EIGHT undetected murders in one small district at the East-end, and more to follow. One ghastly murder and mutilation in the West-end to which there is no clue, and so far, while many innocent persons have been arrested, the murderers are still at large. There have been at least nine women murdered in London within ten months, under every circumstance of savage and fiendish atrocity, and the police are utterly at fault. Sir CHARLES WARREN'S policy of subordinating the detective department to the soldier's does not seem to be rewarded by the success which so brilliant and original a mode of strategy ought to command.
Of the latest, but not the last, of the murders in the East-end we need say little. The murderer seems on this occasion to have selected a younger victim, and to have profited by the security of a locked room to indulge to a much greater extent than on any previous occasion in his mania for mutilation. Short of absolutely skinning his next victim from head to heel, it is difficult to see what fresh horror is left for him to commit. There is, of course, absolutely no means of preventing such a murder as this in the little room of an unfortunate. The woman invites the murderer into an apartment into which no one has a right to intrude. The certainty that no one will interfere, no matter what shouts and shrieks may be heard, is one of the indispensable conditions for carrying on her ghastly business, and in all probability she herself locked the door before reducing herself to the position of a living victim ready for this fiend's post-mortem. We publish in the next column a very ingenious theory by a correspondent in Manchester, who contends that the murderer is a Malay who seeks to avenge the loss of his savings by the persistent murder of women of the class who robbed him. It may be so. But for our part the details of the latest crime seem to point in another direction. The libertine is ruthless enough even when sane, but a debauchee gone mad with excess, possessed by a passion for blood super-added to the mere brutal instinct from which that passion springs, is one of the most appalling, although by no means the most unfamiliar phenomena in the annals of crime.
The Times, although it thinks it right to lecture Sir CHARLES WARREN and Mr MATTHEWS as to their paramount duty, says there is much more practical occupation than abuse of people who cannot create evidence. Certainly there is, and one of the most practical steps is to remove the man who, after having destroyed the machinery for the detection of crime, actually destroyed the only fragment of evidence by which a clue might have been obtained as to the identity of the murderer. Sir CHARLES WARREN'S exploits as Detective-General are limited to (1) the quarrelling with Mr MONRO, (2) the purchase of bloodhounds, which, as if mockery, vanished as mysteriously as the murderer; and (3) the erasing of the murderer's writing on the wall, for fear that this clue to the crime might cause a crowd to assemble. Of course, if Mr MATTHEWS chooses to prejudice the Conservative cause in London by allying it with this hopeless and conspicuous failure, he can do so for a little longer. But the tale of the murders is not yet complete. There will be more murders yet, and each fresh murder will increase the pressure of public indignation on the Home Office. The Daily Telegraph to-day remarks that:-
"Sir CHARLES WARREN has abounded in the qualities which it was desirable that he should possess only in moderation, and he has been signally lacking in qualities of which it is impossible to have too much. The result is failure fraught with the gravest danger to the public. The position, it is fair to admit, does not wholly owe its disastrous aspect to the Chief Commissioner of Police. It has been made infinitely worse by what we have called the helpless and heedless ineptitude of the Home Secretary. The Home Secretary is even more out of his element in White-hall than he is in the House of Commons. If he has failed to win conscience or popularity among his fellow-members of the Legislature, he has failed even more signally to secure the goodwill and respect of the people, whose wants and ways he labours under a fatal inability to understand. No man is fit for Mr MATTHEWS'S position who has not realized the value of such qualities as tact and sympathy in dealing with public complaints. Never to get an answer from the Minister who is mainly, or wholly, concerned in these matters, except that "he fails to see" this, or "cannot understand" that, or "sees no reason to alter his views", about the other, is simply exasperating to the English mind, and certain, eventually, to beget in it the strongest determination to put an end as soon as possible to such a Minister's authority.
Nine murders may fail to bring Mr MATTHEWS to a sense of duty. But ten may open his eyes, and if the tenth fails the eleventh or the twelfth may work the required change. For in this case we have only to wait long enough for the impunity which is now extended to murder in London to overwhelm both the Chief Commissioner and the Home Secretary beneath an ever accumulating pile of murdered victims.
