|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4492
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 03, 2005 - 1:09 pm: | 
|
Am I the only subscriber who still hasn't got his copy? Just asking, because the postal service round here is very dodgy.
Robert |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2482
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 03, 2005 - 3:43 pm: |
|
Robert,
i've had mine over a week
Jenni |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4495
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 03, 2005 - 5:02 pm: |
|
Jenni, thanks. The post here's so bad, sometimes we don't even get junk mail.
Robert |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1521
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 04, 2005 - 6:20 am: |
|
Also had mine for a week as well, here in Baltimore, Maryland, USA. Sorry. Are you in Ozland, Robert?
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4497
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 04, 2005 - 6:44 am: |
|
No, Chris, sunny old East London. It hasn't been sent to Dr Openshaw by mistake, has it?
Robert |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3254
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Monday, June 06, 2005 - 8:51 am: |
|
The cover art, table of contents and sample article ("The Goulston Street Graffito Debate" by Howard Brown and Neil Bell) are now available on the Casebook at:
http://casebook.org/ripper_media/book_reviews/periodicals/ripperologist.2005-05.html
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Ripperologist magazine
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, June 05, 2005 - 5:01 pm: |
|
Robert, if you haven't received your copy by Wednesday please email me at adam@ripperologist.info and I'll send out a replacement.
Regards
Adam
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4511
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 06, 2005 - 1:33 pm: |
|
OK Adam, thanks very much.
Robert |
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 515
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, June 06, 2005 - 4:09 pm: |
|
Stephen...
On behalf of the smarter of the two of us, thanks for the nice gesture above....
My "better half" is still signing autographs for people that think his "half" of the article was "better".
HowBrown
|
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1530
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 06, 2005 - 5:07 pm: |
|
Hi Howard
What is this that you are doing a "Sunshine Boys"-type routine, Howie and Monty? Will you be going on tour together?   
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 517
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, June 06, 2005 - 6:33 pm: |
|
C.G.
If Dave O' Flaherty can pull off a one-man play such as "Good Night Old C*ck !" at the Ryland Auditorium in Nashville to a sitting room only crowd, doing both the Eddowes role and P.C. Hutt....if Phil Hutchinson can imitate toshers and prosses to a proverbial tee on his tours to awestruck and gawking Yanks from Conshohocken Pa.and Podunk,Iowa....if you can read poetry with your eyes closed[your pic in the last Rip]....then by God, Montgomery Montpelier Bell and I can do Ripper-theater !!!!!!
We are considering a variation of the Abbott and Costello skit, "Who's on First ?", renamed for this tour [ Sweden,Norway,Denmark, since they could use a laugh...]... to the Ripper-themed,"Jews On First?". In this laugh a second routine, Monty and I play Siamese-twin witness Israel-Marvin Schwartz whose bickering during the Seaside Home identification cause Sir Robert Anderson [ played capably by Eduardo Zinna, in his first serious theatrical role ] to leave the force and take up gardening. Sir Bob never names the suspect,due to the kitsch and kibbitz of our lovable Double Event of a witness...
Look for me as the straight man. Monty kicks ass with the jokes.
HowBrown
|
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 369
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 07, 2005 - 12:37 am: |
|
REVIEW: ISSUE #59, MAY, 2005
Christ on a bike, people, what’s with all the posts? I mean, I know every other post on this thread is from Howard Brown – which is to be expected – but like 20 other peeps posted as well. That’s good. I’m truly delighted that Ripperologist has so many subscribers. Any of you Rip subscribers NOT subscribe to Ripper Notes? Well, you need to hurry up and do so as I’ll be introducing readers to a new (so to speak, cuz he’s dead and all) contemporary suspect in the next issue. But I guess this isn’t the proper place to plug Ripper Notes, is it. It’s also probably not the place to say that the most recent issue of Ripperana was the gayest thing I’ve read in years, so I won’t say that either. Instead, we’ll just take a brief (ahem) look at the new issue of Ripperologist.
COVER: A warped picture of John “I build libraries and kill whores” Williams that makes him look like one of those nutcases surrounding Ostrog in that famous collage. No love for Adam Wood this time around. Doubt Dan Norder will get accused of ripping off THIS cover.
EDITORIAL: There’s a photo of Chris T. George, and right next to it in bold print are the words, “The Elephant in the Case”. I guess that pretty much says it all. I’ll bet Paul Begg had a tee-hee or two over that. The photo was taken just after George had finished reading Joe Chetcuti’s contribution to this issue, which explains the closed eyes and pained expression. Migraines will do that to you.
THE ART OF PROFILING AN HISTORICAL CASE: THE WHITECHAPEL MURDERS By Dr. James A Bailey – Note the ‘Dr.’. He’s a PHD bigshot, just the kind of guy Ripperologist likes to have write articles for them, even if the articles are rather vacant. According to Doc Bailey, the ‘art’ of historical profiling requires first purchasing a single book on the case – and not a current one, mind you, but one published 17 years ago – and drawing all your crime scene data from that. The next step is to utilize serial killer data from a century later and a totally different country and apply these lessons to the Whitechapel murders. Make sure there’s plenty of minor errors thrown in to keep the pot boiling. Pepper this with references to ‘Silence of the Lambs’ and an out of place anecdote about a gas station attendant getting killed by his brother-in-law, or whatever, and you’ve got a great reason to skip to the next article. Much like the almost-condescending Robin Odell article from a few issues ago (which totally bogarted me out of a shot at a cover story) there’s little of use here, except some interesting statistics (I’ll have to check them out for myself) that suggest serial killers over the age of 40 aren’t particularly rare. It should be pointed out that ALL of the major serial killer task forces to date have been total failures – Boston Strangler and Atlanta Child Murderer caught wrong guys (and the Atlanta case was THE case that got profiling off and running), the BTK task force failed to catch their guy – he basically gave himself up. Green River task force dropped the ball and waited like 14 years before bothering to test the DNA of their prime suspect, even though they had it all that time. Funny how you never see profilers bring this stuff up. Anyway, the profile he ends up with is totally generic and lackluster. I’m all for pieces by ‘professionals’ outside the Ripperological circles, but I hope in the future the editors will be a bit more selective.
