|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2236
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 25, 2005 - 6:19 pm: | 
|
September 12th 1888.
‘At the Guildhall, before Alderman Sir Andrew Lusk, Alexander Birke, Great Garden Chambers, Whitechapel, shoemaker, was charged with stealing from an inclosure in front of 4, Mitre Street, Aldgate, an empty wooden case, the property of Messrs. Kearley and Tonge. Evidence was given by a person named Morris.
The alderman said an old, empty, champagne case was worthless or nearly so; moreover, there was no actual proof that the accused took it.
Witness Morris:
But the value of the thing has nothing to do with it. I have known a person convicted for stealing a turnip.
Sir Andrew Lusk:
Probably; but I never did convict for stealing a turnip, and I never will.
Witness Morris:
The prisoner has been convicted before.
Harris - the gaoler:
I do not know him.
Sir Andrew Lusk:
The man is not known. No proof has been given that he stole the box; and if he had the value is nothing! He has been in prison all night, and I now discharge him.
The decision was received with applause, which was instantly suppressed.’
I think this Morris was a pile of dung and we cannot rely on his witness statements at all. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2109
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 25, 2005 - 7:10 pm: |
|
I have always thought him a complete sh*t too!Ever since I suspected he had copped a deffun on the night of Catherine Eddowes murder.His door was apparently ajar,he himself was found sweeping up in the corridor,and yet he didnt hear a thing.....mmmm!
I wonder!
Thanks for posting this AP
Natalie |
Simon Owen
Inspector
Username: Simonowen
Post Number: 215
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, June 25, 2005 - 7:26 pm: |
|
How does this cast doubt on his testimony ??? |
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 237
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, June 25, 2005 - 10:25 pm: |
|
I can't agree with that. There is absolutely nothing at all to suggest that what Morris said was a lie. I've been in this debate before, and it's been said to me that Morris wasn't just sweeping near where the door was ajar, he was sweeping other parts and levels of the buildings as well. Plus that, we know the Ripper was very silent in his work, anyway.
The same question could be asked of the policeman who looked into Mitre Square, but didn't enter, at or around 1.42 AM, just before P.C. Watkins discovered Eddowes' body. Why didn't he hear something? Surely at 1.42 AM the Ripper would still have been in the Square, or very close to it, anyway, bearing in mind the time shortage he had. But nothing was heard or seen then.
So I think it's a bit unreasonable to pick on Morris just because of that.
And, by the way, how can we even be sure that this person was the same "Morris" ??
Yes, I'm aware that it names Kearley & Tonge buildings, and Mitre Street, but Morris isn't exactly the most uncommon of names, and no first name of this 'witness' was given. It may have been someone else entirely, although I know that's pretty unlikely.
Still, I think such witnesses deserve a fair go. Even if he was one and the same person, there's no reason why what he said in the past should come into what he said about the night of Eddowes' murder.
I choose to believe him.
Regards,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2110
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 4:31 am: |
|
OK a decent,caring sort of bloke this Morris chap, pressing for this "dubious" conviction on behalf of his [millionaire] employer"s worthless old "champagne" packing box ...proudly pointing out that he knew of several convictions for stealing a "turnip".
I am sure he made his champagne quaffing employers very, very happy did this Mr Morris ----especially if he could get a conviction for them on account of a starving East Ender "stealing a turnip"!Bully for him I say! |
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 239
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 5:44 am: |
|
Natalie,
"OK a decent,caring sort of bloke this Morris chap, pressing for this "dubious" conviction on behalf of his [millionaire] employer"s worthless old "champagne" packing box ...proudly pointing out that he knew of several convictions for stealing a "turnip"."
Worthless or not, such convictions were made like that back in the 1800's.
By the way, "Morris" only said he knew of "a person" being convicted for taking a turnip, not "several convictions", Natalie.
"I am sure he made his champagne quaffing employers very, very happy did this Mr Morris ----especially if he could get a conviction for them on account of a starving East Ender "stealing a turnip"!Bully for him I say!"
