|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Fixed Point Duty.
Casebook Message Boards: Police Officials: General Discussion:
Fixed Point Duty.
Author: The Viper
Sunday, 24 December 2000 - 06:10 am |        | Ever wondered what this was all about? Apparently it was a means by which members of the public could find a policeman in a hurry if they needed to, rather than chasing through the streets hoping to catch one on his beat. Fixed locations were set aside at which a policeman could be found at peak times - usually evenings.
The following is taken from Dickens’s Dictionary of London 1888 – An Unconventional Handbook, originally published by the great author’s son and now reissued by Old House Books, price £10.99
The information below doesn’t include all the fixed points policed by H Division, rather a selection of those most immediately relevant to the area of the Ripper murders.
"Fixed Points (Police). – The under-mentioned places are appointed as fixed points where a police constable is to be permanently stationed from 9 p.m. to 1 a.m.
In the event of any person springing a rattle, or persistently ringing a bell in the street or in an area, the police will at once proceed to the spot and render assistance.
H or WHITECHAPEL DIVISION.
Junction of Brick-lane and Bethnal-green-road
junction of Christian-street and Commercial-road
Commercial-road-east, corner of Bromehead-street
Commercial-street, Spitalfields, corner of Thrawl-st
Flower and Dean-st and Brick-lane, Spitalfields, end of
George-yd, High-st Whitechapel, end of
Great Garden-st and Whitechapel-rd, opposite end of
Hanbury-st, corner of Deal-st
Leman-st, Commercial-st, and High-st Whitechapel, junction of
Spitalfields Church
Upper East Smithfield, principal entrance London Docks
Well-st, Whitechapel, opposite Sailor’s Home
Whitechapel Church".
Note also that J Division had a fixed point in the Whitechapel Road, directly in front of the East London Railway Station.
Regards, V. |
Author: Christopher T George
Sunday, 24 December 2000 - 09:43 am | | Hi, Viper:
It sounds as if from Dickens’s Dictionary of London 1888 – An Unconventional Handbook is a resource that would be useful for us Ripperologists. Thanks for the tip.
All the best to you for the season!
Chris George |
Author: Jon
Sunday, 24 December 2000 - 10:06 am | | I'll not bother digging for references now but wasn't there a policeman on point duty at the Market on the morning of Chapmans murder?
I seem to recall him being approached but could not render assistance as he was on point duty.
(cannot leave his station)
Which raises the question, "what was the point?"
Jon
(no pun intended) |
Author: The Viper
Sunday, 24 December 2000 - 11:31 am | | Jon,
Henry John Holland was the man who testified "I then went for a policeman in Spitalfields Market. The officer told me he could not come." (All quotes taken from the Daily Telegraph).
After double checking the book I can confirm that Spitalfields Market doesn't feature in the fixed point list. There is no obvious reason why other than just an error or oversight, but possible alternatives could be:-
1). That the newly extended Spitalfields Market building, which was only completed in 1887, could have been a newly introduced fixed point. OR
2). That the policeman assigned to the market was not officially on a fixed point duty, but was still forbidden to leave the general market structure. On first examination this doesn't square with the Coroner's comment "There does not seem to have been much delay. The inspector says there are certain spots where constables are stationed with instructions not to leave them. Their duty is to send some one else." OR
3). That Spitalfields Market was separately policed. Smithfield, Billingsgate and Leadenhall Markets were all controlled by the Corporation of London. However, the market area was physically outside the City confines (just). I've never seen anything to indicate that Spitalfields Market was administered by the City of London, and so am inclined to discount this possibility unless somebody knows otherwise.
Chris, the book lives up to its name - unconventional. It contains a few useful snippets but isn't worth buying for those interested exclusively in Ripper material.
Seasonal Regards, V. |
Author: stephen stanley
Sunday, 24 December 2000 - 04:52 pm | | Certainly in the 1960's Spitalfields market had it's own market police....my Dad was one....not sure who administered them...must ask him.
