|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Chris Scott
Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 345
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 1:16 pm: | 
|
hi folks- didnt know quite where to post this one...
The account below gives the story of an unnamed medic (from St george's hospital) who claimed to be the Ripper - anyone know who he was? This was just after the Kelly murder and the account comes from the Frederick News of 13 November 1888:
 |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2793
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 2:12 pm: |
|
The IPN and Times provided some more details on this story...
Illustrated Police News
17 November, 1888
"Great excitement was caused shortly before ten o'clock off Sunday night, in the East-end, by the arrest of a man with a blackened face, who publicly proclaimed himself to be "Jack the Ripper." This was at the cornet of Wentworth-street, Commercial-street, near the scene of the latest crime. Two young men, one a discharged soldier, seized him and the crowds, which always on Sunday night parade this neighbourhood, raised a cry of "Lynch him!" Sticks were raised, and the man was furiously attacked, and but for the timely arrival of the police he would have been seriously injured. The police took him to Leman-street Station. He refused to give any name, but asserted that he was a doctor at St. George's Hospital. His age is about thirty-five years, height five feet seven inches, complexion dark, and dark moustache, and he was wearing spectacles. He wore no waistcoat, but had an ordinary jersey vest beneath his coat. In his pocket he had a double-peaked light check cap, and at the time of his arrest he was bareheaded. It took four constables and four civilians to take him to the station and protect him from the infuriated crowd. He is detained in custody, and it seems that the police attach importance to the arrest, as the man's appearance answers to the police description of the man who is wanted. "
I believe this turned out to be Dr. Holt, who has an entry in the A-Z. His release was covered by the Man. Guardian:
Manchester Guardian
12 November 1888
"WHITECHAPEL TRAGEDY"
"The man giving the name of Holt who was arrested in connection with the Whitechapel murder has been discharged. It was ascertained that he is really connected with St. George's Hospital and has a residence at Willesden. He stated in conversation with police officers that he was an amateur detective and had been out in various disguises for the last few nights. He is said to be well connected, but no friends have appeared. He was released at a quarter to two, telegrams from his friends having established his identity. "
(PS: I'm moving this part of the thread to Suspects: Dr. Holt)
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
esm
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, October 17, 2004 - 11:02 am: |
|
St. James Gazette 12. Nov. 88 (as I've seen not yet available at the "press section"):
 |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 420
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 08, 2005 - 6:19 am: |
|
One of the constant criticisms of Sir Melville Macnaghten's description of his Ripper suspect who suicided in the Thames after the last murder, is that he mistakenly describes Montague Druitt as "a doctor".
Countless other police memoirs - and newspaper articles, by Macnaghten's confidante, George R Sims for instance -, repeat the "doctor" mistake.
Even in the Littlechild letter, to Macnaghten's friend George R Sims, there is a reference to a presumed suspect "Dr D". And that was as late as 1913.
Andy Spallek has said he feels there is a tad of
truth in the story by Edward T Woodhall in his 1935, WHEN LONDON WALKED IN TERROR, where he describes a man claiming to be the Ripper, who was besieged and nearly killed by a desparate mob in Whitechapel in November 1888. This man had his face cork-blacked. And he claimed to be an amatuer sleuth on the trail of the Ripper.
Woodhall then goes on to claim the black-faced doctor's body was later found in the Thames near Waterloo Pier.
A faded photo of the almost unrecognisable drowned corpse was claimed to have been shown to Woodhall by a retired sergeant from H Division.
My question is has any Ripper researcher positively provided proof, the black-faced doctor-
who was subsequently identified as Dr William Holt of St George's Hospital, London (born circa 1864)and resident of Willesden - did not, in fact, drown in the Thames, as alleged by Woodhall?
The case is mentioned in Howells & Skinners THE RIPPER LEGACY, and Melvin Harris' JACK THE RIPPER - THE BLOODY TRUTH. Neither of whom offer supporting evidence of Dr Holt's non-suicide.
A quick search on Google produces the interesting fact a couple of "Dr Holts" still appear to have a professional connection with the St Georges Hospital. |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 935
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2005 - 5:26 pm: |
|
John,
The 1901 Census lists a William Holt who is a surgeon in Derbyshire. His birthplace is London and age is 48. He would then have been born around 1863. Could be a coincidence but this looks like our man. If so, "White-Eyes" was still alive in 1901.