NEARLY a month ago we received a long letter from Manchester setting forth a theory of the Whitechapel murders which seemed to us more ingenious and plausible than any of the others which have been ventilated in the press. The public, however, was surfeited with suggestions, and we laid the letter on one side to see if the next murder would verify our correspondent's hypothesis. This morning we received the following letter from him, which we print as an introduction to his letter of October 18, commending the whole to the attentive consideration of Scotland-yard:-
Sir - You will see that the theory re London murders being the work of a Malay serving in some sailing vessel sailing and returning to port for the latter end and first part of the month appears corroborated also as regards the latter part of the week, when such a man would get liberty on shore: - Friday, August 31 - Saturday, September 30, Saturday, September 8 - Friday, November 9, almost to the days. If for the previous murders he is to be held accountable we have August 7, 1888, and also April 3; the rule as to early part of month hold good. I much regret you did not think fit to publishing my letter. I was only remarking to day that if my theory was correct it was time for another murder, when the newsboy shouted out in the street. - Yours faithfully,
Manchester, Nov. 9, 1888.
MALAYSIA.
Here is the letter referred to:-
Allow me to suggest that the solution of the London mysteries lies in the fact that you have a Malay "running a-muck" amongst s certain section of the community there.
First, let us consider the Malay nature as described by authorities:-
"The Malay race are extremely vindictive, treacherous, and ferocious, implacable in their revenge, and on the slightest provocation, or imaginary insult, will commit murder. When bent of revenge they scarcely ever fail of wreaking their vengeance.
Many shocking murders have been committed by Malays to gratify their thirst of revenge, which nothing but blood will satisfy, though at the certain loss of their own lives.
How strongly marked this revengeful spirit is, is best shown by the following: - A Malay conceiving himself injured by his master, murdered a fellow-slave. He admitted that the boy was his friend, but that he had conceived that the most effectual way of being revenged on his master was not by taking his (the master's life), but by robbing him of 1,000 rix-dollars, the value of the murdered boy, and another 1,000 by bringing himself to the gallows - the recollection of which loss would prey on his (the master's) avaricious mind for the rest of his life.
A Malay thinks himself wronged by society, or he is bankrupt and cannot pay his debts, or otherwise. He will be revenged; he grasps his Kris handle and stabs a man in the heart, and runs on, stabbing at everyone he meets, until the cry of alarm and warning, 'Amok, amok!' being raised, he in turn is stabbed or otherwise despatched. Hence it is called running a-muck. Which is, in fact, the Malay fashion of committing suicide. He knows that death must be his immediate lot, but he only wants to score as many victims as possible to his own steel before he is killed on the spot fighting, and not reserved for death on the gallows.
These vicious attributes are hereditary and apparently ineradicable.
Now by the light of this, and with the aid of the lucid summary of the murders in Lloyd's News of 7th October, let us try and put together a story of what might have been.
An English seaman who, sailor-like, fixes the date thereabouts by that of his arrival in England - namely, August 13 - states that some time subsequent to this date, he met in an East-end music-hall a Malay cook (which term cook also includes butcher, in which business than the Malay none are more dexterous and quick - he seems born to use of the knife), who tells him that he has been robbed of two years' savings by a woman of the town, and failing finding the thief he would murder and mutilate as many of the class as he could lay his hands on.
Here then is the wrong, and a greater one, to a Malay, than robbing him of his hard earned savings it is impossible to imagine. Anyhow subsequent to this meeting on Friday, August 31, such a woman is murdered and mutilated.
On Saturday, September 8, another of the same class meets an identical fate.
And again, Saturday-night - Sunday-morning, September 30 - October 2, two more unfortunates are murdered and one horribly mutilated.
Medical evidence seems to show that the murderer possessed a good deal of knowledge of the organs of the body and the way of removing them, not (as emphatically says Dr Gordon Brown) necessarily surgical knowledge, but such as would most likely be possessed by one accustomed to cutting up animals.
In the dextrous Malay cook and butcher, is not exactly the knowledge described accounted for? (that on one occasion knowledge approaching the surgical seemed to be shown, is accounted for by the fact that the murderer being undisturbed had
ample time for the operation). Now we want to know where he came from and where he disappeared to:- Observe (that numbering after interview with sailor at music hall):-
Murder No.1 on last day of month and Friday of week.