QUESTIONING UNCLE JACK – Interview with ‘Uncle Jack’ authors Tony Williams and Humphrey Price – I FINALLY got my copy of this book from Amazon.co.uk this week, but am so backed up in my reading I won’t be getting to it for a while. Nevertheless, this interview is pretty good, except the editors are apparently asking questions that were already answered in the book. Ha ha. What be up with that? I guess I can’t really comment too much on it until I read the book. I’ve read the introduction and first chapter just to get a feel for it, and it appears to be written in the Chris Miles ‘I’m using this book as an excuse to write about myself’ style, but with a little more humility, and the action takes place at the National Library of Wales, where there’s less smoke and, unfortunately, fewer opportunities to gallantly rescue prostitutes from the clutches of Martin Fido…err….I mean lecherous old men. Regarding this interview, I will say the authors handle their responses very well, and it would appear they’ve produced a book that, in the least, will be refreshing and entertaining, if not wholly convincing.
TUMBLETY IN LONDON: TRAILING AN INFILTRATOR Part 1 By Joe Chetcuti – Chetcuti has a keen eye and a passion for research, which virtually assures us some intriguing and educational articles in the future. I’m thinking this might not be one of them. While well-written, there’s just too much going on here. First, he seems to hate W.T. Stead for some reason. But whatever. The purpose of the article appears to be to suggest that Tumblety knew Stead and went to the same rich people club with him and was involved in some plot or another. The lone nudge that got this speculative ball rolling was a newspaper article that Chetcuti has totally taken out of context. The article is an interview with Colonel Sir Francis Charles Hughes-Hallett from the Oct. 8th, 1888 edition of the Reno Evening Gazette, and the crucial part reads: “I was convinced that my man [the Ripper] left his club as I was then doing, and disguised himself for his nocturnal revel. My theory is that the Whitechapel murderer is an Army Doctor, or a medical student, or a gentleman, and a man of leisure. Or perhaps a retired Army Surgeon.” Remarkably, Chetcuti jumps to the strange conclusion that the Colonel was suspicious of a particular individual. He interprets the line ‘…my man left his club as I was then doing’ to mean that they were both leaving the SAME club. Clearly, he was meaning only to suggest the status of this individual by suggesting he was leaving a club. The fact that his theory has the Ripper as everything from a medical student to a retired Army Surgeon makes it pretty clear that the Colonel was not speaking of anyone inparticular. But Chetcuti, in a piece of fine research, learns the club the Colonel attended (and assumes it’s the ONLY club he frequented), and jumps to thinking that Stead (who also went there) must have brought along Tumblety as a guest, and thus the Colonel’s suspect was Tumblety! At least I think I got that right. Like I said, it’s a very busy article. Unfortunately, this entire line of enquiry was based on a misinterpretation of just another ‘theory’ on who the Ripper MIGHT be. Again, I’m a little surprised this wasn’t caught by one of the editors.
THE GOULSTON STREET GRAFFITO DEBATE By Howard “Full” Brown and Neil ‘Monty’ Bell – This is one of those little areas of the case that holds a particular interest for me, so I looked forward to reading this article, which has Howard ‘Don’t hate me because I’m beautiful’ Brown arguing in favor of the graffiti as evidence, and Neil ‘Pass me that pipe’ Bell arguing against it. Howard writes in his usual enthusiastic, chatty, style, and makes some good points in favor of the graffiti, but spends too much time going over the different versions of ‘Juwes’, which we’re all already familiar with. Oddly, Brown leaves out some of the more persuasive points in favor of the graffiti as evidence. Obviously, establishing that contemporary officers and officials regarded the graffiti as a viable clue would go along way in this argument, yet he never brings up that at least two superior officers with full access to all reports indicated their impression that the Ripper himself wrote the graffiti. He also never brings up that just a few days before Warren resigned (to suggest that Warren resigned solely from pressure put upon him for a moderately indiscreet magazine article is naïve to say the least), Home Office requested reports from a number of people present prior to the erasure of the graffiti, and the focus of these reports seems to have been on Warren’s actions. The impression this leaves is that Home Office felt Warren reacted hastily. None of this stuff is brought up by Brown. It was also not mentioned that Halse and others knocked up the people in the building and, apparently, none could recall having seen the graffiti. Also, we can infer that no other pieces of graffiti in the same hand could be found in the vicinity. These are all major points in favor of considering the graffiti as evidence that do not appear in the essay, so I can’t say Brown’s argument is a persuasive one. Nevertheless, Howard Brown’s argument is a total Johnny Cochran meets F. Lee Bailey compared to Neil Bell’s incoherent ramblings. He goes on and on about his idea that the graffiti was written on the INSIDE of the jamb, even though we all know that’s not the case. Warren said where it was, and nobody at the inquest or in reports contradicted him. Remember, that the graffiti was visible to passers-by was Warren’s sole reason for having erased it, and as most at the scene were not agreeable to this course of action, it would be a most remarkable thing for none of them to have contradicted Warren on this important point. Bell also argues that the residence of the Wentworth dwellings may not have erased the graffiti had they seen it because they may not have been able to read it. Again, whether or not they could read it would mean nothing if any of them had actually SEEN it. That’s the important thing. Had anyone in the building reported having even seen ANY white-chalked graffiti in that location prior to the time Eddowes was murdered, Warren would have been shouting it from the rooftops and we wouldn’t be having this debate today. But no one reported having seen it, and that’s no small thing. Bell then reproduces at great length a newspaper report about the poor lighting in the East End at the time. This must have been done to fill space, because a couple short excerpts would have made the point. And what was his point? That the author wouldn’t have been able to see to write in the darkness. Um, okay. But let’s be real. The Ripper had less lighting in Mitre Square and yet could see well enough to carve designs on Eddowes’ face and knick her eyelids. When staring against a black background (the dado), even with the limited moonlight, the graffiti writer wouldn’t have had much problem making out the white of the chalk. While the darkness may have effected his penmanship, it certainly would not have made writing impossible. In all honesty, the best argument against the validity of the graffiti is simply that there’s nothing in the text of it that precludes anyone other than the Ripper as its author. That’s it. The evidence, however, suggests that the graffiti was quite fresh, was the only one of its kind in the area, and was found directly above the discarded apron portion. The placing of the apron there makes that entryway a crime scene, and due to the location of the graffiti, and the apparent freshness of it, it must be considered a clue. That’s a far cry from stating unequivocally that the two were from the same hand, but me thinks the odds are in its favor.