Perhaps Chris Scott can help us further.
Andy S. |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 422
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 5:56 am: |
|
The date of birth seems pretty close.
Unless the name William Holt was more common than
I thought amongst the medical profession.
Perhaps someone will have access to a British Medical Directory for closer to 1888. This would provide additional clues. Also, the 1891 Census would be revealing too.
Thanks for that Andy.
Come to think of it, Keith Skinner is a pretty thorough researcher - as was Melvin Harris. It was just that they presented no chapter and verse.
This is just something that needs tidying up. Your idea of asking Chris Scott is good. CCCHHRISS!? |
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 2149
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 12:35 pm: |
|
Two other medics of this name appear in various returns:
Dr. William Holt
1881:
46 Goldstone Villas, Hove, Sussex
Head: William Holt aged 28 born London - General practitioner MRCS
Wife: Julia M Holt aged 31 born Hackney
Children:
Ethel M aged 1 born Mortlake
William St George aged 2 months born Camberwell
Servant:
Louisa S Bruton aged 28 born Birmingham
1891:
5 East Hill. Ashford, Kent
Head: William Holt aged 38 born St Martin's, London - General practitioner MRCS
Wife: Julia M Holt aged 34 born London
Children:
Ethel W aged 11 born Mortlake
William G aged 10 born Camberwell
2nd William Holt:
1881
Address
1 High Street (near Spital square)
Head
William Holt aged 43
Born Hosbury, York
Practising as General Practicioner MRCS LSA
Wife
Matilda Ann Holt aged 41
Born Lambeth
Daughter
Rosa Beatrice Holt aged 12
Born Norton Folgate, Middlesex
Servant
Esther Thomas aged 23
Born Shoreditch
NEXT Household listed as Fleur de Lis Street Comm Corner Police station
1891:
52 Stamford Hill, Hackney, London
Head: William Holt aged 53 born Hosbury, Wakefield - General Practitioner and Surgeon
Wife: Matilda Ann Holt aged 51 born Lambeth
Servant:
Elizabeth Wicks aged 23 born Islington
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 936
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 7:06 pm: |
|
Thanks, Chris.
Looks like I pulled a "Macnaghten." If the Holt I found was 48 in 1901 he would have been born about 1853, not 1863. Thus he would have been about 35 in 1888. This is the correct age for the "White-Eyes" doctor that was arrested Nov. 11, our Dr. William Holt.
The second William Holt identified by Chris is not the one I saw in living in Derbyshire in the 1901 census because the one I saw was born in London.
The first William Holt looks like our man. He is exactly the right age and is born in London. If this is our man he is still alive in 1891.
Andy S. |
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 2151
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 2:13 am: |
|
Andrew
the Holt you found with a Derbyshire connection and the first one I found are one and the same. This Holt and his family (minus his son William)were living as boarders as follows in 1901:
17 Lordsmith Street, Chesterfield, Derbyshire
Head: William Holt aged 48 born London - Surgeon
Wife: Julia May Holt aged 44 born London
Daughter: Ethel Margarita Holt aged 21 born Mortlake
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 940
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 2:31 am: |
|
It's almost certain then that "White-Eyes" did not commit suicide any time near the end of the murders but that he was still alive in 1901 -- unless there was another "William Holt" who was also a surgeon and who was exactly the same age. Not quite the proof you were looking for, John, but close.
Andy S. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4759
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 6:49 am: |
|
Chris, thanks for the Holt info.
John, my memory here is a bit shaky, but isn't Goldstone Villas pretty close to the (future) Seaside Home?
Robert |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 423
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 7:42 am: |
|
Dear All,
What a great team we have here! Just yell out "Chris!" (and the other Regulars) and there it is, all ironed and ready.
Thanks once again Chris. As you say, it seems you have identified THE Dr William Holt.
I am now 99% satisfied.
However, does anyone have access to a Medical Directory for 1888/9 in the next six months? So that we can see if the mention of St Georges Hospital, clinches the deal?
Robert,
Having taken the precaution of securing a Tourist map of Brighton/Hove on my recent visit, I can confirm, "Yes", Goldstone Villas crosses Clarendon Villas towards its Eastern end. G. Villas travels North/South; C.Villas East/West.
So Dr Holt would have been residing quite close to the earliest Police Convalescent Seaside home (only he was just seven years too early, that's all).