" No.2 on eight " " and Saturday of week.
" No.3 on last day " and Saturday of week.
" No.4 on last day " and Saturday of week.
And if we credit him with a murder committed before the music-hall interview we find -
Murder on 7th day of month and Tuesday of the week.
They are all committed at the end or early part of the month, and principally also, the latter end of the week.
Is this Malay serving on board some vessel engaged on short trips out of the port of London, her voyages so arranged that she was in harbour the latter end and commencement of these particular months?
Again, as a man so serving would be paid monthly, the time would be opportune for finding him in funds, which, more or less, would be requisite in his operations.
And the last days of the week and the first (the Sunday) are just the days that the cook would be able to get liberty for a run on shore.
Is it possible that after the murders he quietly returns to his ship? There would be nothing astonishing in the cook doing so, even early on Sunday morning, as his duties might require him on that day, and early too.
He might have made a change of clothes at the house where he lodges when on shore, or he might return to his ship ready dressed for work, in white jacket and trousers over his clothing, which had been at wash from the previous week, and which he picked up at his lodging - at which lodging perhaps he is in the habit of leaving a locked-up box when away at sea. If he times his murders for the last part of the vessel's stay in harbour, he shortly after proceeds to sea for a time. And in this way is not the mysterious and periodical appearance and disappearance amply accounted for?
As for blood stains, if any, going on board early he would have his galley all to himself to remove any such, and besides, such a stain as regards "Cook" would be paid little attention to by any one on his workaday clothes, and if on his best he could stow them away to be cleaned at leisure. What we want to find out is, a vessel or vessels (on either side of the river) whose movements will satisfy the above conditions; and next has such a one a Malay on board in any capacity? If such a vessel is now at sea, when is she expected home? Has she gone to a port in the north of the United Kingdom or Ireland, where news of the proceedings in connection with the murders can readily be obtained, or to a foreign port where information would be necessarily be more meagre?
Such a Malay, if existent, would probably be of Cape origin, speaking English fluently, with little to distinguish him from A European in the eyes of any one unfamiliar with the Malay race, certainly nothing to one seeing him casually by gaslight when purchasing a few grapes on a busy night, or even speaking a few words with him in a public-house. Such persons would simply describe him as a dark, &c., while the seamen well accustomed to the race would say at one, "A Malay, height, &c.; &c". (And here it may be remarked that the description in London by the fruit-seller and the seaman in America correspond wonderfully.)
In case of knowledge or even suspicion that such a one is afloat the key to the position is off "Gravesend," where vessels are boarded by the port and Customs authorities, the latter of whom in the ordinary course of their business would be able, without the slightest suspicion falling on them, to satisfy themselves as to the presence of such a person during the run up river; but a water policeman or other who has been a sailor, in Customs uniform in place of a Customs officer, would be the best possible arrangement - only keep the ordinary detective out of it, at any price. On board ship he would be immediately himself detected, and the whole arrangement as to securing a conviction upset.
In dealing with such a one, if found, it should be remembered, that a Malay wreaking his revenge cares nothing for his own life, and by nature thinks no more of taking human than animal life.
This man is pursuing a secret course, only with a view of making his list of victims as large as possible and not with any view to his own safety.
The open "running a-muck" is, as said above, the Malay way of committing suicide, and this murderer, although at present he molests none but prostitutes, if brought to bay, will simply "run a-muck" in earnest, whereas what is wanted is a conviction without further loss of life.