Starving or not, I can assure you that such convictions were made back in the 1800's. It's a perfectly valid point. I know of a woman who was sent down here as a convict for stealing 2 shawls. And how long did she get? Life! She got life for stealing 2 shawls.
As it is, my own Great Great Grandfather was convicted of stealing a table/desk back in the 1850's, and he was sent off as a convict for 7 years just for that.
Stealing handkerchiefs, loaves of bread...turnips...they were all regarded as criminal offences back in the 1800's. This isn't a 2005 court case we're talking about!
Besides that, this witness "Morris" only said he knew of a person who got such a conviction.
Just a passing comment, perhaps?
Regards,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2111
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 6:13 am: |
|
Understood Adam,
Thankfully there were people like Lusk ready to question such unjust laws over sentencing as well as question whose laws they were and who benefitted from them.
Natalie |
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 242
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 7:12 am: |
|
Hi Natalie,
"Thankfully there were people like Lusk ready to question such unjust laws over sentencing as well as question whose laws they were and who benefitted from them."
Yes, I completely agree with you there. Fortunately things have changed over time, in that respect atleast, but yes, some of the laws back in the 1800's were pretty pathetic.
By the way, I asked earlier if we can be sure this was the same "Morris" or not.
I wonder if the Alderman, Sir Andrew Lusk, was related to George Lusk, head of the WVC, in any way?
Does anyone happen to know?
Regards,
Adam. 
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 398
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 11:31 am: |
|
Who's to say the accused DIDN'T steal the box? He very well may have, which is testiment to Morris' honesty and dedication and in no way reflects negatively on his testimony in the case of Eddowes.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Simon Owen
Inspector
Username: Simonowen
Post Number: 216
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 11:38 am: |
|
Has anyone considered that Morris might have had to act in this way because of the rules of his employers , and if he didn't he would have been sacked ?
If he didn't press for conviction of the box thief , his employers might have considered him too lenient , or that he might let some cronies steal more important things given half a chance.
In any case , nothing above has any bearing on the testimony Morris gave in relation to the Eddowes murder case. |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 939
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 1:11 pm: |
|
Hey, doesn't Morris sound a little like a Dennis Rader/law and order type here?
Seriously, whether or not Morris had some sort of stick up his backside, I think I'd have to agree with Tom that that's not a good reason to dismiss his later inquest testimony. Morris seems enough of a stickler that I imagine he'd have chased a prostitute and her john away, if he had known they were there. When I read about this episode over a lousy box, I feel sure that Morris would certainly have tried to apprehend a murderer in Mitre Square, as he had boasted.
Morris really had no idea what was happening outside his door that night, IMO.
Dave
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2112
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 1:36 pm: |
|
Hi Adam,
The case is also reported in Paul Begg"s JtR The Facts in the chapter on Catherine Eddowes footnote 29 page 466.Begg cites it because he thinks its a possible indication of his character.
What is astonishing in the murder of Catherine Eddowes is that in less than 15 minutes the murderer drew CE into the square, killed and mutilated her and escaped unseen and unheard by all these police,-four serving police,a city policeman asleep with his family and its only private residents, one ex-policeman and nearby some plain clothes police.And all this had taken place in the 44 minutes since she was released from police custody at 1 am.
Morris who had his door ajar when Watkins arrived and was brushing the corridor,claims to have looked out into Mitre Square a little before and -like one of the three wise monkeys -claims he had "seen nothing and heard nothing"----how often have we heard that when the ripper struck----!
Morris also claims to have seen Watkins for the first time that night when Watkins announced the murder to him-yet someone here appears to be telling porkies because it stretches credulity too far that all these police/ex-police were out and about passing each other in the night on their beats around Mitre Square etc and if we are to believe every word of all their testimony the ripper would have had to have completed his assignment in less than 6 minutes[not 15 just 6 minutes]without any of these police seeing anything at all since Kate pulled the door to of Bishops Gate Police Station!
No! Either someone was telling porkies or its looking as though they must have been playing blind man"s buff!
Morris comes across as a rather hardened character -not necessarily the one who was telling the porkies but well aware of what side his bread was buttered on.