PRESS TRAWL By Chris Scott – A special John Williams edition of Press Trawl, again throwing it in my face that I haven’t yet been able to read ‘Uncle Jack’! The day before I got my copy I received Scott’s latest book ‘Will the Real Mary Kelly…?’, where he goes about misspelling Millers Court like freaking everybody else these days. I’ll look forward to coming back to this edition of ‘Press Trawl’ once I’ve read the book by Tony ‘Maybe saying I’m related to Jack the Ripper will get me laid’ Williams. One thing’s for sure, though, and that’s not even Donald Rumbelow could rescue Tony Williams’s National Library of Wales library card from the shredder.
I BEG TO REPORT – The Drama of the Ripper is coming up, featuring – guess what – a play or whatever called ‘Miller’s Court’! There’s that damned apostrophe again! And they’re running it like this in all the advertising. Isn’t Chris George behind this event? You’d think he of all people would know how the court’s name was spelled and get it right. And Chris Scott?!!! God. Next thing you know they’ll be putting an apostrophe in Bucks Row. Oh, wait…
Following this and other odds and ends about a dozen other Ripper plays and books that may or may not ever come out (hey, where’s the blurb for MY book that’s never coming out!?) is a short piece on the Platt Diary Report. And let me say I’m impressed at the gumption shown by the young and energetic Jennifer Pegg in getting these tests done, even if they proved to be about as useful as a Dr. Bailey profile. But I gotta say ‘what the hey?’ about printing the word ‘bitch’ in this piece (NOT in reference to Ms. Pegg, I should add) but censoring the word ‘ass’ in the printing of my review? I guess the moral of this issue is ‘Just because you’ve got a bitch doesn’t mean you’ll get any ass’.
LETTERS AND COMMENTS: Irons writes in to say he received the last issue and it looks good, but he hasn’t read it yet. Howard Brown says “I haven’t even had the chance to read Chris Scott’s stuff or Mr Gregg’s…or the book reviews…It’s a really large issue.’ (Poor Howie, all those big words and stuff). Rob House writes in to say he hasn’t even RECEIVED his issue yet. Maybe I’ve been doing this all wrong; you know, actually READING the issue before I write about it. BUT WAIT, a few people DID read it, including Jane Coram, who enjoys looking at photos of dead, mangled corpses, as well as a bunch of folks praising Rob House’s Kosminski article. Again…whatever. Jennifer Pegg, the lone voice of exquisite taste here (except for myself, of course) writes that she found my last review interesting and wonders if they’ll publish it. They did, edited, of course. Spiro Dominicanrepublic writes something, but I can’t figure out what the hell he’s talking about. But his was the only actual letter to the editor (via e-mail), the rest were all snagged from Casebook and JTRforums. Funny how Paul Begg has so much time to scour the threads and read all the posts, but never has the time to post anything himself. Hmmm..
ON THE CRIMEBEAT By Wilf Gregg – Next time you run into Wilf Gregg, ask him where he was when Lincoln was shot. Probably get a good story out of him. Poor little dude, he only gets a paragraph or two per book, whereas the Big Bad Editors get all the space they want. To be honest, the books Gregg covers usually don’t appeal to me, so I kinda did the skippy-skippy on it this time around.