Steve S. |
Author: stephen stanley
Monday, 25 December 2000 - 03:32 pm | | Checked this out... yep,was administerered by the City of London, (hic!!!)merry xmas
Steve S. |
Author: The Viper
Monday, 25 December 2000 - 05:56 pm | | Good work, Stephen. Can we assume then that your father was in the City Police, as opposed to the Met?
Regards, V. |
Author: Christopher T George
Monday, 25 December 2000 - 07:43 pm | | Hi Viper & Stephen:
I think one of the things that is possibly confusing to people new to the case, and to non-Londoners and non-residents of Britain, is the distinction between the City Police, Scotland Yard, and the Metropolitan Police. I believe the latter two police bodies were one and the same, but it might be good for one of you, or someone else, say, Mr. Evans or Mr. Fido, to give everyone a seminar on either this board or on a new board, on the distinctions between the police entities who had involvement in the case. Any takers? Thank you in advance!
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: Leanne Perry
Monday, 25 December 2000 - 08:23 pm | | G'day everyone,
Sorry I haven't been reading the boards much lately. I have just written a story for 'Ripperoo' explaining this:
The 'Metropolitan Police' was responsible for all of London, (including Whitechapel), excluding the city. All but one Ripper body was found within this jurisdiction.
The 'City of London Police' was reponsible for for an area 'roughly a square mile north of London Bridge'. This area was considered the 'administrative area' of London city. Mitre Square fell in this jurisdiction.
LEANNE! |
Author: The Viper
Tuesday, 26 December 2000 - 11:41 am | | Chris,
Whether this is the best place to clarify matters is debatable, but you make a fair point. Readers outside the UK must find it hard to understand all the different police forces and bodies referred to. I suspect this applies particularly to the distinction between London and the City of London which everyday logic might suggest are one and the same, but which are not.
Let’s take the police first and no doubt those with far greater knowledge will correct any errors here. Policing in Britain is divided up among a large number of different forces by area. The different counties and large conurbations each have their own force. London, (population about 5 million in 1888, 7.5 million today) has its own which is known as the Metropolitan Police. The exception is one tiny area to which we will return later. Each police force has two basic sub-divisions - the uniform branch and the CID (Criminal Investigation Department). Uniform provides the traditional interface with the public, patrolling the streets and attending reported incidents of crime. Thereafter proven instances of crime are often handed over to the detectives who comprise CID for investigation. Their function is to follow up and track down the miscreants who have not been arrested in the immediate aftermath of the incident.
With such a large population to cover, the Metropolitan Police force is sub-divided by district. Hence we meet mainly H Division (a.k.a. Whitechapel Division) in the Ripper case. Their area stretched eastwards from the City border to cover part of Aldgate, Spitalfields, St. George’s-in-the-East and the bulk of Whitechapel. We also find references to J Division (or Bethnal Green Division), especially concerning Polly Nichols who was murdered on their patch. J Division covered a huge geographical area stretching from around Whitechapel Station out north-east all the way into the county of Essex. Each of these Divisions was comprised of uniformed and CID officers, the CID men being experienced local policemen who knew the area and its villains well. The Divisional Inspector for H Division was Edmund Reid, who dealt with eight out of the eleven cases in the Whitechapel Murders file, since the murders took place on H’s patch.
Additionally there was a central CID which could be brought into high profile cases across all areas. It was based in the Westminster area (near to the administration seat of London). This became known as 'Scotland Yard' after the location of its offices. Scotland Yard’s experienced team of detectives included men with specialist knowledge of particular areas. Inspector Frederick Abberline was assigned to the Whitechapel murders from the Yard because of his extensive knowledge of the Whitechapel area – he having once been its Divisional Inspector.