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2237
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 2:11 pm: |
|
When studying vast amounts of information the process sort of teaches you something about itself and yourself as you do it.
You learn to spot anomalies and what I call ‘blips’ - like on a radar screen - and the process tells you to examine these blips because they mean something… you have ‘incoming’ if you like.
Now, the system has taught me that to find a single individual mentioned twice in a national newspaper - when he is neither a law-breaker or a famous personality of that moment in time - in the space of a month is a blip on the radar screen.
When that same person is involved as a witness in a case of murder, then his name appearing in some other connection does provide ‘incoming’ and suitable measures must be taken to deal with this unexpected development.
The system goes on to develop a level of self protection, so that as more information becomes available, the system becomes more alert to the anomalies.
Just the simple fact that Kearley & Tonge are mentioned in both court cases, that of the murder of Eddowes, and that of Morris the would-be turnip thief condemner, is pause for honest thought.
September 12th 1888 is the court appearance of Morris seeking his turnip of truth.
September 30th 1888 is the slaughter of Eddowes outside of Morris’ fiercely protected warehouse.
On September 12th Morris is so zealous in his night watchman duties that he apprehends some poor old sod at 1.30 in the morning for stealing an empty box from outside his warehouse, but by the 30th September that zeal has been tempered and he sweeps floors while a whore is butchered outside his front door at about 1.30 in the morning.
This is an anomaly.
Secondly, there is the attitude adopted by the magistrate, Sir Andrew Lusk, to Morris the night watchman at the K&T warehouse in this case.
Lusk is obviously belligerent and looking for a fight with Morris. He dismisses his evidence wholesale and releases the prisoner.
Morris was a retired police officer and occupied a position of security and enforcement in the Whitechapel community, which normally would mean that Lusk would handle his evidence with due care and attention to that position, and would under usual circumstances use his superior role in the judicial system to reinforce the efforts of those who guarded property in his parish.
This he patently did not do, and it is Morris who comes out of the affair with his reputation barley intact.
Lusk was a local man with intimate knowledge of the area, he was elected to his first position of authority right next door to the K&T warehouse.
I would say from the exchange in court that Lusk knew Morris very well indeed, and trusted him not as far as he could throw him. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4595
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 3:03 pm: |
|
AP, just as a piece of pure speculation : I don't know if Birke was Jewish, but if he was, and a Polish Jew Ripper read about the case and had his pride offended, then this might explain
1. The site of Kate's murder
2. The meaning of the graffito
3. The Lusk letter (although it was the wrong Lusk, and the right Lusk had been on the defendant's side).
Robert
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4596
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 3:13 pm: |
|
By the way, what were Kearley and Tonge doing with a champagne case? Their tea must have been strong.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2239
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 5:15 pm: |
|
Robert
I would assume that the empty champagne case was awaiting transformation from such to a tea packing case. As you will know there was an entire industry in Whitechapel involved in remaking such wooden cases for the tea trade, a few of Jack's victims were slaughtered at such establishments.
I enjoy your speculation very much, but as you know, I drink stronger stuff than champagne, and almost never speculate, but your post makes a lot more common sense than much I have read lately on these boards.
Perhaps when Morris referred to a turnip he really meant a parsnip, and then of course we would have to rewrite history. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4597
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 - 6:13 pm: |
|
AP, thought you might appreciate this from the Old Bailey Sep 15th 1779 :
French. He never was out late the whole time he lodged with me. He worked for Mr. Davis at the same time. I never knew him steal a turnip. I have asked him several times to bring a turnip home, but he would not.
NOT GUILTY.
Tried by the First Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM
Robert |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2114
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 4:29 am: |
|
Robert,
What a gem!
In terms of the research into the Law and Order of those times that you and AP are doing its
fascinating to see how things very gradually evolved towards a fairer judicial system concurrent with very gradual socio-economic improvement especially for the poorest classes after the 1880"s!
Many Thanks for that Robert,absolutely brilliant stuff!
Natalie
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4598
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 7:41 am: |
|
Thanks Natalie - but AP does the law and order research ; I do the turnips. 
