|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2543
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 19, 2005 - 1:46 pm: | 
|
This is part of an Old Bailey court transcript which I will post fully on the Stride thread as I believe it has great relevance as to the nature of her murder, and killer.
However in this thread I wish to discuss the strange question of Victorian ‘stays’ and the part this curious garment may have played in the Whitechapel Murders.
Here is the partial transcript:
‘the shock was so great I could not speak at first, and he stabbed me in my left side, and I screamed out, and then he stabbed me again in the bone of my stays - he held me while he drew the knife out of my stays, and then stabbed me on the left breast’
As can be seen the attacker’s knife actually became stuck in the whalebone of the woman’s stays, and the man required a good deal of force to extract the knife from the stays.
I would point out that this case is not an exception, and I have found other cases where a woman’s stays have probably saved her life from a determined attacker.
We must also note that the ‘unfortunates’ of Whitechapel used their stays to hide away valuable items, such as coins or jewellery.
There are hundreds of such cases, and I would be happy to post some of them if there is an interest.
Obviously the roughs and toughs of Whitechapel would have been well aware of this fact, so what might have started out as a simple attempt to rob an unfortunate, where she was pushed to the ground so that her stays could be removed or investigated, could easily have turned into something far more vicious and deadly.
Personally I can see no situation or circumstance where a Whitechapel whore would allow herself to be pushed to the ground and then have her stays examined by a stranger, without considerable resistance on her part, unless of course that stranger had paid his way.
Apart from this I see no other option for the attacker here than the murder of his victim.
I would also strongly speculate that much of the mutilation evidenced by the victims of the Whitechapel Murderer could be explained by a vicious and frenzied attack on the stays of the victim rather than the victim herself.
Take this case:
‘I was stabbed in my bowels, in two places; I was sent to the hospital. Here are the stays which I wore at the time; there is blood on them, and two holes.’
So given the ’mutilations’ experienced by most of the victims of the Whitechapel Murderer, especially to the areas of the body encased by the stays all the woman wore - with the exception of MJK - I am bound to say that these type of injuries could well have been motivated by a desire to rip apart the victim’s stays rather than the victim herself.
I find myself almost poised to say that at least some of the crimes that we attribute to a person we call Jack the Ripper were in fact the results of simple street robbery carried out by the gangs that infested that area of Whitechapel. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5011
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 19, 2005 - 2:11 pm: |
|
Nice idea, AP, but Kelly wasn't the only one not wearing stays. There was Kate too.
Anyway, why would a street robber bother to place a woman's intestines on her shoulder, and then walk off with her uterus/bladder/kidney?
Robert |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2464
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 19, 2005 - 2:43 pm: |
|
AP
Many of us kids were very interested in our Grandmothers "stays".When I was seven or eight I used to get told off for trying them on in front of the mirror.The look of them with the boning and the Cinderella type look they gave when you laced them up also intrigued me.
I knew some of my friends were curious about them too even some little boys used to try them on ,also fascinated probably by all the strange boning and lacing.You can still buy them apparently in good hosiers in London.They are reputed to support the back.
Is it possible that the ripper may have had "issues" over these strange stays and ripping them up brought some kind of "closure"!
But AP I think Robert is probably right.It was apparently quite a spectacular arrangement of innards that the public were probably supposed to see and various doctors and police did see and have described-not just someone from a street gang trying to get at coins etc hidden away in stays and leaving behind a bit of a mess.
I doubt a gang would have got away unseen anyway.
Natalie |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2544
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 19, 2005 - 4:11 pm: |
|
Yes, Robert and Natalie.
I agree, to a certain extent.
I'm mainly hammering away here at the killing and 'mutilation' of Tabram... and perhaps one or two others.
My acceptance of Eddowes as a victim of the Whitechapel Murderer is fairly complete.
It is all the others that vex me. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2546
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 19, 2005 - 4:41 pm: |
|
Inquest detail, Mary Ann Nicholls.
'The Coroner said he considered it important to know the exact state in which the stays were found.'