Thanks too, are due to Andy.
Any chance of you down-loading your RIPPEROLOGIST-published list of December 1888 suicides for London (?) on Casebook? Possibly after a reasonable lead time? |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 425
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 7:57 am: |
|
Sorry, I have just received another thought:is there any substance in the seemingly detailed account of the "black-faced corpse" in the River Thames near Waterloo Pier related by Edward Woodhall?.( Dislodged from the bottom by a paddlesteamer...And the police photo of a drowned corpse...).
Has anyone discovered a press story which might account for Woodhall's confusion? Or is it all invention? |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2011
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 12:31 pm: |
|
Hi All,
I have Stephen Ryder's permission to post the following message from Keith Skinner:
Following this development with interest but feel I should inject a note of caution into the discussion.
Going back to my research notes of 20 years previous, I can find no support for my assumption that Dr Holt's first name was William and I could be guilty of wrongfooting and misleading researchers who are, unquestioningly, basing their investigation upon my work without challenging its accuracy.
When I checked a Medical Register for 1889, I noted 13 Holts listed - only one of whom gave his address as St George's Hospital, London, S.W. This was a "William" Holt. I think, (but cannot be certain), that I followed him through the Registers until his last appearance in 1900. Thereafter, my notes indicate that I was searching for his death, but with no firm idea of his age in 1888. I don't believe I was even aware of the "thirty-five years" cited in the Illustrated Police News (17 November 1888) [which raises the curiosity of why the A-Z states that he was born c.1864?] and certainly I had not located any references to him in the 1881 Census - the latest available to me at that time.
The point is that without some independent evidential support, I feel it unwise to accept that Holt's first name was "William" - even though it is tempting to agree that the "William Holt", born circa 1853, is probably the correct identification.
Where though is there any documentary support for the Willesden residence connection?
It might be worth trawling the death indexes from 1901 onwards to try and establish when William Holt (b.c.1853) died - which may generate an obituary that provides a glancing reference to the incident in 1888.
Forgive the intrusion into your thread, but I was concerned that nobody seemed to be asking how it was first established that Dr Holt's first name was "William" - if indeed it was!
Keith Skinner |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 942
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 2:05 pm: |
|
That is interesting. However, if there was a "William Holt" associated with St. George's Hospital in 1889 and no other Holts associated with that hospital, I believe it is fairly certain that the Dr. Holt of St. George's Hospital who was arrested on Nov. 11 had the first name of William.
Andy S. |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 427
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 5:09 am: |
|
Thanks Keith, Caroline and Stephen,
Yes. A lesson for us all.The newspaper reports don't give a first name for "Dr Holt".
I was indeed relying on the"A to Z" for my basic
biographical information.
Hopefully, someone a little closer to British Medical Directories for 1888/9 will be able to turn up the relevant entry.
Take nothing for granted.
Which brings up a point: is someone noting all the errors belatedly discovered in the "A to Z"?
Against the day a brand new edition of this valuable work emerges cleansed of all its factual
improbabilities? |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2017
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 3:47 am: |
|
Hi All,
I have had this response from Keith:
Dear Caroline
Thank you (and Stephen) for putting up my message although I suspect Andrew Spallek is still missing the point. Just because I established there was only one listed Dr Holt at St George's Hospital, in the relevant time frame - whose first name was given as William - it does not mean that he was definitely the Dr Holt in the newspaper. At best, he remains a good possibilty but that's all. To confirm the identfication there needs to be a supporting piece of evidence which directly connects him to the incident. An address in Willesden would be useful - but again - not conclusive. That's why I suggested researchers should follow through on this William Holt to see whether any contemporary source, (his obituary), makes reference to the event in 1888. Try and locate descendants - maybe they have the oral tradition in their family.
Keith Skinner |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1304
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 4:56 am: |
|
I should think it would be a good idea to look in the 1888/1889 Post Office Directories, for a Holt in Willesden who might be "connected" with St George's (perhaps not as a doctor?).
I don't think the estimate of his age as 35 from the Illustrated Police News should be treated as exact, considering that he had refused to give his name at that point.
In ancestry.co.uk's index of the 1891 census, there is only one male Holt in Willesden who would have adult in 1888, a John H. Holt, cab [?driver], aged 37.
