|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Neal Shelden
Police Constable
Username: Neal
Post Number: 5
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 16, 2003 - 12:34 pm: |       |
I wondered if someone could inform me whether there was any description of George Hutchinson as to age, looks, etc., ever printed in any newspaper?
I know that Bob Hinton's candidate was not the one that knew Kelly, and that Fairclough's seems unlikely, so was there an age given that I've missed in the records that other people might have seen?
All the best.
Neal |
Bob Hinton
Sergeant
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 20
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 17, 2003 - 2:06 pm: | |
Dear Neal,
I'm not quite sure what you mean about my candidate not being the one who knew Kelly.
Bob |
Neal Shelden
Police Constable
Username: Neal
Post Number: 7
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 17, 2003 - 3:34 pm: | |
Hi Bob,
Sorry, what I meant was the George Hutchinson, who was the son of Joseph Hutchinson, a licensed victualler. Born in 1859 at King David Lane in Shadwell, and by 1881 at Clerkenwell. I believe he was your candidate for George Hutchinson in your book From Hell?
Unfortunately, he was married in December 1887 in Marylebone to Mary Jane Walker. The certificate gave his father's name as Joseph Hutchinson, a retired licensed victualler. By the 1901 census, he was an insurance collector at St Pancras. Obviously, he could not be the man that knew Kelly in 1888, as I don't believe that there was a record of the real George Hutchinson being married at the time?
It's a problem trying to track down Hutchinson because there appears to be no description of what he was like where age, accent, or description was concerned?
I'm sure I've seen at least one newspaper suggest that he had a military appearance? It may explain why I can't pinpoint him on the 1881 census if he was in the army?
All the best
Neal
|
Gary Weatherhead
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, March 28, 2003 - 11:48 am: | |
Neal and Bob
Sarah Lewis described the man she saw loitering in and around Dorset St.on the night of Kelly's murder She stated the man was
"... not tall but stout, and wearing a black wide awake hat..." (JTR A-Z) This is going to be of little help to you but it resembles the description of short stout men seen with Chapman and Eddowes immdiately berfore they were killed. The man seen with Stride before her murder was also said to be short and stout with broad shoulders. All were said to be roughly thirty years old.
I believe the man Ms. Lewis saw was Hutchinson. Another source which I can't put my hands on at the moment indicated that the man Lewis saw appeared to be waiting for someone and loitered for 3/4 of an hour.
I believe Hutchinson did not realize that he had been spotted until he read Ms. Lewis statement in the papers a couple of days after the murder.
He would have then realized that he could possibly be identified and that he was the last person to be seen with Kelly except for her killer before she was killed. This assumes of course that he was not the killer. He therefore made a premptive move by coming forward. Had he not come forward Ms. Lewis would likely have been pressed to give a more complete description such the one you are looking for as to age, etc.
The absurd description he gave of the man seen with Kelly is a total fabrication in my eyes and played into anti-semitic fears. The man clearly would not have lasted five minutes in the Dorset St. area without being mugged and probably beaten.
I wish I could be of more help, but I fear Hutchinson's exact description may have been lost to history. Perhaps more details died with
Sarah Lewis or Mrs. Kennedy as she appears to have also been called.
Best Regards
Gary
P.S What on earth is a wide awake hat. |
Eduardo Zinna
Police Constable
Username: Eduardo
Post Number: 4
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 02, 2003 - 5:00 pm: | |
Bob et al.,
Does anyone know whether Hutchinson was Irish?
Cheers,
Eduardo |
Neal Shelden
Sergeant
Username: Neal
Post Number: 32
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 03, 2003 - 2:43 pm: | |
Hi Eduardo,
I don't know if he was Irish, but I always thought that the name of "Hutchinson" was a Scottish one?
All the best
Neal |
Bob Hinton
Sergeant
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 36
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 04, 2003 - 8:20 am: | |
Dear Neal,
Yest that's the one (sorry for the dealy got back from Prague in the early hours of this morning and still a bit groggy) and I still think he's the right one.
My research into Huntchinson since I wrote my book shows a lot more interesting information about him.
If you have a complete listing of his marriage entry I would be very interested. I just haven't had the time to get one for myself yet.
Bob |
Neal Shelden
Sergeant
Username: Neal
Post Number: 33
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 04, 2003 - 2:07 pm: | |
Hi Bob,
The full entry was for the 15th December 1887 at Marylebone Register Office.
Groom: George Hutchinson aged 27, Bachelor, Licensed Victualler Manager, of 8 John Street West, Marylebone, son of Joseph Hutchinson, a Licensed Victualler (retired).