He never did find out. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2550
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 - 5:52 pm: |
|
Mary Ann Nichols.
‘The wounds on the abdomen were visible with the stays on, and that proved they could have been inflicted while the stays were on the deceased.’
And then the stays disappeared.
Dispute between the Foreman of the Jury and James Hatfield:
Hatfield: ’Although he had said deceased wore no stays he would not be surprised to find she had stays on.’
Foreman: ’Why, you tried the stays on the body of the deceased in my presence at the mortuary, and you said they were short,’
Hatfield: ’My memory is bad.’
Compare this debacle with a case of murder over a hundred years before where the investigating authorities were well aware of the importance of stays in correctly placing wounds to a murdered female victim.
‘Samuel Cooling , Surgeon. I examin'd the Wound; It was about an Inch and a Half above the Hip; and was about an Inch in Breadth, and an Inch and a Half deep. I pass'd my Finger into the Orifice; 'tis my Opinion it was the Occasion of her Death, and that it was made with that Clasp Knife. (A thick Clasp Knife was produc'd in Court.)
The Constable This Knife I took from the Prisoner: 'tis the very same.
Mr. Cooling. I believe the Wound was given with this Knife, for it tallies exactly, both with the Hole in her Stays, and with the Wound.
Q. Would that Knife have wounded her thro' her Stays.
A former Witness. Yes it would: and the Hole in the Stays tallies exactly with the Knife.’
This is the type of material that we should have seen appearing in the inquest into Nichol’s murder.
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2972
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 - 6:35 pm: |
|
Gosh! stays AP! I remember as Nats did.... trying my granny's articles on and hate to say it ....theyre still the same!.... and the fun is too!!!!!
(Oh dear God did I say that!)
The stays at the time though were I think a lot more shall we say 'canvassy' than our present equivalaent! A LOT mor boning and construction of the body!......quite armoured really but didn't come that far down the body did they ....Must check that!!!!!!Even so may have been enough to deflect a clumsily thrusted blade I'd say... (well ish!)Well not obviously in Pol's case!!!
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2973
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 - 6:39 pm: |
|
More boning,a LOT of canvas, and lacing up to make sure that all was safely gathered in!!!..... (A Harvester!!!) !!!! and a lot less lace maybe!!!! Blimey! feel a bit of research coming on here!!!
Back to The Spanish Brandy and an inspection of the 'undie drawer' I think!!! He he!
Suz x |
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 373
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 - 6:52 pm: |
|
MMM This could get naughty!! |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5017
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 - 7:04 pm: |
|
From http://www.manchestergalleries.org/costume/narrative.php?irn=142&themeback=1&CostumeTheme=Underwear
"The corset as we know it today developed in the fourteenth century from the "cotte", a close-fitting woman's stiffened underbodice. From the fifteenth century, this became known as a "body" or pair of bodies, and by the seventeenth century the usual term was a pair of stays. These could be stiffened with cane or whalebone, creating a flattened front with the breast pushed upwards and not separated. The firm front of the stays could be covered with a decorated stomacher or else the stays themselves might be displayed. Stays were always worn over a linen shift or chemise, never next to the skin, and this protected them from inner dirt and minimised rubbing or chafing from the rigid edges. It was, of course, almost impossible to wash stays which were constructed from so many different materials."
Apparently men wore these contraptions too.
Robert (an anorak and jeans chap) |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2551
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - 1:45 pm: |
|
Here’s another little case I’ve found where a good deal of violence is used to get a woman’s stays off her. The poor victim ended up in a ditch, stark naked and very bloody.
JACOB MICHAEL sworn.