Chris Phillips
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 946
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 10:28 am: |
|
Perhaps I am misunderstanding. I would agree that it's not 100% certain your William Holt is our man but it seems almost certain to me.
Newspaper accounts tell of a Dr. Holt connected with St. George's Hospital. Your search shows that the only "Dr. Holt" at St. George's has the first name of William. That, to me, seems rather certain. Of course, there is the possibility that the man who was arrested gave a false name but that is an entirely different question. (One news account says that it was definitely ascertained that the man in custody was connected with St. George's Hospital -- presumably as a physician since he identifies himself as a doctor and no contradictory information is given).
Am I missing something?
Andy S.
(Message edited by Aspallek on August 16, 2005) |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 984
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 11:12 am: |
|
Hi all,
It might be helpful to step out of Willesden and backtrack? Perhaps this detective/doctor Holt was related to Dr. Barnard Wight Holt, the medical officer for Westminster in 1888. It might be helpful to check for Dr. Barnard in the 1871 census to see see whether he had a son. There was a daughter named Margaret. I can't find an obituary for him, but he died Feb. 27, 1894 at 14, Savile-row at the age of 77 (Death notice, Times, 28 Feb 1894).
Dave |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4797
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 4:53 pm: |
|
Hi Dave
In 1871 he was at 14 Savile Row. Wife Margaret, daughter Margaret, and servants. No mention of son.
Robert |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 987
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 9:10 pm: |
|
Thanks for looking that up for me, Robert. Incidentally, the Beatles played their famous rooftop concert on top of 6 Savile Row, I believe.
Dave |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 430
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 7:54 am: |
|
Thanks to everyone for their contributions,
Andy, don't despair,your thoughts on this are much appreciated, as are everybody's.
It is useful for Keith Skinner to trace back over his past researches, because it saves us legwork. And helps clarify things. Thanks Keith.
However, I want to gather as much information as possible on the "blackened-faced sleuth" Dr Holt
"from St George's Hospital" and whose place of domicile, according to THE GLOBE (see Melvin Harris's JTR-THE BLOODY TRUTH,page 76)was Willesden.
My object being to discover if Dr Holt went on to live a long, healthy life, or became a "black-faced corpse" dredged up from The Thames three weeks after his East end fracas.
As to whether Dr William Holt who shows up linked to St Georges Hospital in a Medical Directory of 1889 is THE Dr Holt, it would appear on the surface (no pun intended) he is.
But, as Keith S. has said, there were THIRTEEN Dr Holts in that one Directory.
And as I have found by Googling,there are actually THREE Dr Holts connected with St Georges Hospital this very day.
Once we solve that puzzle, we can see if we can
find out whether a police photo of a drowned body
from The Thames was ever mentioned by any other writer. Perhaps there are other misunderstood clues in Woodhall's book.
For one thing, I am fairly sure Melville Macnaghten would have had a copy of the drowned doctor's photo in his desk drawer, and possibly, so might G R Sims. But I have seen no mention.
We are searching for drowned doctors... |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 431
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 7:58 am: |
|
And Another Thing....
This Dr Holt seems a bit old at 35 to be blackening his face and jumping out of doorways, and claiming he is JTR, don't you think?
Perhaps he was a mad medical student? |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 953
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 10:54 am: |
|
I guess my biggest question is when was the 1889 Medical Register prepared? It might be useful to look at the 1888 Medical Directory on the chance that the 1889 Directory might have already excluded a "Dr. Holt" who had drowned in late 1888.
It would also be useful to see if records still exist from the Thames Police as to bodies recovered in late 1888.
Andy S. |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2027
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 12:08 pm: |
|
Hi All,
By curious coincidence, just a few hours after I posted Keith's response, my daughter was taken to St.George's Hospital, where she stayed overnight. The place is massive. She had complications following last week's tonsil op at another hospital. (But she's beside me now and on the mend again.) Needless to say, I didn't think to ask about doctors named Holt in 1888. 
Love,
Caz
X |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4827
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 6:46 pm: |
|
Hi folks
While looking for something else, I stumbled on the following Dr Holt - a little before 88, though.
Apr 3rd 1872
Robert
 |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 996
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 6:57 pm: |
|
Hi Robert,
I bet that's Dr. Barnard Holt.
Dave |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4828
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 7:22 pm: |
|
Hi Dave
Well if that's him, he'd be a bit old for blacking his face up.