Bride: Mary Jane Walker, aged 41, widow, of 8 John Street West, daughter of Henry Mann, Coach Proprietor (deceased).
Witnesses: James Lowther Calvert and Susan Calvert.
Bob,I will try to send you a copy of the certificate via email, if I can find your number?
Neal
|
R.J. Palmer
Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 24
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 04, 2003 - 11:06 pm: | |
I think there is a chance that George Hutchinson might have been 34 in 1888, connected with an address in Cottage-grove, Bow. He was of a good family, but a habitual drunkard and a petty thief, known to frequent Whitechapel. Check it out and let me know what you think. |
Neal Shelden
Sergeant
Username: Neal
Post Number: 34
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 05, 2003 - 2:32 pm: | |
Hi R.J,
I wondered whether you had any additional information such as wife's name if married after 1888? And where this Hutchinson was living during the 1881 or 1901 census?
Neal |
Chris Scott
Police Constable
Username: Chris
Post Number: 7
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 05, 2003 - 3:10 pm: | |
Hi RJ
I have been doing some research on our friend G Hutchinson and what you said intrigued me. If he was 34 in 1888, he was born in 1854 or 1855. The only George Hutchinson born in 1854 in the 1881 census is a carpenter living at 20 Churchill Road, London. His wife at the time of the census was Elizabeth S Hutchinson and they had an 11 month old son called Henry. George's place of birth is given as Barton Coggles in Lincoln.
Three people of this name are given under 1855:
1) A cabinet maker living at 37 Bentham Road, born in Middlesex. Wife's name is Sarah.
2) A butcher living at 48 Spencer Street, born in St George's East. Wife's name is Margaret.
3) There is a George HUTCHESON living at 34 Antill Road, born in Whitechapel. He was a stationer and wife's name was Ellen.
Whilst looking through, I went one year in the other direction (i.e. year of birth 1853) and this one interested me.
George Hutchinson, born in Canada, living at the time of census at 11 Pancras Road, London. His wife was named Eleanor and they had 3 children, Benjamin aged 5, Mary aged 2 and Christiana aged 9 months. The first two offspring were born in Canada, the last in London. What interested me was his profession: Portrait Painter (Artist). If this is our George, I wondered if this would account for the amazing detail with which he recalled the face and appearance of the man he saw.
Hope this is of interest
Chris S |
Chris Scott
Police Constable
Username: Chris
Post Number: 8
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 05, 2003 - 4:02 pm: | |
Hi all
I have been doing a bit more of my US newspaper research and I have found a comment that intrigued me as it had distinct echoes of Hutchinson's testimony.
The article in question is in the Atlanta Constitution published in Georgia and dated 10 November 1888 i.e. two days BEFORE Hutchinson gave his statement. The article reports the Millers Court murder and says at one point:
"It has been learned that a man respectably dressed accosted the victim and offered her money. They went to her lodgings on the second floor (sic) of the Dorset Street house."
This sounded suspiciously like the Hutchinson statement and I cannot square it with any of the other known sightings of Kelly that night.
Any comments welcome.
Chris S |
R.J. Palmer
Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 26
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 05, 2003 - 4:43 pm: | |
Neal, Chris--Hi. I have no census information on the possible Hutchinson candidate, and was hoping someone with the inclination and/or resources might check it out. What I do have is a police report I found from 1887:
At the Thames Police-court, George Hutchinson, 33, respectfully dressed, who was stated to be well connected, giving an address at Cottage-grove, Bow, was charged on remand, with stealing a gold watch, value L5, the property of Walter M'Lachlin, of 49, Wellclose-square, Whitechapel. Prosecutor said that on the evening of Saturday week he met the prisoner at a druggist's shop in Aldgate. He was suffering from the effects of drink and appeared very ill. He told witness he lived at Bow and witness offered to see him part of the way home. Hutchinson, however, go worse and witness took him to his own house in a cab. He sent for a doctor, who attended him. Witness took him into the bedroom where his wife's watch was kept, and allowed him to wash himself. He was afterwards advised to take a rest, but said he must go, and then left. He had previously insisted on paying 4s. for the doctor's attendance and the cab fare. At 10 o'clock the same evening the watch and the case were found to be gone. The accused was next seen by witness's wife on that day (Thursday) week, when he was charged. Charles Harris, a pawnbroker's manager, said that on Saturday week a cabman entered the shop and offered the watch in pledge for 30s. Witness said he would advance a sovereign on it, when he said he would go and inform his fare, who had sent him to pledge the watch. He returned and accepted the sovereign. Witness afterwards went outside, when he saw the accused, who he knew, very drunk and hanging on the cab horse's neck. (Laughter.) He was remanded for the attendance of prosecutor's wife."