I deal in Lemons. I was coming towards London, on the 27th of July: sitting at the door of the George, at Pancras, I saw the two prisoners come out of the house whispering, and laughing together, and looking over into the fields; soon after they went into the field where the prosecutrix was sitting. Upon seeing them go towards her, I drank my beer, and then went after them. I went round another field, and laid myself down behind the hedge facing her: there I saw one of the prisoners hold her hands fast, and the other taking things out of her pocket. Hatchett said, Now, d - n your eyes, you bitch, if you do not give me your stays, I will cut your throat. Upon that the prosecutrix called out, For the Lord's sake, leave me my stays; but they repeated that again; upon which she called out, Murder. Hatchett answered, If you squall out murder, d - n your eyes, you bitch, I'll cut your throat. Upon this, I jumped over the hedge to them, and said, You have been robbing the poor girl: upon that Hatchett came up with a pen-knife, and said, You Jew bugger, what is that to you? Upon seeing the knife, I ran away for assistance: I ran and fetched Mr. Congreve. Upon his coming up, he found them together.
I believe the attackers were after what they thought might be in her stays.
The language is of interest: ‘You Jew bugger.’
What is also interesting is that the two attackers were women, not men.
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2469
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - 2:20 pm: |
|
What an astonishing case this is AP.
Maybe the very idea that these stays contained "hidden treasure" sent blood rushing to the heads of all sorts of people!
Lovely photo of these "magnets of attraction" Robert.
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5021
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - 2:59 pm: |
|
Hmm...this may seem obtuse, but I thought the idea of the stays was to squeeze everything up so as to look small. In which case, where would a woman find room to hide anything?
Some of these contraptions...if it's an hour glass figure that's wanted, then some of the women in these pics have only two minutes left.
Robert |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5022
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - 3:15 pm: |
|
This one sounds like a prop from "Are You Being Served?"
Harness' Electric Corset
Price only 5/6 post free
In appearance these corsets do not differ from those usually worn, being made of the same material (best quality), in the latest style, and most approved shapes. They are, in fact, "THE VERY THING FOR LADIES", young or old, especially those who suffer from "WEAK BACK", Chills, Rheumatism, HYSTERIA, Internal Complaints, Loss of Appetite, NERVOUS DYSPEPSIA, Kidney Disorders, RHEUMATIC AND ORGANIC AFFECTIONS. LADIES' AILMENTS. BILIOUSNESS etc
QUALIFIED LADY NURSES CAN BE CONSULTED DAILY FREE OF CHARGE
BY WEARING this Perfectly designed Corset, the most awkward figure becomes grateful and elegant, the internal organs are speedily strengthened
The Chest is aided in its Healthy Development
and the entire system is invigorated.
DON'T DELAY. Send at once 5/6 Postal Order or Cheque for one of these beautiful Corsets. SEND AT ONCE
NOTE ONLY ADDRESS:
THE MEDICAL BATTERY CO Ltd
52 OXFORD ST LONDON W.
advertisement pictured in
A Victorian World of Science by Alan Sutton
It'll ride up with wear.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2552
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - 4:27 pm: |
|
Here’s what the girls of Whitechapel concealed in their stays, Robert:
(Old Bailey Transcripts)
‘Judith Roach . Upon the Woman's missing her Money, I went out to see after the Prisoner, and brought her home, and she went up stairs into her Room jingling some Money. Collins asked her what that was? Upon which she ran down Stairs as fast as she could, and Collins called out, - stop her, she has got my Money! I stopped her at the Threshold of the Door, and she dropped 2 Guineas and 2 Shillings. She told Colonel De Veil it was her Money, and she pulled out another Guinea out of her Petticoat, and said she had 2 Guineas more in her Stays; all which Money she begged for in the late hard Frost, and worked for on other Times. While she was at the Justice's, I was sent home, to search her Room, with the Constable, and we found 2 Guineas in her Stays, but she said, these too were her own.’
‘Mary Wayte , of the Parish of St. Clement Danes, was indicted for privately stealing 2 pair of silk Stockins, value 30 s. out of the Shop of Anthony Haslam on the 20th of June last. It appear'd, That the Prisoner coming to the Shop pretending to buy Stockins, sound an Opportunity to steal those in the Indictment; whereupon being pursu'd, she was taken, and the 2 pair of Stockins found upon her, thrust under her Stays. The Fact appearing so very plain, she was found Guilty of Felony.’