Robert |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 997
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 7:31 pm: |
|
Hi Robert,
Face-blacking's not just for the youngsters, you know. 
Seriously, I don't mean Barnard Holt was the Ripper suspect--I mean he might have been the medical officer at Whitechapel Union in 1872; we know he held that position for the district of Westminster later on. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4829
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 7:35 pm: |
|
Yes, Dave, you're saying that if this guy is Barnard, then he's unlikely to be the 1888 guy. I agree.
My money's on Dick van Dyke.
Robert |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 999
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 7:54 pm: |
|
I think Al Jolson had a long career, too. Anyway, that's exactly what I was trying to say. The reason why I brought up Barnard Holt was because I was hoping looking at his family might throw up another name for the Ripper suspect (the Willesden Holt might be related to the established Barnard Holt).
Cheers,
Dave |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 441
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 11:46 pm: |
|
I love these newspaper vignettes Robert,
Well, it turned up a Dr Holt connected with the Whitechapel Union in 1872.
As David points out, our Dr Holt/Jolson, could have been a relative.
Keith Skinner said thirteenDr Holts in England in 1889.
It would be likely if the elder Dr Holt had a medical-man son, he might likely follow in his fathers benefactorial footsteps. So a possible Whitechapel link.
At least "our" Dr Holt was a pioneer in modern fashion: a jersey and belt and no jacket!. |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 442
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 11:59 pm: |
|
Another thought about "drowned doctors",
It is interesting to note that if we had been searching for a man who drowned in the Thames on the last day of December 1888, following Macnaghten's clues, and we used THE TIMES as our source, we would not be aware of the death of Montague Druitt. No mention therein.
It says something of the nature of Druitt family influence that the Coroner's Inquest was very brief. Especially after Montague's brother said there were no other relatives.
And that family shame was spared at least in London where Montague practised as a barrister and had taught at a suburban school.
It is interesting to note, no Blackheath acquaintance or colleague was present at Montague Druitt's funeral; only Dorset family friends.
So looking for a drowned doctor might not be as easy as it at first appears. |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 1000
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 10:59 am: |
|
Hi Robert,
I might be wrong about your Holt in Whitechapel Union. In the 1884 Business Directory for London, there's a surgeon named William Holt at 1 Norton Folgate. My geography's not so good, but that's Bishopsgate?
For what it's worth, there's a Ernest James Holt living at (I think) 104 Inverness Terrace, Victoria Road, Willesden (1907 Kelly's Directory). In 1911 he's at (I think) 89A Wells House road, Willesden. I'm a little confused because I thought Kelly's Ealing, Acton, Hanwell, Gunnersbury & Chiswick Directory covered West London. Is Willesden not North London? In any case, perhaps Ernest James is a possible relative.
Dave |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4834
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 11:44 am: |
|
Thanks Dave. Willesden's sort of north-west. Norton Folgate's Tower Hamlets.
This is Dr Holt in 1881 :
1 High St, Norton Folgate
William Holt, 43, Practising as general practitioner MACS - LSA (bit unsure about initials) born Hasbury Yorks
Matilda Ann, wife, 41, born Lambeth
Rosa Beatrice, daughter, 12, born Norton Folgate
Esther Thomas, servant, 23, unmarried, housemaid born Shoreditch
Robert
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4835
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 11:50 am: |
|
If this was the man who blacked up, then he didn't go for a swim - he was alive in Hackney in 91.
Robert |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 959
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 12:34 pm: |
|
John,
That's a very important point to remember. Not every body found in the Thames was reported in the Times. Druitt's was not.
We need to go back to official records of bodies found in the Thames. Anybody want to see if the Thames police records are accessible? It's a bit hard for me to do from this side of the pond.
Andy S. |
David O'Flaherty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 1001
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 12:58 pm: |
|
Thanks very much, Robert. He would have been too old, wouldn't he? He'd have been around 50 in 1888, and the IPN has our guy at 35 in 1888. I know ages get mixed up, but that's a good little gap.
This must be our prime candidate in the Ripper incident passing his RSC exam on Jan 18, 1881. We can't go by this because it doesn't reference his age, but I think this suggests he could be in the ballpark. He's associated with Camberwell:
Times, Jan 20 1881
"William Holt, Camberwell, of St. George's Hospital" was admitted a Member of the Royal College of Surgeons.