Robert |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1732
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 7:42 am: |
|
Dave,
Morris really had no idea what was happening outside his door that night, IMO
Well no, he wouldnt have had a clue. He was inside all night. The only night in the week he would have been in the warehouse all night.
Monty
I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die.
|
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 386
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 7:43 am: |
|
A.P., Robert & Natalie,
Wasn't "a turnip" street argot for a gold watch?
And if Sir Andrew Lusk was linked to the nextdoor premises to Kerley & Tonge,then, quite possibly, he may have been related to George Lusk.
Dockers in Australia used to make up wonderful nick-names for their fellow workers: one was called "The Judge", because he was "always sitting on a case" !
I agree with Natalie, wonderful cases unearthed by A P and Robert.Thanks. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4599
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 8:16 am: |
|
Thanks for that, John.
Re turnip, if Morris was talking about a gold watch, then the only way I can see the passage making sense is if the newspaper misreported him and his actual words were "I have known the person convicted for stealing a turnip."
That would involve Lusk and Morris talking at cross-purposes. Interesting!
Robert |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4600
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 8:30 am: |
|
I said newspaper, I meant record-keeper. I'm used to the "Times" !
Robert |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 940
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 8:35 am: |
|
Hi Monty,
I'm not sure I'm following. I think I've seen you write that the Ripper might have had an eye on the police beats in the square. Do you think he kept track of Morris's smoking habits too? If so, that's a lot to keep in your head, and it implies that it was the Ripper who chose the murder sites (otherwise I guess he would have had to known the beat of every P.C. in Whitechapel and Spitalfields).
To me, Morris is the same sort as Cadosch or Richardson. I don't know whether his not being noticed was dumb luck, or if he had some street smarts (or relied on that of his victims'). Maybe both. I think he looks smarter than he really was though--I think he nearly got caught every time.
Hi A.P.
Try Albert Bachert, he's good reading.
Cheers,
Dave |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1733
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 8:55 am: |
|
Dave,
Morris had a smoke outside, in (if that makes sense) the square, every other night apart from the one night in the week. The night Eddowes was murdered. So he watched the square for a period almost every night. This is maybe how he came about Birke in the case AP mentions.
As for Jack studying the beat and movements, Im not so sure he did this. However, if Jack did watch the square then either he studied it for weeks or (and more likely if this scenario is correct) he watched Watkins and the square from 9.45pm (the time Watkins started his beat). My reasons for this is because Watkins himself stated he was working left handed and indicated that this route was rarely used. Harvey was working left handed also which to me shows that these beat PCs had orders to work their beats that way.
As the PCs wouldnt know which way they were working their beats until just prior to the commencement I think its logical to state that either Jack studied the beats from 9.45pm or he just got plain lucky.
Personally? I favour the later.
Reagrds,
Monty
I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die.
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 941
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 9:22 am: |
|
Thanks, Monty. That is an interesting scenario, although I favor good (or in this case, bad) old luck. Think about it, you've not only got to watch for police and Morris, but the people who lived in the square, too. Assuming he wasn't watching for days, how'd he know someone wouldn't come home, leave home or wake up? Then all his time watching the police would have been for nothing. And done in the rain to boot
Maybe I am wrong about it being just a case of city people wearing blinders, but I bet old law-and-order Morris felt pretty stupid as he watched the City Police carry out their investigation. He probably pondered on that over many a pipe, just like Albert Cadosch could never go to the bathroom again without wondering "what if".
Cheers,
Dave |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2240
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 1:56 pm: |
|
Important to remember here that the killer 'may' have actually worked for K&T at some time, and may well have known the good and bad habits of the watchman Morris.
Also worth a mention is Uncle Charles; and again I refer to Robert's important posting where he demonstrated conclusively that Charles Henry Cutbush was responsible for the detailed reporting of and organisation of police beats in the Whitechapel area. |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 942
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 2:09 pm: |
|
Thank you, A.P. I will check out the Cutbush thread as I also hold Robert in high regard!