The small area not covered by the Metropolitan Police was the City of London, which had its own police force, among many other privileges. To understand the reasons for this it is necessary to look briefly at the capital’s history. Modern London is a vast urban sprawl, but originally 'Londinium' as founded by the Romans was in a very contained area of roughly one square mile north of London Bridge, as Leanne has stated. Around AD200 this was reinforced when a 20 ft. high defensive wall was erected around the city, enclosing about 330 acres. At different times this wall would fall into disrepair and be rebuilt, until it and the seven gates were finally dismantled as superfluous in the mid-eighteenth century. Such a barrier did the wall present to invaders that in 1066 the victorious Norman ruler, William The Conqueror, agreed to give the city special privileges which it had enjoyed under the Saxons in exchange for its peaceful occupation. The City has made use of these rights ever since, and has ruthlessly exploited its huge wealth to extract further concessions. (Monarchs from the Normans to the Stuarts were always short of cash). Even though by the eighteenth century the neighbouring city of Westminster to the west had been connected by ribbon developments to create one huge, expanded city which we would recognise as modern London, the so-called "Square Mile" has retained its own unique system of government to this day. This includes the poste of Lord Mayor (currently David Howard), which is an entirely separate office to the recently created position of Mayor of London which covers the rest of the capital (Ken Livingstone). Hence when you see references to the City of London in books it means something very specific – not the whole of London but the tiny historic core (which over time has been extended beyond the old walls both to the east and west a little), with its own administration. The latter includes the right to its own police force. Another of its powers is the administration of some of the old London markets - which is where this topic started.
The old City wall in the eastern quarter originally ran along the line of the eastern pavement of Duke Street. By 1888 the border went through Middlesex Street. So when JTR took Catherine Eddowes to Mitre Square to murder her, he was inside the City of London and therefore acting within an area covered by the City Police. As a result Eddowes’ body was taken to a different mortuary and her inquest was held by the City’s own coroner, Mr. S. F. Langham. The investigation of her case was the responsibility of the City of London Police under the control of Major H. Smith as the acting Commissioner. Thus on the night of the Double Event, Jack was able to exploit the inevitable confusion caused by having two different police forces following up two different murders.
I hope this clarifies some of the distinctions a bit, but if it doesn’t it’s somebody else’s turn anyway.
Regards, V. |
Author: Scott Nelson
Tuesday, 26 December 2000 - 07:24 pm | | | Viper, did the City line continue south along Mansell St., making that zig-zag pattern throughout Butcher's Row? (Ref. 1894 Aldgate Map) |
Author: Christopher T George
Tuesday, 26 December 2000 - 11:09 pm | | Hi, Viper:
Thank you so much for your very informative discourse on the different police jurisdictions. I am sure it has helped clarify things for many of us.
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: The Viper
Wednesday, 27 December 2000 - 05:27 am | | Scott,
The City boundary does follow the line of Mansell Street today but it didn’t at the time of the Whitechapel Murders. According to Godfrey’s reproduction map of Aldgate 1873-94 (sheet 7.67) the northern section of Mansell Street as far as Great Alie St. was inside the City, but the boundary then ran back east towards Minories leaving the remainder of the street outside it. The reason is complex, being related to the historic privileges accorded to certain monastic lands in the Middle Ages. E-mail me privately if you want to know more about that subject – it isn’t relevant background material to the case and doesn’t belong on these boards. All of Aldgate High Street, including the section known as Butcher’s Row was inside the City, though the properties on the south side fell into two different parishes. The civic boundaries of the area were a complete mess.
Regards, V. |
Author: Caroline Anne Morris
Wednesday, 27 December 2000 - 05:54 am | | Hi All,
Viper, you wrote:
'Thus on the night of the Double Event, Jack was able to exploit the inevitable confusion caused by having two different police forces following up two different murders.'
I seem to recall that, before computerisation, different police forces around the country were often handicapped in similar ways when a criminal was operating in more than one area. Practical difficulties, such as old-fashioned filing systems, were not helped by any rivalry and competition between police areas, leading to a lack of vital co-operation and co-ordination of information.