Chris Scott found a William Holt with a Camberwell connection in 1891. He could conceivably have become MRCS in 1881. He appears to have been in Camberwell in 1881 (since his ten year old son was born there):
1891:
5 East Hill. Ashford, Kent
Head: William Holt aged 38 born St Martin's, London - General practitioner MRCS
Wife: Julia M Holt aged 34 born London
Children:
Ethel W aged 11 born Mortlake
William G aged 10 born Camberwell
Cheers,
Dave
(Message edited by oberlin on August 22, 2005)
(Message edited by oberlin on August 22, 2005) |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4836
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 1:20 pm: |
|
Hi Dave
I looked him up for 81 - then I found Chris Scott already had! And he posted the High St Holt too! 
Anyways, we know it wasn't Al Jolson or Dick Van Dyke.
Robert |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 444
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 3:04 am: |
|
Well done all you Holt-sleuths,
So where is Camberwell then? Is it in Surrey?
If the Camberwell Holt is the man giving Whitechapel ladies black looks from darkened doorways,then he looks like "our" man.
He's the right age. With a St George Hospital link.
But, given there were so many "Dr Holts",its a wonder the police didn't have difficulty identifying him.
It just goes to show, if you were male, and "respectable" in Late Victorian London, you could paint your face black, leap out of doorways at frightened women, even tell people you were JTR.
But if you were a woman, from the humble classes,
obviously, "not respectable', you could be locked up for making noises like a fire-engine, and being drunk. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4839
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 4:17 am: |
|
Hi John
Camberwell's south-east London, near Lambeth and Peckham.
I agree the Hove-Camberwell-Ashford Holt is the best candidate.
Just a small point : the one who lived in Norton Folgate would have had to be extremely unreceptive to his environment to think that he could possibly play this stunt and get away with it.
Robert |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 965
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:14 pm: |
|
So, the good Dr. Holt was not found floating in the Thames in December 1888. Then, whose mortuary photo did Edwin Woodhall's informant see? Or is this just a made-up story or a hopelessly jumbled bit of history? Anyone know anything about Woodhall or read his book? I've only read the excerpts printed in Howells/Skinner.
Andy S. |
David O'Flaherty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 1002
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:33 pm: |
|
Hi everyone,
Just a reminder that William Holt of St. George's still hasn't been traced to Willesden or to the Ripper article. He's a good bet, but it's not certain. It might be helpful to try to trace Ernest James Holt of Willesden--I've no idea how old he was in 1907 or what he did for a living. Maybe he was there in 1888 or related to someone who was.
Just thinking aloud,
Dave |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 445
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 6:06 am: |
|
I think Chris Phillips tracked down the only Willesden Holt and found he was a "Cab Man".
Just as I do with the Steve White obit., I feel in my bones this Woodhall yarn about photos of drowned persons suspected as JTR does have a ring of verisimilitude about it.
Several police gossip/yarns strung together in the one story by Woodhall or White's obituarist.
The thing which strikes me is, how difficult would it be to recognise, say Druitt's features after a whole month at the bottom of the Thames?
What would be the point of photographing him?
(And like Andy, I wonder where a register of these photos/names might be found?).
I know (if a drowned black-faced person was photographed, and linked to the JTR murders) that does not tie in "Our" Dr Holt. Anyway, if that story is true, he was in the water considerably less. And wouldn't all drowned corpses take on a blackened, or at least discoloured appearance after time immersed?
Just picking at Woodhall's yarn. |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 971
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 25, 2005 - 1:43 am: |
|
John,
In another thread, when I stated "What I would like to have is a comprehensive list of all bodies recovered from the Thames from Nov. 10 - Jan. 31, 1888-89," Chris Phillips replied with this observation:
"From a previous discussion, this information should be in the River Occurrence Books kept by the Metropolitan Police Marine Support Unit, and covering the part of the river between Dartford and Chelsea Bridge.
I think they're held at the Wapping Police Station Museum. The National Archives' information leaflet on Metropolitan Police records says "The Metropolitan Police Historical Museum and the Wapping Police Station Museum will try to answer written enquiries."
http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/RdLeaflet.asp?sLeafletID=104"
Care to do a little digging, anyone? Awfully difficult for me from this side of the "pond."
Andy S. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