Cheers,
Dave |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2241
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 2:17 pm: |
|
No worries, Dave
I'm a bit lost to your reference to Albert Bachert?
Is he fun to read, you mean?
Because if so I shall chase him.
Robert
you say turnip
and I say parsnip...
thanks for the delightful little case. |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 943
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 2:29 pm: |
|
Hi A.P.
Sorry, I just meant if you thought Morris's two appearances in The Times as an odd radar blip, you might be interested in the numerous instances Bachert found his way into the Ripper investigation. He's got a few threads around here.
Dave |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2243
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 2:40 pm: |
|
Now I put my brandy glass down, I see what you mean.
I shall get back to you with these radar blips.
Has Bachert got enough threads to put a fly button back on me trousers, cos' they just fell down. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2115
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 3:14 pm: |
|
Sometimes you sound like Max Wall!Hope you have now got yourself together AP!
I was a bit disturbed by what you were saying about Abberline.I know he is thought to have done a bit of "covering up"-for example about the Cleveland Street scandal but I actually didnt think that Abberline in particular spent a lot of his time being less than economical with the truth.
Legend has it that Abberline was very popular with a lot of folk in the East End who used to confide in him etc.
Another thing about him is he appears to have shared the Commisioners Office at Scotland Yard with Charles Cutbush.This I found in the records at Kew.I smiled when I read it bec ause I couldnt see Abberline taking kindly to a lot of bull from Cutbush about papist plots and poisoned water supplies!
It kind of disturbs my image of him as a heroic,hands on detective,sweating his guts out night and day
on this baffling case, while his superiors went on holiday or prepared notes for their memoirs
like the Victorian lounge lizards most of them seem to have been!
Abberline has always struck me as the hero of the Jack the Ripper case so I"m a bit reluctant to accept all this stuff about him.
Natalie |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2244
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 4:14 pm: |
|
Sorry Natalie
but what the judge had to say about Abberline in the Cleveland Street Scandal was very damning.
I agree with you that prior to that he had been a superb 'hands-on' police officer, and he probably was after that, but he had put his reputation on the line, probably under pressure from his peers and superiors, but that does mean he may well have done it again in the Ripper case.
My private impression has always been that Abberline would have been absolutely terrified of uncle Charles.
I'm not prepared to accept that there was a 'hero' of this case, on the contrary I tend to think we deal with a bunch of villians.
But your defence of a long dead cop is commendable; and somehow I hope you might be right. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2116
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 4:34 pm: |
|
I am chuckling now AP.You are probably right, you know,they probably were!
Dont get me wrong-its what I WANT to believe
here rather than what was most likely the case!
It fits the Saturday afternoon Cowies at the local flea pit where as kids we always had a hero and a villain[or sometimes a heroine-Doris Day-and a villainess Spider Woman!]and boy did we cheer and boo all afternoon!
Old habits die hard!
Natalie |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2245
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 5:33 pm: |
|
Thanks Natalie
I'm sure that somewhere along the line we will find a hero to appease those long lost days when we used to stamp our feet at the Saturday afternoon flea pit.
I did it as well.
Meanwhile can anyone get a better date of birth for our Morris than 1834?
You see I want him born a little bit earlier than that, for that would make him 54 in 1888, and I want him to be 61 in 1888.
Did police officers really retire at 48 in the LVP? For he is supposed to have retired in 1882.
I'd like to see about eight years added to that.
Then I have the worm. |
Ditto
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 10:18 pm: |
|
Hi
The East London Advertiser Sat Oct 6 1888 describes George James Morris as a "naval pensioner".
Is this information incorrect?
I ask because A.P.Wolf, in a posting Sun June 26 2005 states, "Morris was a retired police officer"
There are several men named George Morris recorded in the 1881 Census as serving in the Royal Navy.
There is also more than one George Morris recorded as a Police Constable.
There are also some other interesting possibilities for him if he were to be neither former Police nor Navy.
Is there a primary source stating George Morris to be a retired police officer?
Thanks for your help.
Kind Regards Di |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2250
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 5:20 pm: |
|
The press reports describe George Morris as a retired police officer, this comes out in witness testimony a number of times at inquest.