REVIEWS: Trevor Marriott’s much hyped book is reviewed here, and I’m starting to feel sorry that I ordered it (it’s on its way to me now from Amazon.com, so I should receive it sometime in December). I only scanned the review of Tony Williams’s book, since I don’t want it TOTALLY ruined for me when I get around to reading it. But kudos upon kudos to the editors for spelling ‘Millers Court’ appropriately. My faith in the world is almost restored…wait, put a cork in that faith… Begg’s actually giving a halfway decent review to Ripperana, the same issue that I declared gayer than a Hillary Clinton rally. He points out that the entire issue is filled with absolutely unforgivable errors, and still deems it a ‘marked and definite improvement’ for the magazine. Hmmm…now that I look at it in that context, maybe it was a back-handed compliment; a polite insult. Oh that sly Begg! Speaking of ‘backhanded compliments’, let’s look at his Ripper Notes review. While refraining from going on another of my Begg-alleged ‘Holy Crusades’ in defense of Dan ‘the Alpha-Ripperologist’ Norder, I’ll point out that Begg (or one of the other editors) writes that the latest RN looks “more than usually like a clone of Ripperologist”, and that it’s “the slimmest and probably the least Ripper-focused issue since Dan Norder took over…”. Remarkably (or perhaps not so) he then deems this issue “one of the best to date”. In other words, because it’s supposedly more like Ripperologist, that makes it great. What did I tell ya, Sly and the Family Begg! A few more items are reviewed, and the section ends with a write up about Paul Begg’s new book on the Mary Celeste, which sounds to be pretty cool.
THE LAST WORD By Christopher-Michael DiGrazia – One look at CMD’s pic begs the questions, “Where are Simon and Theodore?” For some of us, it also begs the question, “Where’s my copy of Jean Overton-Fuller’s book that I lent you almost 3 years ago?”, but I digress. In this column, CMD touches on something I’ve considered for some time – the serial killers who become truly ‘famous’, such as Jack , tend to come from major cities. I live in the state connecting to Kansas and NOBODY I know had ever heard of BTK prior to this year. Remarkably, hardly anyone had heard of the Green River Killer prior to his capture, and he’s America’s most prolific serial killer! But whack a few in a major city and you get a cool name and front page headlines. Balanced.
All in all, this issue was one of the quickest Ripperologist reads I’ve had in a long time. The articles were by and large enjoyable and entertaining. The one exception was Chetcuti’s which, while fascinating, was unbridled speculation derived from a misunderstanding of the source material, and requires repeated readings to fully digest. The Bailey article, of all the major pieces of this issues, was the only one not worthy of real discussion, so take that for what it’s worth. But this was, I believe, the first issue of Ripperologist to use the word ‘bitch’. Let’s hope for more of that in the future. What future, you ask? Well, the future issues, of course, that you’ll only be able to read if you subscribe NOW – www.ripperologist.info. That’s right, they wouldn’t spring for a dot com for some reason, who knows why. Maybe ‘info’ sounds more ‘scholarly’, so people like Dr. Bailey will want to write for it. Anyhow, I’m reading the new book by Stan Russo, “The 50 Most Significant Individuals in Recorded History”. I almost hate to admit it, but it’s damn good. More on that later, though. For now, I’ll leave you with this little thought: What’s the difference between Jack the Ripper and a Ripperologist? Jack never stabbed his victims in the back. Ha ha! Booyah! Until next time…
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1673
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 07, 2005 - 4:16 am: |
|
Spry,
Echoing Hows post, yeah many thanks.
Can you take it off now?? 
How,
ooof, kicked in the nuts by one of your henchmen....how low can you go?
Tom,
" The evidence, however, suggests that the graffiti was quite fresh, was the only one of its kind in the area, and was found directly above the discarded apron portion"
Can you cite this evidence?.....I mean, I couldnt find it. Too busy with the crack pipe (which is slanderous by the way).
Unless you mean Halse. If so I raise you one Warren, one Arnold and a virtually located Swanson.
Ooh, define fresh also.
Its like, you know man, like yellow moonbeams in the night sky to me Dude. Heh-heh
Peace Bro !
Monty
"You got very nice eyes, DeeDee. Never noticed them before. They real?"
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2491
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 07, 2005 - 6:15 am: |
|
This is how they do it - get people to write tempting things on the thread so that you reply. And you know unless its totally incoherent it could get printed for other people who aren't readin this to see, making for a scary issue!!
so anyway, Tom,
rather than wonder if your review will get printed (as last tine when i really didnt think it would) I can now play a fun game, which i suggest everyone tries, of guessing just what exact parts of it they'll print. Print out Tom's review and cross out what you think wont make it, come July see if your right. Everyone who gets it right gets a team point! the team with the most team points at the end of the year, actually now i think of it I have no clue what the point of team points was at all, but dont let that stop you.
Oh, read Uncle Jack, it didnt take me long to get through, if you can manage to stop laughing you shouldnt have trouble. Its really enjoyable. Of course i do think it is...
well you'll know when youve read it.
Jenni
ps Monty, you've got a crack pipe!? |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2492
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 07, 2005 - 6:19 am: |
|
ps I'd mention what i think of Tom's review but then he might mention me in his next one. i'm trying to keep a low profile! |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1532
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 07, 2005 - 8:39 am: |
|
Hi Tom
Are you saying that Miller's Court doesn't have an apostrophe in it? And neither does Buck's Row? Check your sources, Tom. The dropping of a comma in placenames or streets is a modern American trend. Tom Wescotts misapprehension.
All my best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 518
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 07, 2005 - 6:13 pm: |
|
Good and fair criticism,may I say, of what I put out for scrutiny. I couldn't read it afterwards anyway. Monty's story, on the other hand ,was a very interesting and sensible approach to the GSG. I salute you,Mr. Bell !
Before I go Monty... Lets get together and put another pro/con argument on another subject..
As I remove this ice-pack from Lower Sack-sony...I'm thinking I should take the pro-neutering of T.C. and you could take the contra-neutering in favor of lobotomizing Mr. Wescott. Who cares who wins,right?
HowBrown
|
Ripperologist magazine
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 07, 2005 - 8:15 pm: |
|
Tom, the first use of the word 'Bitch' in Ripperologist was in issue 12 (August 1997), in an article by Andy Aliffe. What a naughty boy!