If Jack did kill both Stride and Eddowes, it does make you wonder again if playing funny little games with the police was all part of the thrill for him. Was he actually being very organised, perhaps helped by considerable knowledge, not only of the coppers' beats, but of the way the investigation(s) would be handled? Was Jack's primary intention that night to engage the two separate forces? If so, we'd have to look at Stride's murder and see if it fits with Jack having the City in his sights and on his mind at the time.
Love,
Caz |
Author: The Viper
Wednesday, 27 December 2000 - 12:10 pm | | As with anything it would be dangerous to discount that idea completely, Caz, but it sounds very unlikely to me. There remains the possibility that the Mitre Square murderer, whether he killed Stride or not, may have been aware of police activity in the Commercial Road locality. However, to suggest further that he chose deliberately to kill in an area under different police administration requires something of a leap of faith, in my view. True, it made no sense to look for a victim in the immediate area where the bluebottles were buzzing about, but I can’t help feeling that the powers of organisation and clear thinking sometimes attributed to the Ripper are overstated, and that these just add to the myth.
Regards, V. |
Author: stephen stanley
Wednesday, 27 December 2000 - 05:03 pm | | Just to add to the confusion....The market Police (in the 60's,anyway) were a seperate body responsible for enforcement of market bye-laws etc, and part of neither the Met,or the City police,although administered by the City corporation.
Steve. S. |
Author: The Viper
Wednesday, 27 December 2000 - 06:06 pm | | Thanks for finding those things out, Stephen. Enquiries this end are none too helpful either. They suggest that Spitalfields Market was an independent concern until bought by the Corporation of London in 1920 and redeveloped, re-opening in 1928. Interestingly part of that redevelopment included the northern side of Dorset Street. Jon’s original point is therefore still valid. The policeman collared by Holland probably was a Met. man, but his fixed posting was either missed by the Dickens' Almanac or else he either wasn’t officially on 'fixed point' duty (perhaps because he was detailed to walk about, but was consigned to the market area?). Whilst it would be good to draw a firm conclusion about this detail, we haven’t done so far and it's probably of no consequence – as the coroner himself implied.
Regards, V. |
Author: Caroline Anne Morris
Thursday, 28 December 2000 - 06:10 am | | Hi Viper,
I hear exactly what you are saying (in your post of 12.10pm) and find myself agreeing with your final sentence. It was just your words about Jack being 'able to exploit the inevitable confusion' which led me to speculate on what other specialised knowledge or skills our man might have possessed and used (aside from the oft-discussed medical ones), along with the luck, enabling him to do what he did and get away with it. We have discussed elsewhere the likelihood of Jack being entirely at home in the area in which he chose to operate, which in itself implies some planning, even for walking a short distance from his lodgings, armed with his knife, and grabbing at the next reasonable chance of killing and making it safely home again. I suppose my speculation is on the degree of planning, and knowledge of the local people/police and their movements etc, Jack needed - in addition to luck - to make it safely home again every time.
Sorry, V, I guess this should have been posted to a different topic - I got a bit carried away.
Love,
Caz |
Author: stephen stanley
Saturday, 30 December 2000 - 12:40 pm | | Just a thought..As a firm suscriber to the cock-up school of history...maybe the 'point' officer was nearing the end of his shift (06:00) and looked for any excuse not to get involved ?....
P.S. as I've mentioned before,following the redevelopment Market staff were very dubious about entering the Friut Exchange (built over Dorset St.),during the hours of darkness.
Steve S. |
Author: The Viper
Sunday, 31 December 2000 - 06:40 am | | Stephen,
My first reaction when reading your comment was "But the fixed point duties ceased at 1 o'clock in the morning". A quick search revealed the following from the testimony of PC Lamb, as reported in the Daily Telegraph for 3rd October. It appeared to confirm the 1 a.m. time.
"I was coming towards Berner-street. A constable named Smith was on the Berner-street beat. He did not accompany me, but the constable who was on fixed-point duty between Grove-street and Christian-street in Commercial-road. Constables at fixed-points leave duty at one in the morning. I believe that is the practice nearly all over London."