Some parts of the murdered bodies are missing. Why? Because this fiend has possessed himself of preserved some, as the Indian warrior did the scalps of his victims. They have taken the place of stolen savings, an equivalent for what he has lost. And by these he should be convicted. Detectives who have been seamen alone should be employed; the river police would supply many such. Watched (but in no way interfered with on board) by the apparent Customs officer when he goes ashore, followed by the river police (in the garb of seamen going out on liberty with money in their pockets and heads strong enough to stand a drop of drink if necessary, when he leaves the ship. When outside these jolly tars should associate themselves with him, and follow him to his lodging, which he will go to after a bit. When he has left the ship, anything he has left behind should be searched, as well as his lodging when he has left that, probably for the music-hall, which he frequents every time to endeavour to find the person who robbed him, he most likely having picked up with her at that place. After a time he will start on his night's excursion, when he should be followed and seized with the implements for fresh murders in his possessions, which together with the result of searching his belongings would be evidence enough to convict him of the capital charge. I suppose it has not struck the police to secure the attendance of the seaman from America, or to ascertain by means of promise of pardon or reward if a man of the said description has been known to be robbed of such a sum of money. This would be too much to expect from them, although to have done both would have been as valuable as anything they seem to have done at present.
WE publish the following complete list up to date of the murders which have been committed in the last twelve months in a comparatively narrow area in the East-end. The first two do not appear to have been by the same hand as the last six. The murderers are still at large:-
The first of the so-called Whitechapel murders took place at Christmas, when an unknown woman was found murdered near Osborne-street, Whitechapel. How she came by her death no one could say, but a certain grim horror distinguished it from ordinary murders by the fact that an iron stake was thrust into her person. It is necessary to mention this, because in the lists that appear in the morning papers she is confused with the victim of Easter Tuesday, Emma Smith, whose death was not caused by an iron stake, but by repeated outrage of the worst kind.
On Easter Tuesday, Emma Smith, "unfortunate", was passing Whitechapel Church at half-past one in the morning, when she was accosted by some men who seized her money and the outraged her in succession. She was picked up dying, but lived long enough to tell her story. The gang seem to have been animated by plunder and passion. They stayed long enough to kill the woman by every imaginably atrocity, but no one of them has been identified. The incident attracted little attention and no arrests were made.
Early on the morning of August 7 a woman, supposed to be Martha Turner, aged thirty-five, a hawker, lately living off Commercial-road E, was discovered lying dead on the first-floor landing of some model dwelling known as George-yard-buildings, Commercial-street, Spitalfields. The woman when found presented a shocking appearance, her body being covered with stab wounds to the number of thirty-nine, some of which had been done with a bayonet. How the body came to be here is a mystery which the police as yet have not solved. It is a singular coincidence that the murder was committed during Bank Holiday night, and is almost identical with another murder which was perpetrated near the same spot on the night of the previous Bank Holiday. The police, said the coroner, would endeavour to bring home the crime to the guilty party. No one was arrested for this crime and it also passed unnoticed.
Early in the morning of September 1 Mary Ann Nichols was murdered under circumstances of a most revolting character in Buck's-row, Whitechapel-road. The body was found lying on the footpath against the gates of the yard. Police-constable Neil was walking along Buck's-row between four and half-past in the morning, when he noticed the body on the footpath, and a very brief examination revealed the fact of her murder. Her throat was cut from ear to ear, and her body had been ripped up from the abdomen almost to her breast bone, while a second cut gashed the left thigh. The coroner, on September 23, 1888, said that she was last seen endeavouring to walk eastward down Whitechapel. She said she had had her lodging money three times that day, but she had spent it; that she was without money; that the lodging-house deputy refused to trust her; that she was going to look about and get some money to pay her lodgings; and that she should soon be back. What her exact movements were after this it is impossible to say. At all events, in less than an hour and a quarter after this she was found dead at a spot rather under three-quarters of a mile distant. The time at which the body was found cannot have been far from 3.45 A.M., as it is fixed by so many independent data. The condition in which the body was found appears to prove conclusively that the deceased was killed on the exact spot on which she was found. There is not a trace of blood anywhere, except at the spot where her neck was lying.
On September 9, at five minutes to six o'clock on Saturday morning, a man named John Davis, living at 29, Hanbury-street, Spitalfields, discovered the body of Annie Chapman in the yard at the rear of that house; the body had its clothes so disarranged as to show that the lower part of her body had been horribly mutilated. The throat had been cut so deeply that the head was nearly severed from the trunk. The surgeon said he had no doubt that the throat was first cut and the stomach subsequently mutilated. The body had been ripped up from the abdomen to the breast bones, and then hacked and gashed until the entrails protruded; portions of the flesh hung in shreds, and some of the viscera were on the shoulders. On examination it was found that the uterus had been removed.