There is certainly points both for and against this being "our" Hutchinson. Would a man with "good connections" be living a year later in the Victoria Working Men's Home? On the otherhand, implicitly we have a shady fellow that frequents Whitechapel, drinks heavily, is roughly the correct age, and is evidently a well-known figure in the Whitechapel pawnshops. In some ways, he sort of "feels" right to me, but I'm certainly not overly confident. Maybe a Hutchinson family can be located in Bow? Cheers, RJP
|
Chris Scott
Sergeant
Username: Chris
Post Number: 19
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 6:48 am: | |
Hi all
In my recent newspaper archive research, I have found this article in a US paper about George Hutchinson's evidence which I had not seen before. It provides the information that he was a groom, and varies in two important ways from other accounts of his evidence that I have read:
1) It alleges that Hutchinson gave evidence at Kelly's inquest
2) It alleges that not only did he stand at the end of the court but went right up to Kelly's door and only when the light went out did he leave.
Any comments welcome!
Atchison Daily Globe (Kansas) November 14 1888
FIEND FEATURES
A Winess Describes the Kind of Man Engaged in the Woman Murders
London Nov. 14.
The hopes of the police of catching the Whitechapel murderer, which had almost entirely died out, were raised to the acme of buoyancy yesterday in consequence of the testimony at the Kelly inquest of George Hutchinson, a groom, who had known the victim for several years and who saw a well dressed man with Jewish cast of countenance accost her on the street at two o'clock on the morning of the murder and the circumstances of his acquaintance induced him to follow the pair as they walked together. He looked straight into the man's face as he turned to accompany the woman and followed them to Miller (sic) court out of mere curiosity. He had no thought of the previous murders and certainly no suspicion that the man contemplated violence, since his conspicuous manifestations of affection for his companion as they walked along formed a large part of the incentive to keep them in sight. After the couple entered the house Hutchinson heard sounds of merriment in the room and remained at the entrance to the court for fully three-quarters of an hour. About three o'clock the sound ceased and he walked into the court, but finding that the light in the room had been extinguished went home. During the hour occupied in standing at the entrance to or promenading the court he did not see a policeman.
There is every reason to believe Hutchinson's statement, and the police place great reliance upon his description of the man, believing it will enable them to run him down. The witness who testified previously of having seen the woman enter the house with a man with a blotched face was evidently mistaken as to the night as his description of her companion is totally unlike that of Hutchinson's in every particular. The bulk of the evidence taken fixes the time of the murder at between 3:30 and four o'clock. It transpired yesterday that in addition to the face mutilation of the murdered woman the uterus was wholly and skilfully removed and laid in a corner of the bed.
|
R.J. Palmer
Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 31
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 11:33 am: | |
Chris--I've seen a couple of other American news releases write as though Hutchinson was at the inquest. Clearly, though, this is a mistake, as we know Hutchinson didn't come forward unil 6 P.M. on the day the inquest was closed, and the official inquest papers exist. I think what probably happened is that the news of Hutchinson's identification of a suspect was hitting the wires at the same time the inquest details were being reported, and a few papers assumed Hutchinson was part of the inquest. A good deal of the garbled accounts in American papers seem to be the direct result of diffculties in telegraph communication as well as the general low standards of journalism. I've even seen the suspect in Francis Cole's murder described as a "sadler by trade", when, of course, Sadler was his name.
I'm mildly surprised that there is no interest in George Hutchinson, aged 33. Yet here we have a Hutchinson slumming Whitechapel and being arrested for theft less than a year before the murders. Cheers, RP |
Bob Hinton
Sergeant
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 41
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 17, 2003 - 1:43 pm: | |
I regret to announce................
Research is like trying to do a jigsaw puzzle without the benefit of the completed picture on the lid. You also are not sure whether or not the pieces you have belong to the puzzle you are trying to complete, or indeed if other pieces have become mixed up with yours.
This morning I received through the post the final piece of the puzzle I had been working on, namely the correct identification of George Hutchinson. I have been working on this since before my book was published.
The final piece was a comparison of the handwriting of 'my' George Hutchinson with the handwriting of 'the' George Hutchinson.
I stand before you now to announce that in my opinion I was wrong and that my George did not sign the statement referring to Mary Kelly.