Now read this version of Lamb's words from The Times of the same date:-
"When I was fetched I was going in the direction of Berner-street. Constable Smith is on the Berner-street beat. The constable who followed me down is on fixed-point duty from 9 to 5 at the end of Grove-street. All the fixed-point men ceased their duty at 1 a.m., and then the men on the beats did the whole duty."
This statement looks rather contradictory and if anybody can explain that "9 to 5" reference it would be appreciated.
Nevertheless, you make a worthwhile point about the time of shift changeover. If memory serves, some reference was made to this with regard to the Chapman murder.
Regards, V. |
Author: Ashling
Monday, 01 January 2001 - 09:25 am | | VIPER:
How's this? 9 am - 5 pm = an 8 hour shift. The next shift might run from 5 pm - 1 am, which would also equal an 8 hour shift ... And Lamb meant no one on the 2nd shift worked past 1 am.
Why the Grove Street copper would hang about the vicinity of his fixed duty point so many hours after he got off work is anyone's guess ... It's my understanding that during the Autumn of Terror some cops patrolled the streets during their off time--hoping to snare Jack.
Ashling |
Author: The Viper
Monday, 01 January 2001 - 03:40 pm | | Ashling,
Whilst your interpretation that it refers to a shift sounds promising, it would imply 9 p.m. to 5 a.m. surely? That would make sense if Lamb was trying to say that the officer concerned was on that stint, but that he went off fixed point duty at 1 o'clock to do some other work for the remainder of his shift.
Regards, V. |
Author: Simon Owen
Monday, 01 January 2001 - 06:33 pm | | Viper , I wonder if it would be possible to print the ISBN of the Dicken's Diary of 1888 book , as I would like to obtain a copy.
Simon |
Author: The Viper
Tuesday, 02 January 2001 - 04:05 am | | | The book is Dickens's Dictionary of London, published by Old House Books of Sutton Mead, Moretonhampstead, Devon, TQ13 8PW. ISBN is 1-873590-04-0 |
Author: stephen stanley
Tuesday, 02 January 2001 - 04:30 pm | | My idea's based on two suppostitions:
1) Shifts ran 06:00-14:00,14:00-22:00,& 22:00-06:00 (I know this was the pattern more recently in some forces)
2) The officer lied when he said he was on point duty...he was dawdling while waiting for the end of shift..this could all be complete rubbish,of course,but it's worth a thought
Steve S. |
Author: Martin Fido
Saturday, 06 January 2001 - 01:41 am | | Harking back to the question of the Spitalfields Market fixed point: if the officer allocated to Spitalfields Church was stationed in the middle of Commercial Street and was sent or drifted to a position toward the north side of Dorset Street, with the Britannia and the Ten Bells on either side of him, a layman unfamiliar with the way the police described the point might have described it as Spitalfields Market. The new buildings (dated to this day) had gone up just north of the Britannia.
Martin Fido |
Author: stephen stanley
Saturday, 06 January 2001 - 02:46 pm | | Valid point(ouch!),Martin,
Thinking about it,anyone entering Commercial St. from the east might well say they were at the Market.
Steve S. |
Author: John Dixon
Saturday, 06 January 2001 - 02:50 pm | | Ashling perhaps your man simply lived or socialised locally. I can see the dayshift man that just happens to be handy being referred to in the way Vipers articles say.
John |
Author: Ashling
Tuesday, 09 January 2001 - 06:43 am | | Hi everyone.
Viper--No, our minds are running in different directions. My thinking is a possible typo or mis-quote in one of the articles. I can't get the articles to match otherwise.
John--Yes, quite possibly so.
Isn't there a way to determine the regular hours of police shifts in 1888? Am I naive in thinking the info might be found in the files still available to us ... just not deemed of extreme importance by previous researchers?
Ashling |
|
|
|
|