On Sunday, September 30, two murders were committed. The first was on Elizabeth Stride, in Berner-street, opposite the "International and Educational Club". The woman's head was nearly severed from her body, and her blood streaming down the gutter. The body when found was quite warm. In one hand was clutched a box of sweets, and at her breast were pinned two dahlias; she was respectably dressed for her class, and appeared to be about thirty-five years of age. Her height was 5 ft. 5 in., and her complexion and her hair were dark. On the same date shortly before two o'clock, Police-constable Watkins (No, 881), of the City police, was going round his beat, when, turning his lantern upon the darkest corner of Mitre-square, Aldgate, he saw the body of a woman, apparently lifeless, in a pool of blood. The woman's throat had been cut from the left side, the knife severing the main artery and other parts of the neck. Blood had flowed freely, both from the neck and body, on the pavement. Apparently, the weapon had been thrust into the upper part of the abdomen and drawn completely down, ripping open the body, and, in addition, both thighs had been cut across. The intestines had been torn from the body, and some of them lodged in the wound on the right side of the neck. Her clothes were thrown up on to her chest. Both hands were stretched by her side.
One of our reporters prosecuting enquiries on the scene of the murders to-day writes: - The details of the murder of Mary Jane Kelly are still enshrouded in mystery. There is no disposition on the part of the police officers at Commercial-street police-station to correct any of the conflicting statements which have been made by the newspapers, or to supply further particulars. I have, however, ascertained that there is one man in custody on suspicion, but the police do not attach importance to this arrest, and when the police have made some further enquiries, if they should be satisfactory, he will be liberated. The excitement in the East-end continues. Dorset-street is still crowded with curious men and women, who stand in groups and discuss the details. Tow constables guard the entrance to Miller's-court, and to prevent any one approaching except those who live or have business there. The series of murders have created a panic among the poor unfortunate women who wander in large numbers about Spitalfields Market. One poor creature left her companions and came up to me, seeing that I was writing, and said; "Writing about the murder, sir? I wish it had been me! I have been crying my eyes out ever since I heard of it." I asked her where she lived. And, bursting into tears, she replied: "Anywhere. Last night I slept under some stars. I have eaten nothing for some time. The last meal I had was on Sunday. All I have had since has been drops of beer which friends have given me." The woman was poorly clad, and was strolling about, as a large number of her class do in the East-end, without hat or bonnet. Dr Phillips and Dr Bond have been to the mortuary this morning making a further examination of the remains of the deceased.
If the following statement can be confirmed, it has a very important bearing upon the question, who is the murderer? because it fixed approximately the time at which the murder was committed. But so many stories have been invented for the sake of gain by the people who live in the locality since these murders became the sensation in the newspaper that it is difficult to ascertain whether they are accurate or otherwise. However, here is the latest statement, and it is given on the authority of the Central News:-
Mrs Maxwell, the wife of the deputy of the lodging-house in Dorset-street, situated just opposite the court where Mary Kelly lived, said to a Central News reporter:- I assist my husband in his duties, but we live next door, at 26, Dorset-street. We stay up all night, and yesterday morning, as I was going home, carrying my lantern and other things with me, I saw the woman Kelly standing at the entrance of the court. It was then about half-past eight, and as it was unusual for her to be seen about at that hour I said to her, "Hallo, what are you doing up so early?" She said: "Oh, I'm very bad this morning. I have had the horrors. I have been drinking so much lately." I said to her: "Why don't you go and have half a pint of beer? It will put you right." She replied, "I've just had one, but I am so bad I couldn't keep it down." I didn't know then that she had separated from the man she had been living with, and I thought he had been "paying" her. I then went in the direction of Bishopsgate to do some errands, and on my return I saw Kelly standing outside the public-house talking to a man. That was the last I saw of her.
Late yesterday evening a man was arrested near Dorset-street on suspicion of being concerned in the murder. He was taken to Commercial-street police-station, and is still detained there. Another man, wearing a slouch hat and carrying a black bag, was arrested, but he was quickly released. The main streets, which are usually frequented by the unfortunate women from whom the murderer had selected his victims, were almost completely deserted last night, so much has the news of the last murder terrified them.
A Mrs Paumier, a young woman who sells roasted chestnuts at the corner of Widegate-street, a narrow thoroughfare about two minutes' walk from the scene of the murder, told a reporter yesterday afternoon a story which appears to afford a clue to the murderer. She said that about 12 o'clock that morning a man dressed like a gentleman came to her, and said, "I suppose you have heard about the murder in Dorset-street?" She replied that she had, whereupon the man grinned, and said, "I know more about it than you." He then stared into her face and went down Sandy's-row, another narrow thoroughfare which cuts across Widegate-street. When he had got some way off, however, he looked back as if to see whether she was watching him, and then vanished. Mrs Paumier said the man had a black moustache, was about 5ft. 6in. high, and wore a black silk hat, a black coat, and speckled trousers. He also carried a black shiny bag about a foot in depth and a foot and a half in length. Mrs Paumier stated further that the same man accosted three young women whom she knows on Thursday night, and they chaffed him and asked what he had in the bag, and he replied, "Something that the ladies don't like." One of the three young women she named, Sarah Roney, a girl about twenty, states that she was with two other girls on Thursday night in Brushfield-street, which is ear Dorset-street, when a man wearing a tall hat and a black coat, carrying a black bag, come up to her and said, "Will you come with me?" She told him she would not, and asked him what he had in the bag, and he said, "Something the ladies don't like." He then walked away.
The following is the song of "Sweet Violet", which the murdered woman was heard singing at one o'clock yesterday morning:-
Sweet violets, sweeter than all roses,
Laden with fragrance, sparkling with the dew,
Sweet violets, from mossy dell and rivulet,
Zillah, darling one, I plucked them, my darling, for you.
Oh, say! Go not away,
Violets are blooming love for you alone.
Oh I sweet violets, sweeter than all the roses,
Zillah, darling one, I plucked them and brought them for you.
Sweet violets, resting in beauty's bower,
Crouched all unnoticed I did pluck that flower.
Sweet violets, still looking up to Heaven,
Zillah, darling one, I plucked them and brought them for you.
Although more complete details of the revolting which was discovered in Spitalfields yesterday morning are now obtainable, the story is practically the same that we told in our afternoon editions yesterday. Not one of the hideous facts which were then recorded can be taken back. This is now the seventh crime of the kind which has occurred in this immediate neighbourhood, and the character of the mutilations leaves very little doubt that the murderer in this instance is the same person who has committed the previous ones, with which the public are fully acquainted.
The scene of this last crime is at No. 26, Dorset-street, Spitalfields, which is about two hundred yards distance from 35, Hanbury-street, where the unfortunate woman, Mary Ann Nichols, was so foully murdered. Although the victim, whose name is Mary Jane Kelly, resides is at the about number, the entrance to the room she occupied is up a narrow court, in which some half a dozen houses, and which is know as Miller's-court; it is entirely separated from the other portion of the house, and has an entrance leading into the court. The room is known by the title of No. 13. The house is rented by John M'Carthy, who keeps a small general shop at No. 27, Dorset-street, and the whole of the rooms are let out to tenants of a very poor class. As an instance of the poverty of the neighbourhood, it may be mentioned that nearly the whole of the houses are common lodging-houses, and the one opposite where this murder was enacted has accommodation for some 300 men, and is fully occupied every night.
About twelve months ago Kelly, who was about twenty-four years of age, and who was considered a good looking young woman, of fair and fresh-faced complexion, cam to Mr M'Carthy with a man named Joseph Kelly, who she stated was her husband, and who was a porter employed at the Spitalfields market. They rented a room on the ground floor, the same in which the poor woman was murdered, at a rental of 4s. a week. It had been noticed that the dead woman was somewhat addicted to drink, but Mr M'Carthy denied having knowledge that she had been leading a loose or immoral life. That was so, however, there can be no doubt: for about a fortnight ago she had a quarrel with Kelly, and , after blows had been exchanged, the man left the house, or rather room, and did not return. It has since been ascertained that he went to live at Buller's common lodging-house in Bishopsgate-street. Since then the woman has supported herself as best she could, and the police have ascertained that she has been walking the streets.