I would like to quickly summarise why I thought I had the right person.
1. The age was right. Both Brian Marriner and myself had read an article which gave his age, alas neither of us was able to locate this article subsequently.
2. The name was right. Just George Hutchinson without any other names.
3. Georges mother died when he was sixteen, she died of cancer of the womb. I was considering the removal of the victims body parts as being an unconcious desire to 'save his mother'
4. My George had a connection with Romford - his sister was born there.
5. Something very funny happened with the family. My George had several brothers and sisters and they were a very close family. The 1881 shows them all living together with the exception of George. Between 1887 and 1891 something very strange happened. The family completely split apart with no trace being found of any of the other siblings.
Joseph Hutchinson died in 1891 and left his entire estate to his son James who was also sole executor. James was not only younger than George,he wasn't even Josephs son. James was Josephs nephew, yet Joseph not only calls him 'my son' he cut everyone else out of his will?
What had happened to this family between 1887 and 1891 to cause such a rift? I think you can guess what I thought!
6. My George married a much older woman in 1887. Was he trying to replace his mother? There have been several notorious killers who have murdered without their spouses knowing anything. Christie and Peter Sutcliffe to name but two.
However as dissapointed as I am that I have been following the wrong trail, it does not alter my sincere belief that George Hutchinson, who made the statement, was Jack the Ripper.
Back to the drawing board
Bob Hinton
|
Christian Jaud
Police Constable
Username: Chrisjd
Post Number: 5
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 17, 2003 - 5:23 pm: | |
Bob,
proofing in this whole mess (where nobody knows anything for sure, where nothing is indubitable) that something is NOT something else, is a very high achievment IMHO.
Christian
|
Peter R. A. Birchwood
Police Constable
Username: Pbirchwood
Post Number: 9
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 6:01 am: | |
Bob:
Thanks for your honourable statement about GH. It takes a brave man to decide to go "back to basics" after spending an enormous amount of time on a wrong lead.
If I can help out on any research, let me know. |
Scott Nelson
Police Constable
Username: Snelson
Post Number: 6
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 10:19 am: | |
One of the George Hutchinsons mentioned by Chris several posts above appears in the 1891 London census:
St. James, Ratcliffe
Cook's Buildings
George Hutchinson head M 35, Butcher b. Shadwell
Margarat wife 33, b. Shadwell
George son 8, b. Old Town
Eliza daughter 4, b. Shadwell
The age of the son, however, makes it unlikely that this could be the witness, Hutchinson.
Piece 293, Folio 75, p. 25 |
Kevin Braun
Sergeant
Username: Kbraun
Post Number: 38
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 10:22 am: | |
Thanks for your honourable statement about GH. It takes a brave man to decide to go "back to basics" after spending an enormous amount of time on a wrong lead. Well said Mr. Birchwood.
Bob,
Every so often in the last year and a half, I have asked you to share with Casebook readers the promised "new information" on George Hutchinson that you have gathered since the publication of your book. I was puzzled by your ambiguous responses. I now understand. Thank you for your honesty!
Take care,
Kevin |
David Knott
Police Constable
Username: Dknott
Post Number: 5
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 10:56 am: | |
Bob,
What a shame - 'your' George sounded so promising. If only Maybrick's supporters had been as honest as you've been when they realised that his handwriting was different to that in the diary ....
Despite this setback 'the' George still has some serious questions to answer. Hope you find him one day.
Best Wishes
David
|
Chris Scott
Sergeant
Username: Chris
Post Number: 46
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 12:15 pm: | |
Hi all
I thought this article might be of interest! It was published in the Manitoba Daily Free Press, Winnipeg, Canada. It was published on November 16, 1888. Maybe we are looking for George's background in the wrong country!!!
 |
Christopher T George
Detective Sergeant
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 98
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 12:38 pm: | |
Hi, Chris:
We have long known there is an American George Hutchinson connected to the case. Check A to Z which lists George Hutchinson of Elgin, Illinois.
Chris |
Chris Scott
Sergeant
Username: Chris
Post Number: 47
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 12:46 pm: | |
Hi Chris
many thanks for the info:-)
CS |
R.J. Palmer
Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 37
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 1:14 pm: | |
Chris--I don't think we've heard the final, definitive word on Hutchinson from Elgin, but it's likely to be a false lead, as the Illinois police didn't have any record or recollection of the incidents described in the American articles.
I couldn't help notice that the Hutchinson arrested in Whitechapel in 1887 seems to have an address very close to the attack on Ada Wilson in March, 1888. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