If you would like a case that has a timeline closer to the Whitechapel Murders, then try the strange case of Annie Bliss, 22nd November 1888 to see what she had hidden in her stays. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2472
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - 5:32 pm: |
|
Hi AP and Robert,
I think there may have always been a certain amount of curiosity about stays/corsets etc.
Thomas Cutbush though , cut out pictures of them to place in his scrap book -do you know whether he actually made drawings of women being cut up-through these type of stays?It might be helpful to discover.
Natalie
Natalie |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2553
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - 5:47 pm: |
|
Good thought, Natalie
Such obsessions existed.
Take the case of one William Vorley, March 25th 1891, a gentleman of independent means who was cleared by the court for a paltry sum as he was a gentleman, after making indecent gestures at women while wearing women’s stays, petticoats and a chemise underneath his gentleman’s clothing.
The case is a blinder.
But yes, I think you to be right, the secretive and hidden nature of a woman’s under-garments would have played a major role in these crimes. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5026
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - 5:54 pm: |
|
Natalie, AP, a quick search of the "Sun" reports doesn't reveal any mention of THC drawing women with wounds through their stays, though I might have missed something.
I was going to say that women's underwear wasn't secret in Whitechapel, as it always seemed to be hung out on some washing line or other. But I gather that stays couldn't be washed? So maybe they were a mystery.
Robert |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2136
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 10:45 am: |
|
...upon that Hatchett came up with a pen-knife, and said, You Jew bugger, what is that to you? Upon seeing the knife, I ran away for assistance: I ran and fetched Mr. Congreve.
And if Schwartz had reacted similarly after the "Lipski!" taunt, I wonder whether any of us would be here now.
This thread reminds me of Bennie Hill, struggling to read a passage:
'He grabbed her corsets. It's not often that...oh sorry, that should be: He grabbed her. Course it's not often that...' and he would give that smirky schoolboy grin.
Good weekend all.
Love,
Caz
X |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2562
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 1:47 pm: |
|
I think this case is a classic example of situation where a woman could be killed just to get her clothes… and stays.
Note that one of the men attempts to shoot his victim twice, but the gun fails to fire.
‘
Elizabeth Pullvash On Tuesday Night, I cannot possible tell the Day of the Month, but it was towards the two last Days of Tottenham Court Fair, the Prisoner met me coming from Tottenham Court, in the middle of the Road near the Town, there were two more with him, he had a Dagger in his Hand, and they had Pistols, They took hold of me, and said, if I cried out I should die. I begged hard for my Life, but they led me out of the Way, and stripped me stark naked. They seized another young Man (whom I never saw before in my Life) at the same time. They kept me at some distance from the other Man, and that Man at the Bar stripped me naked, and left me naked, all but my Shift, then he bound me and did what he pleased with me; he tried to lie with me, and he did all that was in his Power. After he had done every thing he pleased, he took hold of one of my Legs and bound it behind me, and cut my Pocket and stuffed it into my Mouth. I down'd on my knees, and begged of him to spare my Life; I told him I was with Child to make him more favourable to me; he took my Gown, my Stays, a quilted Coat, my Hat, a laced Mob, a flannel Coat, a dimity Coat, my Shoes, a gold Ring, an Apron, and nine Pence Half penny in Money - all I had in the World; they left me nothing on but my Stockings and Shift and one Petticoat. One of the Men snapped a Pistol twice at my Breast, but it did not go off, the Prisoner was the most resolute, wickedest Fellow of them all; for he was so long about me doing what he did, that I knew him again; they kept me 'till 12 o'Clock, doing one thing or another to me. The other Man they robbed at some distance from me, and told him if he looked that way, towards me, he should die; but when they had done with us both, they tied us with a Cord, and threw us into a Ditch,
See original where we lay up to the Neck in Water and Mud for several Hours.’ |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2985
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 3:50 pm: |
|
AP Robert Caz Nats et al!!!