Kelly had a little boy, aged about six or seven years, living with her, and lately she had been in narrow straits, so much so that she is reported to have stated to a companion that she would make away with herself, as she could not bear to see her boy starving. There are conflicting statements as to when the woman was last seen alive, but that upon which most reliance appears to be placed is that of a young woman, an associate of the deceased, who states that at about half-past ten o'clock on Thursday night she met the murdered woman at the corner of Dorset-street, who said to her that she had no money and, if she could not get any, would never go out any more but would do away with herself. Soon afterwards they parted, and a man who is described as respectfully dressed, came up and spoke to the murdered woman Kelly and offered her money> The man then accompanied the woman home to her lodgings and the little boy was removed from the room and taken to a neighbour's house. At any rate, none of those living in the court or at 26 Dorset-street saw anything of the unfortunate after about eight o'clock on Thursday evening, but a person living in the court opposite heard her singing, it is said, the song "Sweet Violets", but this person is unable to say whether any one else was with her at that time. Nothing more was seen of heard of her until her dead body was found.
At a quarter to eleven yesterday morning, as the woman was 30s. in arrears with her rent, Mr M'Carthy said to a man employed by him in his shop, John Bowyer, "Go to No. 13 (meaning the room occupied by Kelly) and try to get some rent". Bowyer went, and on knocking at the door was unable to obtain an answer. On looking through the keyhole he found the key was missing. The left-hand side of room faced the court, and in it were two large windows. Bowyer, knowing that when the man Kelly and the dead woman had their quarrel a pane of glass in one of the windows was broken, went round to the side in question. He put his had through the aperture and pulled aside the muslin curtain which covered it. On his looking into the room a shocking sight presented itself. He could see the woman lying on the bed, entirely naked, covered with blood and apparently dead. Without waiting to make a closer examination he ran to his employer and told him he believed the woman Kelly had been murdered. M'Carthy at once went and looked through the broken window, and, satisfying himself that something was wrong, despatched Bowyer to the Commercial-street police-station, at the same time enjoining him not to tell any of the neighbours what he had discovered. Inspector Beck, H Division, who was in charge of the station at the time, accompanied Bowyer back, and on finding that a murder had been committed at once sent for assistance. Dr Phillips, the divisional surgeon of police, and Superintendent Arnold were also sent for. On the arrival of the latter he caused a telegram to be sent direct to Sit Charles Warren, informing him what had happened, and Inspector Abberline, who had already arrived, despatched a message to Sir Charles Warren to bring the bloodhounds.
Mr Arnold, having satisfied himself that the woman was dead, ordered one of the windows to be removed. A horrible and sickening sight then presented itself. The woman lay on her back on the bed, entirely naked. Her throat was cut from ear to ear, right-down to the spinal column. The ears and nose had been cut clean off. The breasts had also been cleanly cut off and placed on a table which was by the side of the bed. The stomach and abdomen had been ripped open, while the face was slashed about, so that the features of the poor creature were beyond all recognition. The kidneys and the heart had also been removed from the body, and placed on the table by the side of the breasts. The liver had likewise been removed, and laid on the right thigh. No portion of the body, however, had been taken away by the murderer. The thighs had been cut. A more horrible of sickening sight could not be imagined. The clothed of the woman were lying by the side of the bed, as though they had been taken off laid down in the ordinary manner. While this examination was being made a photographer, who, in the meantime, had been sent for, arrived and took photographs of the body, the organs, and the room, and its contents. Superintendent Arnold then had the door of the room forced. It was a very poorly furnished apartment, about 12 ft. square, there being only an old bedstead, two old tables, and a chair in it. The bedclothes had been turned down, and this was probably done by the murderer after he had cut the victim's throat. There was no appearance of a struggle having taken place, and, although a careful search of the room was made, no knife or instrument of any kind was found.
After a careful examination of the remains by several doctors, the body was placed in a shell, which was put into a cart and conveyed to the mortuary. It was ten minutes to four o'clock that a one-horse carrier's cart, with the ordinary tarpaulin cover, was driven into Dorset-street, and halted opposite Miller's-court. From the cart was taken a long shell or coffin, dirty and scratched with constant use. This was taken into the death chamber, and there the remains were temporarily confined. The news that the body was about to be removed caused a great rush of people from the courts running out of Dorset-street, and there was a determined effort to break the police cordon at he Commercial-street end. The crowd, which pressed round the van, was of the humblest class, but the demeanour of the poor people was all that could be desired. Ragged caps were doffed and slatternly-looking women shed tears as the shell, covered with a ragged-looking cloth, was placed in the van. The remains were taken to the Shoreditch mortuary, where they will remain until they have been viewed by the coroner's jury. Dr M'Donald, coroner, in whose district the murder happened, has fixed Monday morning for the opening of the inquest at the Shoreditch Town-hall.
From inquiries made among the persons living in the houses adjoining the court, and also from those residing in rooms No. 26, it appears that no noise of any kind was heard. Up to the present time the occurrence is enveloped in as much mystery as were the previous murders. The man Kelly was quickly found, and his statement ascertained to be correct. After the examination the windows were boarded up, and the door padlocked by direction of the police. It was reported that bloodhounds would be laid on to endeavour to trace the murderer, but for some reason the project was not carried out, and, or course, after the streets became thronged with people that would have no practical result. The street being principally composed of common lodging-houses, persons were walking along it during all hours of the night, so that little notice is taken of any ordinary attired man. The murderer, therefore, had a good chance of getting away unobserved.
A correspondent who last saw the room in which the murder was committed says it was a tenement by itself, having formerly been the back parlour of No. 26, Dorset-street. A partition had been erected, cutting if off from the house, and the entrance door opened into Miller's-court. The two windows also faced the court, and, as the body could be seen from the court yesterday morning, it is evident that, unless the murderer perpetrated his crime with the light turned out, any person passing by could have witnessed the deed. The lock of the door was a spring one, and the murderer apparently took the key away with him when he left, as it cannot be found. The more the facts are investigated, the more apparent becomes the cool daring of the murderer. There are six houses in the court besides the tenement occupied by the deceased.
A young woman named Harvey, who had slept with the deceased on several recent occasions, has made a statement to the effect that she had been on good terms with the deceased, whose education was much superior to that of most persons in her position of life. Harvey, however, took a room in New-court, off the same street, but remained friendly with the unfortunate woman, who visited her in New-court on Thursday night. After drinking together they parted at half-past seven o'clock, Kelly going off in the direction of Leman-street, which she was in the habit of frequenting. She was perfectly sober at the time. Joseph Barnett (called in other reports Kelly), an Irishman, at present residing in a common lodging-house in New-street, Bishopsgate, informed a reporter last evening that he had occupied his present lodgings since Tuesday week. Previously to that he had lived in Miller's-court, Dorset-street, for eight or nine months and with the murdered woman Mary Jane Kelly. They were very comfortable together until another woman came to sleep in their room, to which he strongly objected. Finally, after the woman had been there two or three nights he quarrelled with the woman whom he called his wife and left her. The next day, however, he returned and gave Kelly money. He called several other days and gave her money when he had it. On Thursday night he visited her between half-past seven and eight and told her he was sorry he had no money to give her. He saw nothing more of her.
A somewhat important fact has been pointed out, which puts a fresh complexion on the theory of the murders. It appears that the cattle boats bringing live freight to London are in the habit of coming into the Thames of Thursdays or Fridays, and leave again for the Continent on Sundays or Mondays. It has already been a matter of comment that the recent revolting crimes have been committed at the week's end, and an opinion has been formed among some of the detectives that the murderer is a drover or butcher employed on one of these boats - of which there are many - and that he periodically appears and disappears with one of the steamers. This theory is held to be of much importance by those engaged in this investigation. There is also, it is to be noted, a striking similarity in the period of the month in which the crime has been committed, for while two of the most atrocious of the other murders were committed on the 7th of the months of September and August, this was commenced or committed on the 8th - approximately the same period in the month. This would seem to indicate that the murderer was absent from the scene of these horrors for fixed periods, and that his return was always about the same time.