Keep up the good work.
Adam
|
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 370
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 07, 2005 - 9:53 pm: |
|
Chris,
Why so pissy, Chrissy? I was just having fun with you, no harm intended. You are an editor, after all. But on to your response
Chris writes: Are you saying that Miller's Court doesn't have an apostrophe in it?
Tom replies: Yes, I'm stating this quite plainly.
Chris writes: And neither does Buck's Row?
Tom replies: No, of course Buck's Row has an apostrophe (though it shouldn't). Re-read that portion of my review and you'll see I was making a joke.
Chris writes: Check your sources, Tom
Tom replies: I did, which is why I know there's no apostrophe in 'Millers Court'. But I'll look again...hmmmm...here's a nice clear photo in Pam Ball's book. Still no apostrophe.
Chris writes: The dropping of a comma in placenames or streets is a modern American trend.
Tom replies: Given the unlikelyhood that a modern American built the stone archway into the court and chiseled in the words 'Millers Court' - MINUS an apostrophe - I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that 'millers' applies to men in the profession and not a man named Miller. In any case, as they say, it's 'etched in stone'.
Chris writes: Tom Wescotts misapprehension.
Tom replies: Kinda like it was my mistake when you got all ugly 'correcting' me on the Nichols (or was it Stride?) thread, only to find out you - and not I - were in error. I've made no misapprehension. And, yes, I noticed you dropped the apostrophe from 'Wescott's'. Good times.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
|
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 371
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 07, 2005 - 10:12 pm: |
|
Monty,
You know the answers to these questions, so I shouldn't need to go over them again. As for my slanderous 'crack pipe' comment, go back and read the review - the word 'crack' is not mentioned. I wrote 'Neil 'pass me that pipe' Bell. I mentioned crack months ago in my review of your Mitre Street article, which I enjoyed very much. And calling me out for slander over something like that is kinda mamsy-pamsy, don't you think? Howard Brown is the anti-Christ.
Adam,
The word 'bitch' was used in an Andy Aliffe article? Was it in the by-line? Ha ha. Thanks for that strange bit of minutia. But suffice it to say that this use of 'bitch' in the new issue is the first of the current regime (i.e. Begg). Howard Brown is the anti-Christ.
Howard,
In my case, a neuturization WOULD be a lobotomy. I'm saving the use of my upper-head until I get about your age...you know, when the bottom one stops working. Ha ha. You know, if you play your last post backwards, it says 'Howard Brown is the anti-Christ'.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
P.S. There's no apostrophe in Millers Court. |
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 2087
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 12:58 am: |
|
Hi Tom
The reason I used the apostrophised version is that it is much the more common version in press reports at the time, which were my main source As examples of this (from The Times) at the period of the Kelly murder, see below:
  
However, I am sure that the official version of the name, as on the street sign, was not apostrophised. In the census listing for Millers Court for 1881 there is no apostrophe:
and also for 1891
(Message edited by Chris on June 08, 2005) |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1680
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 3:52 am: |
|
Tom, Howie,
Tom, Tom, Tommy, Tom, Tom,
You first used the crack pipe gag in your review on the Mitre Square article true, mentioning that I 'hit' it. Then you make the cardinal sin of comedy, repetitiveness. You refer the pipe again in you lastest review (a review, as Howie says, is good and fair). Fresh material is far better than regurgitating the old, especially as the old only appeared a month or so back. Too fresh in the punters minds you see.
However, thats not my gripe. My gripe is the insinuation in your past two reviews that Im a crackhead. Stating that you didnt type the word 'crack' in your latest review doesnt get you off because the insinuation and interpretation is still there. What else could 'pass me that pipe' mean? Bagpipes? peace pipes?
I expect an apology in your next monthly review, even though Im not part of that.
And finally, I was yanking your chain sunshine. Relax. Your points were taken on board and if the truth be known, I didnt like it that much anyway. That said, please do me a favour...stop using rhyme in your descriptive work. Masy pamsy, pissy Chrissy indeed.
Keep up the good work,
How,
If you fancy it, yeah. Give me some ideas on what topics you want to disect and Ill see if I can do a better job this time.
Monty
"You got very nice eyes, DeeDee. Never noticed them before. They real?"
|
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 204
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 5:48 am: |
|
Interesting review, Tom. And, again, a few laughs along the way. Keep up the good work!
I'm embarrassed to say that I haven't even got to starting to read the latest issue of the Rip yet. I'm still way behind with some other reading, but I am looking forward to getting into it, hopefully very soon!
By the way, yes, I have to say Millers Court is the correct spelling. No apostrophe. I frequently do it myself, I know, but Millers is the correct version. Remember that an apostrophe can be an indication of possession of something (i.e. Bills' farm), or it can be used to shorten common phrases (i.e. Can't, can not - Won't, will not, etc, etc).
Therefore, unless the Court was owned by someone called Miller (In which case it should be Millers' Court), it is Millers Court.
If it was infact spelt Miller's, then that would seem to mean it was being called "Miller Is Court", which obviously makes no sense.
Thus, it must be Millers Court.
There you go, a nice little English lesson for today.
Cheers,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 916
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 8:45 am: |
|
Hi Tom,
On the other hand, Viper wrote this dissertation about Miller's Court:
Miller's Court seems to have been built at a time when there was increasing pressure on the district's housing from the start. The name Miller's Court is first mentioned in the census of 1861, so it might be a reasonable assumption to assume that they were built in the 1850s; however it is interesting to note that there was a Miller's Rents in Spitalfields, listed in the 1851 Census index under reference HO107 / 1543, Folio 451-452. This alley, which contained three dwellings at that time, appears immediately after Dorset Street and New Court and immediately before Paternoster Row in the census return, so is virtually certain to be the same place. (No court named "Miller's anything" had existed in 1841.)
So if Viper was correct that Miller's Rents was an earlier name for Miller's Court, that indicates a landlord, an actual person. He also wrote that in the 1880s, the Court was known locally as "McCarthy's Rents" or "McCarthy's Courts".
Weird, but fun, argument.
Cheers,
Dave |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1541
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 11:59 am: |
|
Hi Tom
There you have it from straight from the mouth of Chris Scott, that fount of knowledge and source these days of all things Ripper in terms of period newspaper coverage, that Miller's Court with an apostrophe is the more common rendition of the street name in contemporary newspapers.
Again, Tom, it is more modern convention to drop the apostrophe, whether you see it on the plaque for the court or not, and I still would tend to say it is more American than English to do so -- thus St. Aldhelm's Head in Dorset, England still has the apostrophe but in the US it would be dropped, to read, St. Aldhelms Head, as also in such names as Governors Island, New York which was clearly originally styled "Governor's Island."
I am, as you say, an editor, used to dealing with such things in language, though I don't claim to be the ultimate authority. Another example: Fell's Point, Baltimore, is named for William Fell, its Quaker founder from Lancaster, England, who in the mid-1700's first laid out the plots for the old seaport area of Baltimore. Built on a point of land, it was literally, William Fell's point. However, the modern rendition is "Fells Point" with no apostrophe.
I might also mention that Post Offices and local government sign makers make their contributions for better or worse in styling street and place names. For example, here in Maryland there is a mansion named Riversdale which was owned by George Calvert in the early nineteenth century, but the U.S. Post Office in its infinite wisdom at one point dropped the "s" so that the community is now known as "Riverdale Park" -- thus Riversdale mansion is located at 4811 Riverdale Rd. in Riverdale Park, Maryland. A similar situation might apply to whomever did the plaque for "Millers Court" that you mentioned. 
All my best
Chris
(Message edited by ChrisG on June 08, 2005)
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2498
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 3:53 pm: |
|
Is it time to get into a debate about english.
I never did finish 'Eats, Shoots and Leaves'!!
maybe I'll go wrong here:-
Millers - as in the plural of Miller - right?
Miller's - as in it belongs to a single Miller - right?
Millers' - as in it belongs to a whole bunch of Millers.
accept as far as I remember it's only every means it is.
Maybe I got some of that wrong.
God sake don't quote me on in July's Rip!
Jenni |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1544
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 6:33 pm: |
|
Hi Jen
Maybe in the next issue Howie and Monty could get into the Pros and Cons of the "Great Apostrophe in Miller's Court" debate? Promises to beat the stale old Graffito Debate hands down, doncha think? 
Best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 522
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 7:05 pm: |
|
C.G.
That's not a bad idea,old bean. It'll have to come after Monty and I finish our tour of Nepal and Tibet doing "Jews On First ?".............. [ Alan Sharp isn't just a Renaissance Man...he's an awful agent,as no one in their right mind [ except me n' Mountbatten Bell ] would do a three week stint way up in the Himmerlayas if they had good management....three hots and a shared cot with a mountain goat and Monty's chronic flatulence in a tent make me want to quit show business all together.
But,yeah...maybe Monty and I can come up with something. Thanks for the suggestion,C.G.
A depressed thespian.
HowBrown
|
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 374
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 9:52 pm: |
|
Chris Scott,
Thank you for explaining your usage of 'Miller's' in your book, and for providing the scan showing that 'Millers' - without the apostrophe - was in fact the official name in 1888. Whether that was it in 1841 is irrelevent so I'll side with 'Millers'. I should also like to correct myself when I wrote that the name above the archway was 'etched in stone'. It was pointed out to me in an e-mail that that was a metal plaque.
Chris George,
Yes, Scott explained why he used 'Miller's' - because it was the most common used version in the press. By that same logic we should be spelling Polly's surname as 'Nicholls', with two 'L's. And pointing out what the court MAY and I repeat MAY have been called 40 plus years before the fact is irrelevent. Following that logic, Buck's Row becomes Ducks Row, etc. This is, obviously, a small issue. I'm just surprised more don't use the 'official' version, 'Millers'.
Monty,
Do you have a problem with being called a crackhead or something? I'll come up with something different for my review of your next article. Personally, I'd like to see you pursue your research into Mitre Square, or gaslighting, instead of a debate. However, Begg had mentioned something to me quite some time ago about having a point/counterpoint feature in the magazine, and I think that's a pretty good idea, as long as both sides offer as complete an argument as possible. What else do you and Howard disagree on? Maybe Chris T. George and I should do a point/counterpoint on the spelling of Millers Court!!! What do you say, Chris? On second thought, nah. The issue was pretty much settled above, so it would be kinda lackluster in the mag. But if you and the anti-Christ should decide to tackle the debate, all's good, but whoever sides with the 'no apostrophe' will win hands down. Fair warning.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
P.S. Howard Brown is the sexiest man alive. |
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 528
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 9:59 pm: |
|
The check's in the mail,T.C.....
HowBrown
|
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 207
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 11:24 pm: |
|
Hi Jen,
"maybe I'll go wrong here:-
Millers - as in the plural of Miller - right?
Miller's - as in it belongs to a single Miller - right?
Millers' - as in it belongs to a whole bunch of Millers."
OK, that's pretty confusing, but let's go through them one by one:
"Millers - as in the plural of Miller - right?"
Well Millers is the pluralised version of Miller, yes, so you're right there.
"Miller's - as in it belongs to a single Miller - right?"
No. As I explained in my last post (which everyone seems to have missed), by spelling it Miller's, that would technically mean it was being called "Miller Is Court." Doesn't make sense. The rules of that particular English may have changed since Millers Court was given that name, I'm not sure, but in modern times, it wouldn't be called Miller's. The only way you should have 's at the end of a word would be in a sentence like "This banana's not very nice." ("This banana is not very nice.")
If you're naming it as if it belongs to someone, the apostrophe should come AFTER the s, not before. For example:
"Oh, that's Bob Millers' court."
Confusing, I know, but as far as I know, that is technically the correct spelling in that context.
"Millers' - as in it belongs to a whole bunch of Millers."
This one I'm not sure about, but I think that if you were talking about a group of them, you wouldn't use any apostrophe. As in: "That belongs to the Millers." Or, "The Millers have owned this for years." Yes, that sounds right.
Well, if Millers Court is the correct spelling, which I believe it is, then that might mean that a group of Millers (Occupation-wise, or family name wise) might have owned it a long time before MJK was there.
But I've got no idea about that, sorry.
I know that's very confusing, but overall, I still think Millers Court is the correct version.
Yes, I think it would make a 'different', but interesting debate somewhere else! Haha.
"To Have An Apostrophe, Or Not To Have An Apostrophe - That Is The Question."
Hehe - good title, huh?
Regards,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Eduardo Zinna
Detective Sergeant
Username: Eduardo
Post Number: 80
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 3:22 am: |
|
Howard,
I'm touched. It's been a long time since anyone showed an interest in my flagging acting career. My very last role was as Thomas "Indian Harry" Bowyer in the Adam Wood-Sue and Andy Parlour Ripper epic shot in real locations a few years back.
Mind you, unless the Sir Robert Anderson role has no lines, it might be outside my range. Although I spent most of my adult life in New York City - or perhaps because of it - my accent remains decidedly foreign. Posh foreign, at best. Think Bela Lugosi meets George Sanders.
Cheers,
Eduardo  |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1037
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 4:10 am: |
|
Adam
Jenni is quite correct about the use of the apostrophe.
Please just take a visit to this site to confirm it:
http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/
My London A-Z lists 10 "King's" Roads and 12 "Kings" Roads. Presumably it's just a question of custom which street names lose their apostrophes and which keep them.
Chris Phillips
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1687
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 4:22 am: |
|
Tom,
"Personally, I'd like to see you pursue your research into Mitre Square, or gaslighting, instead of a debate."
Funny you should mention that, I am returning to my favourite square. Morris, Blenkinsopp, missing city reports etc.
I agree with your views on the pro and con debate. Has to be thorough. A hard task but certainly do-able. It would be nice to see something from you as you certainly fit that criteria I hope you have something in the pipeline. If not, I believe How is up for it....speaking of How,
"P.S. Howard Brown is the sexiest man alive."
Its all done with mirrors and corsetry.
Monty
"You got very nice eyes, DeeDee. Never noticed them before. They real?"
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2502
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 5:04 am: |
|
Millers, miller's , who cares!
well Tom obviously!
Ah the interesting lives we lead! |
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 208
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 5:05 am: |
|
Hi Chris,
"Jenni is quite correct about the use of the apostrophe.
Please just take a visit to this site to confirm it:
http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/
My London A-Z lists 10 "King's" Roads and 12 "Kings" Roads. Presumably it's just a question of custom which street names lose their apostrophes and which keep them."
Hmm, interesting stuff Chris. Thanks for posting up the link to that site, I've checked it out, and yes, it seems that Jenni's version was correct.
Though I can't help but say that I'm a bit confused about that, I always thought apostrophes in words was a way just to shorten a phrase, and if it came after a word, indication of possession. But it seems that isn't the case.
Perhaps the rules vary from country to country. I know there are several spellings, for a start, that vary between the US and Australia. (i.e. Realise, Realize...Centre, Center..etc).
But, I think British and Australian are mostly the same, so I can't think of any other reasons.
Thanks again for that, Chris. My bad! (I think!).
Regards,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 209
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 5:10 am: |
|
Well said, Jenni!
A lot of discussion over basically nothing there, I think. Still, it was weird, but interesting.
Perhaps we should just settle it by unofficially renaming it as "Mary's Court" in honour of MJK, eh? Thoughts?
Cheers,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1038
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 5:26 am: |
|
Adam
I always thought apostrophes in words was a way just to shorten a phrase, and if it came after a word, indication of possession.
I think the origin of the possessive apostrophe is essentially also shortening. Originally "Jack's knife" would have written "Jack his knife". How the rule about plurals evolved I don't know.
Chris Phillips
|
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 210
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 5:43 am: |
|
Hi Chris,
"I think the origin of the possessive apostrophe is essentially also shortening. Originally "Jack's knife" would have written "Jack his knife". How the rule about plurals evolved I don't know."
Hmm, interesting again, Chris. I would have thought technically "Jack's knife" would have meant "Jack is knife", but perhaps apostrophes have been used for so long in words, regardless of whether they are to shorten something or not, that they are now simply common practice.
This whole apostrophe business has become quite confusing and in-depth for something so small, hasn't it!?
Cheers,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1822
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 5:44 am: |
|
Hi Adam,
You finally got it - Mary's Court, not Marys' Court. (Hi Chris, I've heard that too. But by that token, Mary's Court would have been 'Mary her Court' originally.)
Hi All,
If a Mr Miller gave his name to that court, it should be Miller's Court, not Millers. Sign writers have been known to make mistakes - tattooists too. Didn't some woman recently have Beckam [sic] tattooed above her buttocks? Literally set in stone, metal or flesh doesn't make it right.
The only time an apostrophe comes at the end of a word is when that word is plural, eg the boys' toys.
However, if the word doesn't require an s to make it plural, such as men, women and children, you add an apostrophe and an s to make it men's trousers, women's things or children's games.
Hi Monty,
Its all done with mirrors and corsetry.
No it isn't.
It's all done...etc.
Love,
Caz, Pain-in-the-arse Apostrophe Defender
X
(Message edited by caz on June 09, 2005) |
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 211
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 6:10 am: |
|
Hi Caz,
"Hi Adam,
You finally got it - Mary's Court, not Marys' Court. (Hi Chris, I've heard that too. But by that token, Mary's Court would have been 'Mary her Court' originally.)"
Haha.
Caz, I still don't totally agree with "Mary's" or "Miller's", but rather than write "Mary's/Marys'/Marys place in Millers/Miller's/Millers' court",every time I'm talking about it, I'll just go allong with the seemigly more popular version.
"The only time an apostrophe comes at the end of a word is when that word is plural, eg the boys' toys."
Yes, that's true, if it's a pluralised version of something. Then it can also be often used if you're an Australian, cutting the ends off your words. That's me, for one.
(i.e. "What are you doin'?")
Yes....it all starts to make more sense!
Well, as I said before, most people seem to put apostrophes in the middle of such words anyway, whether it's always correct or not, so I guess it's ended up being pretty common to do.
Regards,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Eduardo Zinna
Detective Sergeant
Username: Eduardo
Post Number: 81
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 6:11 am: |
|
Hi,
How about Millers as in this case? This pub was in Greenwich some five years ago. From the sign you can see the name refers to members of the milling profession.
Cheers,
Eduardo |
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 212
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 6:21 am: |
|
Hi Eduardo!
Good to see you around here.
As for your suggestion of just "Millers Court" - I tried to tell them Eduardo, I did! I tried!
From an earlier post of mine on this thread:
"Well, if Millers Court is the correct spelling, which I believe it is, then that might mean that a group of Millers (Occupation-wise, or family name wise) might have owned it a long time before MJK was there.
But I've got no idea about that, sorry.
I know that's very confusing, but overall, I still think Millers Court is the correct version."
....Then I changed to Miller's. Now you've shown that, I'm not sure again. Maybe it is Millers?
Well, I think we can atleast rule out "Millers'."
Thanks for posting that up anyway, Eduardo. Seems the debate will go on!
Regards,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1040
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 6:24 am: |
|
Hi Chris, I've heard that too. But by that token, Mary's Court would have been 'Mary her Court' originally.
Indeed. This discussion sheds a bit more light on it, but still doesn't quite explain that point:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-pos2.htm
It seems that in Anglo-Saxon times, "Millers Court" would certainly have been correct!
If a Mr Miller gave his name to that court, it should be Miller's Court, not Millers. Sign writers have been known to make mistakes
Grammatically this is logical, but in practice the apostrophe is often dropped, even in the official names of roads. On my local electoral roll, neither "Kings Road" nor "Queens Road" contains an apostrophe.
Chris Phillips
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2505
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 7:04 am: |
|
if the word ends in s like,
(trying not to say the obvious here)l;ike, Jesus,
my understanding is Jesus's is wrong, did i get that right?
Jenni |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4527
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 7:14 am: |
|
From the "Times" Nov 17th 1982.
Robert |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3262
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 8:38 am: |
|
Hey, apostrophes are important. Take this infamous example from Lynne Truss, describing a woman at a car boot sale:
"Those old things over there are my husband's."
vs.
"Those old things over there are my husbands."
;-)
Stephen P. Ryder
Deputy Apostropher Royal
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3519
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 8:49 am: |
|
This is probably one of the weirdest discussions I have ever encountered -- and that says a lot for the Ripper context.
Now, dammit, can any of you come to a conclusion? This debate is only adding to the confusion instead of solving it. Surely there must exist contemporary records on this. Is it Miller's or Millers? What do the local historians say (I would expect there to be quite a few in London)?
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3263
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 9:29 am: |
|
Hi Glenn -
In all seriousness, I would suggest there is simply no answer to this question. If I had to choose one, I would choose Miller's Court because of the connection with Miller's Rents, which Adrian Phyper's found was almost certainly the 1850s name for Miller's Court.
In the end, I think the answer is simply that this was a small court with a "local" name, and was probably known as Millers Court, Miller's Court, Miller's Rents, McCarthy's Rents, etc. etc. Names of people and places back then tended to be a bit more fluid than ours today. I would think that for people living in the Dorset Street area in the 1880s, the niggling point of whether or not to apostrophize the name of a court was probably not high on their list of priorities.
(For what its worth, the Whitechapel Board of Works Annual Report for 1878 calls it "Miller's Court". http://casebook.org/victorian_london/millerscourt1878.html )
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3521
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 9:32 am: |
|
OK, Stephen.
Thanks. I guess that's as far as we can go, then.
Still, would be interesting to check with professional local historians about this; they usually have an enormous knowledge on these rather odd issues.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on June 09, 2005)
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