BLIMEY what a thread!!!!! at least were all 'staying' on the subject!!!
I LOVE the idea of all this stuff being shoved into 'yer stays' as in Mary Wayte!!!!
AP what do you reckon a 'dimity' coat is????
William Vorley sounds intriguing too!!! WOW what an image!..
Caz- NO NO 'NOT Benny please!!!!!! "but past yer eyes is best"!!!! hehe!
Suzi
GREAT THREAD!!!!! keep going AP!
Hey just looked up 'STAY' in Chambers...(as you do)...'a rope supporting a mast, A GUY!!!!' Well there we are ...case solved!!!
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2986
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 4:01 pm: |
|
LOVE the link Robert!!!!!!!...
Have been there for ages! LOVED this though for 'growing girls'!!!!!! Ooooh eh!
Suz |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2987
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 4:03 pm: |
|
Good old Gladys eh!!!!!!!
Not bad for 3/6d I say!!!!
Suzi x |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5056
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 4:48 pm: |
|
Hi Suzi
Surely these things were unpleasant to wear?
When Maxwell described Kelly as having a "velvet body" on, did she mean that she was wearing one of those red things with the strings?
Robert |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2991
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 12:32 pm: |
|
Hi Robert!!!!
Knew that Gladys would draw the eye!!!!
As to the 'velvet body'!!!!!.......Sounds very 'Victorian literature for the discerning gentleman' doesnt it.... BUT... Mr Chambers says..BODY... 'A garment or part of a garment that covers the trunk,...a bodice'...''
In the C17th they were very commonplace' being worn by both sexes and known as a 'Jack (hehe !!good that!) but in the men's case was more of a (often leather) waistcoatey affair!!! a 'body' in Mary's case I take to a close fitting sleeveless top,often made of velvet a sort of decorative 'warmer' not necessarily of the red boned laced variety!!!! (much beloved by Hollywood especially when coupled with a Feather Boa!
Suzi |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5063
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 1:15 pm: |
|
Thanks for that info, Suzi.
Robert |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2993
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 4:10 pm: |
|
He He isnt this a great thread eh!!!!!! Close to the heart!!!!! Maybe the odd chap coupled his 'jack' with a feather Boaz eh??
Suzi |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2599
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 30, 2005 - 1:42 pm: |
|
In this case - very similar to the Stride encounter - there is an interesting exchange in the Old Bailey concerning the protection offered by women's undergarments in a knife attack:
'CHARLES HENRY PODMORE. I am the house surgeon of Middlesex hospital: Sarah Wood was brought on Thursday the 12th of May, about eleven o'clock at night; on examining of her, I found a wound in the lower part of the belly; it was two thirds of an inch long, and about the same depth; it was the lower part of the belly below the navel.
Q. I suppose the plaits of the petticoats that she wore, prevented the wound from being deeper - A. I suppose so.
Q. If it had penetrated deeper, I need hardly ask you whether it would not be dangerous in that part of the body - A. It would. There was a wound in the palm of her hand near the wrist, about an inch and a half long and about half an inch in depth.
Q. Was a wound in that part of the body dangerous - A. It might have been; had it been a little more of one side it would have been near a large artery.
Q. That had the appearance of a cut - A. Both of them were incised wounds.
Q. Did you take any notice of the petticoats being cut - A. No.
Howell. I did.
Q. to Podmore. Would a stab occasion such a wound as that - A. Yes.
Q. You mean the edge of the knife took an oblique direction rather than a direct one - A. Yes; I was just going to say that.'
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5084
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 30, 2005 - 4:40 pm: |
|
AP, I've often wondered whether Jack's knife snagged on Stride's scarf, hence the cut not so severe. I suppose you've wondered whether Kidney's knife snagged....
Good stuff, AP.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2600
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 30, 2005 - 5:46 pm: |
|
Thanks Robert
I'm not stuck on Kidney by any means.
But I just would not like him to get away with it, so am exploiting the available. |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