I'm still looking at this.
Thank you for the quote from the East London Advertiser.
It is entirely possible that witness Morris was both. A copper and a salty dog.
If he did retire from the police force at the age of 48 it was probably through the same injury that he retired as a jolly jack tar some ten or twenty years earlier.
This would seem to fit his character. |
Simon Owen
Inspector
Username: Simonowen
Post Number: 217
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 8:51 pm: |
|
Well , there is still no evidence to support the statement in the first post :
" I think this Morris was a pile of dung and we cannot rely on his witness statements at all. "
Lusk may have not liked Morris , but it is mere speculation that he did not trust him. Similarly , it is speculation to assume that Morris was lying about his level of vigilance on the night of the Double Event because if he had been alert he would have spotted something. Not necessarily so.
Similarly again with Abberline : in the Cleveland Street Case he was placed in a very difficult position in relation to the Establishment , I don't see that this necessarily has any relation to the way he might have acted in the Ripper case. |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 387
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 7:31 am: |
|
Calling A P Wolf:
Some years ago, a poster, whose name I've forgotten, drew our attention to the following site:
<<http://www.lightage.demon.co.uk>>
I accidented upon it again recently.
Several of the people you are interested in: Superintendent Cutbush (Metro. Scot Yd. Presentation ((two mentions)) 1887; Suicide 1896);
George James Morris, Watchman,( Kearley & Tonge; and at Mitre Square, 1888); John George Littlechild, Scot. Yd.,(Evidence 1867, 1877; Rewarded 1883; Interview & Career of,1893;Intervie
1896);P.C. Long, Metro H,(JTR Case 1888).
This extraordinary site includes comprehensive Police Indexes; Black Sheep Indexes; Railway Indexes; Great War & World War Two Indexes.
The dates cited refer to public press mentions of these individuals.
I am not sure if I have got it correctly, but if you contact the Home Site and (pay a fee?)they will send you details of the newspaper or other reference. At least from the Black Sheep Index. Very useful.
Put it in your "Favourites" list.
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4610
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 8:53 am: |
|
Thanks John. The link doesn't seem to work. Maybe this one will :
http://www.lightage.demon.co.uk/
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2251
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 1:41 pm: |
|
Thanks also John.
I have actually used the 'Black Sheep Index' a couple of times, they tracked down CH Cutbush's obituary for me, and his award of fifty of sovereigns... at a very reasonable price as well.
So they come highly recommended.
But I will check the entire site out again.
Simon
you are most likely right about Morris, I guess I might have been too damning.
As I said I'd still like a bit more information about him, as I just might have caught him with his finger in the till.
But I'll hold fire with that until I know that I am absolutely correct. |
Ditto
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 7:03 pm: |
|
Hi
A.P.Wolf
Thanks for your reply.
Here are two entries for George Morris in the 1881 Census both of them are Police Constables, but I suspect perhaps too young for the Morris you are searching for.
1)George Morris born 1849 Colnbrooke Middlesex
Police Constable
Kentish Town Rd Police Station
2)George Morris born 1853 Maidstone Kent
Police Constable
16 Lawn Rd
You might also be interested in two others. I found their places of residence interesting.
1) George Morris (1849) born Shefield
Labourer
Lodger
Head Mary Crossingham
Dorset St 16,17,18,19 Common Lodging House
2)George Morris (1847)born London Middlesex
Dock Labourer
31 New Buildings George Yard
married Wife Maria(49)
Children Caroline (4)
George (3)
Annie (1)
It has to be admitted that hunting for George Morris is as frustrating as hunting for other common named contemporaries.
It never ceases to amaze what odd coincidences continually pop up!
Thanks also John Ruffels the site you refer to seems interesting.
Regards Di |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2256
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 1:14 pm: |
|
Thanks Di
Yes, you are right, it can become very frustrating when searching for a particular individual when that individual has a very common name.
Good old Crossinghams of Dorset Street!
Your efforts are greatly appreciated.
I'll check all those you mention, but I fear all are too young for what I seek. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
