a butcher's knife. In the case of the previous victim the numerous wounds found on the body bore traces of having been inflicted by a bayonet. The abounding foreign element in the East-end naturally gives rise to all sorts of wild suspicions.

Source: Cardigan Observer, and General Advertiser For the Counties of Cardigan, Carmarthen and Pembroke, 8 September, 1888, Page 2

***************************************
Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"
avatar
Karen
Admin

Posts : 4907

View user profile http://victorianripper.niceboard.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Nichols' Murder and Inquest

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum