LONDON. MONDAY, 12 NOVEMBER, 1888
WHITECHAPEL will, we hope, be up in Parliament to-night. Mr. MATTHEWS will be forced, by Tory as well as Liberal members, to say whether he stands by Sir CHARLES WARREN, and whether it is with his approval that Mr. MONRO was elbowed out of his post, and the control of the detective forced placed in the hands of a man without genius, without experience, without tact, at a time when its inefficiency was notorious. If he stands by the CHIEF COMMISSIONER he falls with him; if he deserts him, he falls a little later. But both men are doomed. Whitechapel has avenged us for Trafalgar-square, for Coercion in Ireland and in London, for a score things which are rather more culpable than the failure to take the Whitechapel murderer. Governments nowadays must be up to the level of their duties to the democracy. Let them or their agents fail - as Lord SACKVILLE has failed in America and Mr. MATTHEWS in London - and short will be their shrift at the hands of the avenger.
WARREN and MATTHEWS then may go; but Whitechapel will remain. It becomes a serious and solemn question for us whether we are to accept these hideous crimes not simply as beyond the power of detective agencies, but as incidents in the growth of what we call civilisation, erratic developments of brain-pressure, the result of morbid tendencies in over-worked men. There is no precedent for these deeds, with the possible exception of the Texan atrocities. They have sprung upon us like a thief in the night. They are as unfamiliar to ordinary experience as the wildest of nightmares. One thing, however, we can do, and that is, tell the truth about them, and admit that truth to our own consciences. Could the murder-fiend, looking the wide world over, find a choicer field of operations than Whitechapel? We hear of missionary efforts in the East-end. Year by year, no doubt, a few heroic men and women pluck some brands from the burning, but what impression do they make on the mass? Little enough, we fear. Here is a population thousands of whom live on the brink of starvation; thousands of whom live in one room; thousands of whom have no past, no future, no joy in childhood, no hope for age, no rest, and yet no healthful toil. Thousands of them scrape together exactly one-half of a pitiful wage in order to keep a hovel over their heads. Even the workaday blessings of science - light, well-paved streets, decent drainage - they do not know. Their girls work for 13, 14, 15 hours at a stretch. They marry - if they marry - at a terribly early age; they have children who reproduce the physical and moral ailments of their parents, and add to them. Their physique is deplorable; their want of interest in any subject but what concerns their daily bread is more deplorable still; the absence of gaiety and light and color in their lives is, perhaps, the most deplorable of all. No tongue can utter the truth about their lives, no pen can picture their lot, and we have not even a chastened ZOLA to do for London what he, on the whole, manfully and truly did for Paris.
Something, at all events, we can and must know, and something we can and must do. The responsibility is heavy all round; it is heaviest of all on politicians and leaders of working-class thought. We have watched with interest, not unmixed with disappointment, the proceedings of the International Trade Congress. Little or nothing has come of it; and the result, we are afraid, is not a little due to the action of some of the English delegates, and notably of the chairman. Now nothing could be more calculated to hamper the usefulness of trade unionism than the feeling that it was simply the combination of the lucky and the skilled among the workmen; and that the lot of the sweated tailor, of the seamstress, of the unskilled manual laborer, was not the concern of anybody but themselves. To this comfortable delusion - as to all selfish calculations of the kind - there will one day be a rude awakening, for the progress of machinery will in the long run level the aristocracy of labor. But the spirit displayed at the International meetings was not the spirit of the Trade Congress, and was not the kind of development one expected from the anti-sweating movement of the earlier part of the year. What on earth did it matter if some of the foreign delegates spoke from a more advanced platform than the Englishmen? Are we to prate of internationalism as the cure of the labor problem, and then to see one attempt after another to build up association on international lines break as hopelessly as the wave against the rock-wall? We have many advantages over foreign States so far as the labor difficulty is concerned. We have more freedom, more toleration, and infinitely stronger labor organisations for benefit purposes. But to say that we can learn nothing from such eloquent exponents of the social problem as M. ANSEELE is mere crass John Bullism. There are great tasks before the English democracy, and the preliminary to their accomplishment is the learning of the oldest of all human lessons - the lesson of unselfishness. Let us look to Whitechapel and the sweating system, and content ourselves with no solution of labor questions which does not solve them. There lies our crux; there lies our duty, and if we do it, our hope of better things than the horrors which fill our minds to-day.
IN that dread and tragic abode, Whitechapel, the higher education is progressing even in the midst of crimes which have appalled the nation. Nearly 500 persons have attended the lectures in connection with the University Extension Society this year; and the members have been entertained by Countess Russell, Sir Sydney Waterlow, Dr. Ernest Hart, and others, while they have been addressed by such men as Professor Seeley, the Marquis of Ripon, and Mr. Russell Lowell.
On Friday last reached the Enormous
This number exceeds the total ever circulated in one day by this Journal or by any other evening paper.
A Sunderland correspondent sends us a fragment of a newspaper - believed to be the Tory Sunderland Post - which reprinted, under six large headlines, the paragraph in which we announced the Whitechapel murder on Friday morning. It prefixes to the report this sentence:-
"The London Star, which is certainly not a very trustworthy authority, gives currency to the following :-"
and adds at the end of it :-
"This report has not been confirmed from any other source."
We are glad to have this unwilling Tory testimony to the accuracy of The Star's early information and to the ungraciousness of those who do not hesitate to utilise it. As a matter of fact, we delayed the publication of the news on Friday for nearly half an hour until inquiries had placed its accuracy beyond doubt.
The following circular has been issued :- "In July last an agreement was come to with those who maintain the right of public meetings in Trafalgar-square and other open spaces, and the lawlessness of the proclamations issued by Sir Charles Warren and the use of force to prevent meetings and processions, whereby the weekly meetings, held by way of protest in Trafalgar-square, were temporarily discontinued, upon the assurance given with the approval of the Government, that a case should be stated with a view to test the right of public meeting and other questions involved. The Government have again attempted to prevent these questions being raised, and have thereby committed a distinct breach of public faith. Under these circumstances it has been deemed necessary to immediately convene a meeting of the committee of delegates of Liberal and Radical clubs and associations, which was formed at the Memorial Hall, in February last."
The meeting will be held to-night at eight o'clock at the Memorial Hall, Farringdon-street.
Surely (writes a correspondent) Sir Charles Warren must have been inspired by Ingoldsby's "Lay of St. Gengulphus," when he wrote his recent public notice -
"And, in order the matter more clearly to trace
To the bottom, his Highness, the Prince Bishop, further,
Of his clemency, offers free pardon and grace
To all such as have not been concern'd in the murther."
IMPORTANT EVIDENCE AT THE INQUEST TO-DAY.
A DESCRIPTION OF THE MURDERER.
A Witness who Resides in the Same House Describes a Man whom She Saw Enter the Room with the Deceased on the Night of the Murder.
Vague rumors and contradictory stories have been more prevalent in connection with this most recent horror, the murder of Mary Janet Kelly, than perhaps has been the case with any of the preceding East-end crimes. The police, expecting all possible assistance from the public, have handicapped their capacity for rendering any aid by doing all in their power to suppress information of the crime without which information help cannot be very judiciously given. The result of the police reticence has been the creation of a market for false news, and the actual facts of this latest horror differ with each narrator of the revolting details. Consequently the inquest, and the sworn testimony which it would produce, could not but be
This inquiry was opened this morning by Coroner Macdonald at the Shoreditch Town Hall, in a small but well-ventilated and well-furnished room on the ground floor. With the accommodation so limited, the Coroner's officer had to be careful to prevent overcrowding. He was at first satisfied with holding the door shut, but as the crush outside threatened to overmaster his strength he locked the door, and stationed an inspector on duty there. Inquiries went round as to why a larger room was not requisitioned, and it then transpired that the council chamber could not be used, because it was being repaired. At length those with business at the inquest were all accommodated, but by that time the place was literally packed. Inspector Abberline and Inspector Nairn watched the proceedings on behalf of the police. The inquiry did not open auspiciously, for the jury had a grievance, and the Coroner did not apparently feel in a compromising mood. The coroner's officer was asking the jurors to select a foreman, when several of them complained that their services ought not to have been required to investigate a death which occurred out of their parish. "Don't argue with me, gentlemen," said the coroner's officer, "but speak to the Coroner." "What's the matter?" asked Dr. Macdonald. "The woman did not die in this parish," said a juror, "and therefore we think we ought not to have been summoned on the jury." "Do you think we don't know what we are doing?" asked the Coroner, warmly. "Do you think we don't know our own district? The jury have no business to object. They are summoned in the usual way and can't object. If they persist in their objections
that is all." There were several murmurs among the jurors that Mr. Baxter was their Coroner, and so on, when the Coroner challenged the mutineers in the following words:- "If any juryman says he distinctly objects, let him say so." Whatever the penalties would have been (and they would have been severe, judging from Dr. Macdonald's tone), no juror thought fit to incur them by answering, and the Coroner went on, "I may tell you that jurisdiction lies where the body lies, and not where it was found."
The jurors then all submitted to be sworn and proceeded to view the body. It was lying in the Shoreditch mortuary, the effect of the horrible mutilations being lessened in the eyes of the inspecting jurors by the fact that the pieces cut from the body had been replaced and sewn up. The sight even then was ghastly and sickening enough, in all conscience. By the coroner's directions the jury were taken from the mortuary to the scene of the crime in order that they might acquaint themselves with the appearance of the room. It contained two very old tables, a broken chair, an ancient wooden bedstead, and a dilapidated fender. In a corner there was a pail, and these few articles exhausted the catalogue of the furniture. The walls were papered, but the pattern could hardly be traced for the dirt which covered it, and the floor boards were bare and filthy. There were two windows, both on the same side of the passage, and in one of the windows were the two broken panes of glass, which admitted of the drawing back of the curtain and the revealing of the traces of the terrible crime. It was thus close upon twelve o'clock before any evidence was taken. The first witness was
but when he had been sworn the coroner interposed for a few moments to say that the papers had been making a great fuss as to the jurisdiction under which this inquest came, but there was no need for any fuss at all. He had had no communication with Mr. Baxter at all.
Then the witness Barnet told his story. He was a fish porter, about six and twenty years old, and looking very respectable for one of his class. He said: To my calculation deceased has lived with me for the last year and eight months. I have seen the body and I identify Mary Kelly by the ears and the eyes. I am positive about it. We used to live in 13 room, Miller's-court, Dorset-street, and had been there for over eight months. On the 30th of last month I separated from her, because she had a prostitute with her in her room, having taken her in out of compassion. Being out of work had nothing to do with my leaving her, he added, in answer to a question from the Coroner. I last saw her alive, continued witness, between half-past seven and a quarter to eight on the night she was supposed to have been murdered. I had called to see after her welfare, and stayed there a quarter of an hour. We were on friendly terms, but I told her I was out of work and had nothing to give her, for which I was very sorry.
Did you have any drink together there? - No, sir.
Was she quite sober? - Yes, quite.
Was she generally of sober habits? - I always found her so, but she has been drunk several times in my presence.
Was anyone else there on the Thursday evening you were there? - Yes; a female living in the court. She left first and I left very shortly afterwards.
Did she ever tell you where she was born and brought up? - Yes; she said she was
and was taken to Wales when very young. She came to London about four years ago. Her father was a foreman in some ironworks in Wales. She said she had one sister who was respectable, and who followed her aunt's occupation of travelling from market place to market place with materials. She said she had six or seven brothers, six at home, I think, and one in the army. I never saw one of them to speak to.
Was she ever married, did she say? - Yes, when very young, about 16, in Wales, to a colliery owner or a collier, but I have never been in those parts and don't which. She said her husband's name was Davis, and that he was killed in an explosion. After her husband's death she went to Cardiff, and was in an infirmary there between eight and nine months. She followed a bad life at her cousin's in Cardiff, and I have often told her that was the cause of her downfall. After leaving Cardiff she came to London, and was in a gay house in the West-end. There a gentleman came to her and asked her if she would like to go to France, so she described to me. She went to France, as she told me, but did not stop there long, as she did not like the part. After her return to England she went to
and lived opposite the gasworks with a man named Morganstone. I have never seen that man in my life. Then she went to Pennington-street, I believe, and lived in a bad house there. In connection with that house she mentioned the name of Joseph Flemming, a mason's plasterer, of whom she said she was very fond. He used to often visit her. I picked up with her in Commercial-street one night when we had a drink together, and I made arrangements to see her on the following day, which was a Saturday. We then agreed to live together, and I took lodgings in a place in George-street, not far from where the George-yard murder was committed. I then lived with her up to when I left her, just recently.
Did you ever hear her say she was afraid of anyone? - Yes, she used to get me to bring her evening papers and see if there was another murder. Beyond that she was not afraid of anyone that I know of.
Here a note was handed into the court from Dr. Phillips asking if he should attend to-day to give his evidence.
The Coroner thought he should just give them roughly an idea of the cause of death, leaving the details of his evidence for a future day, and dispatched a message to that effect.
Thomas Bowyer, of 37, Dorset-street, Spitalfields, said: I am servant to Mr. McCarthy, the landlord of deceased's room. At a quarter to eleven on Friday morning I was ordered to go to her room, No. 13, to collect her rent. I knocked at the door and got no answer. I knocked again, and then still getting no answer went to her window.
Here Inspector Ledger put in a plan of the place, to enable the witness the better to explain exactly where he went. It was the window nearest the entrance, the smaller one of the two, to which he went.
Proceeding, Bowyer said: There was a curtain covering the window, but putting my hand through the broken pane I pulled it on one side and looked in. I saw two
which was close against the front of the bed. The second time I looked I saw the body of someone lying on the bed, and blood on the floor. I at once went very quietly back to Mr. McCarthy, who stood in the shop which he keeps in Dorset-street. I told him what I had seen, and he said, "Good God! do you mean to say this, Harry?" We both went down to the police station, Mr. McCarthy having first been with me and looked through the window to satisfy himself. We gave information of what we had seen to the police, and the inspector on duty came back with us.
Did you see this woman in and out there? - Yes, sir, often. I know Barnet through seeing him go in often, and have never seen him drunk. I have seen deceased drunk once.
a gentlemanly-looking man, describing himself as a grocer and lodging-house keeper, said: At about half-past ten or a quarter to eleven on Friday morning, I sent my man Bowyer to collect the rent at room 13, in Miller's-court. He came back, and from the information he gave me, I went with him. I saw the woman's body lying on the bed, and for the moment I could say nothing. Then I said, "Harry, don't tell anyone; go and fetch the police." As he was going I recovered myself, and thought I had better go with him, and followed him down the court, and we both saw Inspector Back, who returned with us at once. Deceased has lived in this room for over 10 months, and Barnet with her. The rent of the room was 4s. 6d. weekly. Deceased was about 29s. in arrears. I have very often seen deceased the worse for drink. She was an exceptionally quiet woman when sober, but when she had drink she had a little more to say. I never saw her helpless.
Mary Ann Cox, a wretched looking specimen of East-end womanhood, said: I live at No. 5 room, Miller's-court. I am a widow, and having been unfortunate lately, I have had to get my living on the streets. I have known the deceased between eight and nine months. On Thursday night at a quarter to twelve I saw her very much intoxicated in Dorset-street. There was with her a short, stout man, shabbily dressed, who went with her up the court. He had a longish dark coat on, not an overcoat, and he had a pot of ale in his hand. He had a round felt hat on. He wore a full carroty moustache, and had a blotchy face. He had a clean-shaved chin, and very slight whiskers. He went with the deceased into her room, and I said "Good night, Mary." Thereupon the man turned round and banged the door, the deceased having answered me, in a drunken voice, "Good night, I'm going to have a song." She thereupon sang "A violet I plucked from my mother's grave when a boy." I remained in my room a quarter of an hour to warm my hands, and when I went out again
I then remained out till three, and when I returned all was quiet, and deceased's light was out. I did not sleep that night, and should have heard any noise if there had been any after that, but there was not. At a quarter past six in the morning, I heard a man go out of the court, but from which house I could not say. I heard no door bang. The man I saw go in with deceased was about 36. There was no noise from his tread as he went up the court with deceased.
The Coroner: So that his boots must have been dilapidated? - I suppose so.
A Juror: Should you know the man again if you saw him? - Oh, yes, I should.
Could you see her through the window? - No, the blinds were down.
a young married woman living apart from her husband, in 20 Room, Miller's-court, said: My room is just over that of the deceased. On Thursday night I slept in my clothes, having barricaded the door with two tables, as I generally did. My kitten disturbed me by putting its cold nose on my mouth, and as I turned over I heard a cry, "Oh, murder!" the first ejaculation being one of surprise, and the second a rather faint cry. Being used to cries of alarm in that neighbourhood, I did not take much notice, but dropped off to sleep.
Nothing has yet been discovered which seems likely to lead to the capture of the Whitechapel murder fiend. The clue on which the police on the first discovery of the crime founded their strongest hopes of discovering the criminal - the finding of a pilot coat in the victim's room - seems to have utterly broken down, as it is now pretty certain that the garment in question was the woman's own property, or at any rate left in her charge by one of her many acquaintances. Yesterday afternoon a man's shirt covered with blood was found in the area of some schools in Russell-street, opposite the side entrance of Drury-lane Theatre. This garment has been submitted to Dr. Mills, divisional surgeon, for examination, but does not promise much. The key of the murdered woman's door has been found, so that her murderer did not carry it away with him, as was at first supposed.
Another point which has been cleared up is that
There have been many conflicting statements as to the time at which Kelly was last seen. Some women have said they saw her between half-past eight and nine on Friday morning. But medical opinion goes against this. Dr. Bagster Phillips, divisional surgeon, says that when he was called (at a quarter to eleven) Kelly had been dead some five or six hours. Owing to the loss of blood the body would have got cold quickly, but a big fire seems to have been kept up, and the police say that when they entered the room it was quite warm. As a proof that a fierce fire must have been made in the fireplace, there was found a large quantity of ashes, and the rim, the handle, and spout of the kettle had been burnt away from the remaining portion of the vessel. This led the police to believe that
and they searched the ashes. In the fireplace was found the charred rim and wirework of a woman's felt hat, as well as a piece of burnt velvet. These, no doubt, formed a portion of a hat and velvet jacket belonging to and worn by Kelly, which are missing. A woman, who is known by the name of Julia, and who was in the habit of continually visiting Kelly's room, states that she knew that she had two cotton shirts there. These the police are unable to find, and believe they were consumed with the hat and jacket. The police are of opinion that the murderer did his fiendish work in daylight, and burned the above-named articles probably because they were bloodstained. In support of that theory, they have ascertained that on Wednesday night the dead woman purchased a halfpenny candle at the neighboring chandler's shop, and on the room being searched this candle was found, barely half consumed.
Some further details as to the woman's antecedents are coming out. Joseph Barnett, the man she lived with in the room in which she was murdered said: - "When she was but little over 16 years of age she married a collier, but I do not remember his name. He was killed in an explosion in the mine, and then Marie went to Cardiff with her cousin. Thence she went to France, but remained only a short time. Afterwards she
in the West-end of London; but drifted from the West-end to the East-end, where she took lodgings in Pennington-street. Her father came from Wales, and tried to find her there; but, hearing from her companions that he was looking for her, Marie kept out of the way. A brother in the Second Battalion Scots Guards came to see her once, but beyond that she saw none of her relations, nor did she correspond with them. When she was in Pennington-street a man named Morganstone lived with her, and subsequently a man named Joseph Fleming passed as her husband."
The authorities have been making inquiries concerning the soldier who, according to Barnett, was in the second battalion of the Scots Guards. That regiment is now in Dublin, and it is understood that inquiries will be immediately prosecuted there.
Mrs. Elizabeth Phoenix, residing at 157, Bow Common-lane, Burdett-road, Bow, called at the Leman-street Police-station last evening and made a statement to the officers on duty which it is thought will satisfactorily establish the identity of the murdered woman. She stated that about three years ago a woman, apparently the deceased from the description given of her, resided at her brother-in-law's house at Breezer's-hill, Pennington-street, near the London Docks. She describes this lodger as a woman about 5ft. 7in. in height, and of rather stout build, with blue eyes and a very fine head of hair, which reached nearly to her waist. At that time she gave her name as Mary Jane Kelly, and stated that she was about 22 years of age, so that her age at the present time would be about 25. There was, it seems, some difficulty in establishing her nationality.
and that her parents, who had discarded her, still resided at Cardiff, whence she came to London. On other occasions, however, she declared that she was Irish. She is described as being very quarrelsome and abusive when intoxicated, but "one of the most decent and nicest girls you could meet" when sober. About two years ago she left Breezer's-hill and removed to Commercial-road, from which quarter she had been reported to Mrs. Phoenix as leading a loose life. It has been stated more than once that Kelly was a native of Limerick, but a telegram received from that place last night says that inquiries made in that city have failed to identify the latest Whitechapel victim as a native of the town.
There is little doubt that Kelly came to London from Cardiff some five or six years ago, leaving in that town her friends, whom she has described as being well to do. She is stated to have been an excellent scholar and an artist. It would appear that on her arrival in London she made the acquaintance of a French lady residing in the neighborhood of Knightsbridge, who, she informed her friends, led her into the degraded life which has brought about her untimely end. She made no secret of the fact that while she was with this lady she
and made several journeys to the French capital, and in fact led the life of a lady. By some means, however, at present not exactly clear, she suddenly drifted into the East-end. Her first experiences of the East-end appear to have commenced with Mrs. Buki, who resided in one of the thoroughfares off Ratcliff-highway, now known as St. George's-street. Both women went to the French lady's residence, and demanded Kelly's box, which contained numerous costly dresses. From Mrs. Buki's place, Kelly went to lodge with Mrs. Carthy, at Breezer's-hill, Pennington-street. This place she left about 18 months or two years ago, and took up her quarters in Dorset-street. As to her ever having a child, the testimony is conflicting. Mrs. Carthy declares positively that she never had one. Mrs. Carthy states that the deceased when she left her place went to live with a man who was apparently in the building trade, and who she (Mrs. Carthy) believed would have married her.
It appears from inquiries made at Carmarthen and Swansea, that after leaving the former place for the latter, Kelly, who was then only 17 years of age, entered the service of a Mrs. Rees, who stands committed to the next assizes on a charge of procuring abortion, and who is the daughter of a medical man formerly resident at Carmarthen.
were made yesterday, but every suspect, after a short detention, was allowed to go free. The arrest which was productive of most excitement was that of a doctor turned amateur detective. About ten o'clock last night the idle and inquisitive crowd, who since the ghastly discovery was made have infested Dorset-street and its immediate neighborhood, had their attention attracted to the extraordinary behaviour of a man who for some short time before had been officiously making inquiries and generally conducting himself in an unusual manner. Over a pair of good trousers he wore a jersey in place of a coat, and his face was most papably artificially blacked. His manner led to considerable remark and at last a cry was raised that he was "Jack the Ripper." In the prevailing state of the public mind in the district this was quite enough to inflame the anger of those in the street, and he was at once roughly seized. Fortunately for him, there was a large number of policemen about, both in uniform and plain clothes, by whom he was at once surrounded on the first alarm being given.
but, happily for himself, soon realised his position, and consented to go quietly to Leman-street Police-station. Meanwhile, the officers who had him in charge had the greatest difficulty in saving their prisoner from the fury of the mod, who amid the wildest excitement made the most desperate endeavors to lynch him. As it was, he was very roughly handled and considerably bruised by the time he reached the police-station, where he gave his name and address, which are withheld by the police authorities. He stated that he was a medical man, and had disguised himself in the absurd manner above described in order to endeavor by what he thought were detective means to discover and apprehend the perpetrator of the Whitechapel horrors. He gave such particulars of himself as enabled the police to quickly substantiate their accuracy, and to discharge him.
While the police have been working zealously in the hope of making some discovery of value, the public themselves appear to have been conscious that the responsibility of the officers of the law is in a measure shared by them. This is seen by
which occurred yesterday, and which resulted in the arrest and detention of a strange man at Bishopsgate-street Police-station. Some men were drinking at a beerhouse in Fish-street-hill. One of them began conversing about the Whitechapel murder, and a man named Brown, living at 9, Dorset-street, thought he detected a blood mark on the coat of the stranger. On the latter's attention being called to it he said the mark was merely paint, but Brown took out a pocket-knife, and, rubbing the dried stain with the blade, pronounced it to be blood. The coat being loose, similar stains were seen on the man's shirt, and he then admitted that they were bloodstains. Leaving the house at once, Brown followed, and when the suspicious stranger had got opposite to Bishopsgate Police-station Brown gave him into custody. The prisoner gave the name of George Compton. On being brought before the inspector on duty he excitedly protested against being arrested in the public street, alleging that in the present state of public feeling he might have been lynched. The man had been arrested at Shadwell on Saturday by a police-constable, who considered his behaviour suspicious, but he had been discharged.
Another arrest was effected at an early hour in the morning through the exertions of two young men living in the neighborhood of Dorset-street. They had their attention drawn to two men in Dorset-street who were loitering about. The two men separated, and one of them was followed by the two youths into Houndsditch. They carefully observed his appearance, which was that of a foreigner. He was about 5ft. 8in. in height, had a long pointed moustache, was dressed in a long black overcoat, and wore, also, a cloth deerstalker hat. When near Bishopsgate-street the young men spoke to a policeman, who at once stopped the stranger and took him to Bishopsgate Police-station. Here he was detained pending inquiries, but afterwards allowed to go.
Another man was detained at Commercial-street Station on account of his suspicious movements. A man named Peter Maguire says that about eleven o'clock on Saturday night he was drinking at the public-house kept by Mrs. Fiddymont, in Brushfield-street, which is known as the Clean House, when he noticed a man talking very earnestly to a young woman. He asked her to accompany him up a neighboring court, but she refused, and afterwards left the bar. Maguire followed the man, who, noticing this, commenced running. He ran into Spitalfields Market, Maguire following all the while. The man then stopped, went up a court,
he was wearing and put on another pair. By a roundabout route he proceeded into Shoreditch, and got into an omnibus, which Maguire still followed. A policeman was asked by Maguire to stop this vehicle, but he refused, and Maguire continued his pursuit until he met another constable, who stopped the omnibus. The man was inside huddled up in a corner. Maguire explained his suspicions, and the man was taken to Commercial-street Station, where he was detained pending inquiries.
In the excited nervous state of the people living in the district in which the crimes have been committed there are naturally
Great excitement was created last night about a quarter past nine in Wentworth-street, Commercial-street, close to Dorset-street, by loud cries of "Murder" and "Police" which proceeded from George-yard-buildings. Police-sergeant Irving and Police-constable 22 H R were quickly on the spot, and at once rushed into the buildings, which are a large set of model dwellings. In the meantime the street rapidly filled with persons from the adjoining houses, while some of those who lived in the top storey of the buildings clambered on to the roof in order to intercept any person who might attempt to make his escape by that means. After a little inquiry, however, by the officers the truth came out. It seems that a Mrs. Humphries, who is nearly blind, lives with her daughter on the second floor of the buildings, and about the time mentioned went to an outhouse for the purpose of emptying some slops. As she went in a young man, who is courting her daughter, and was on his way to visit her, slipped out of the place past her. Mrs. Humphries at once asked who it was. The young man, who, it is said, stutters very badly, made some unintelligible answer and the old lady, who, like her neighbors, was haunted with the terror of "Jack the Ripper," at once gave the alarm, which was promptly responded to. The mistake, however, was soon explained, and quiet restored in the vicinity.
Shortly after ten o'clock last night, as a woman named Humphreys was passing George-yard, Whitechapel, she met in the darkness and almost on the identical spot where Martha Tabram was murdered, a powerful-looking man
Trembling with agitation she asked, "What do you want?" The man made no answer, but laughed and made a hasty retreat. The woman shouted "Murder" several times and soon alarmed the neighbors. Uniformed policemen and detectives ran to the yard from all directions. They entered a house into which the man had retreated, and he was apprehended. A crowd of people quickly collected, who exhibited an almost unanimous inclination to lynch the mysterious person, but the police were fortunately able to protect him. Being taken to Leman-street Police-station, he accounted for his presence in the yard by the fact that he was paying a visit to a friend who is an inhabitant of it. He referred the police to a well-known gentleman at the London Hospital, and in the result he was set at liberty.
The police at Commercial-street station made another arrest at three o'clock this morning in Dorset-street at the scene of the murder. The man refused to satisfy the officers as to his recent movements. At eight o'clock he was still in custody.
A man dressed in woman's clothing was arrested on suspicion in Goswell-road on Saturday night. He proved he could have had nothing to do with the murder, and said he put female attire on only "for a lark," but he will be brought before the magistrate charged with having done it for an unlawful purpose.
Charles Thomas was charged at Clerkenwell with being drunk in Crowndale-road, St Pancras. - Constable 550 Y saw the man drunk and surrounded by a crowd of persons early on Sunday morning. He kept shouting out "I'm Jack the Ripper." - Mr. Bros sentenced Thomas to 14 days' imprisonment, with hard labor, and said he should send every man to prison, without the option of a fine, who was brought before him for shouting out in the street that he was the Whitechapel murderer.
The Women's Gazette says: - "In the name of the women of England we demand that some steps be taken for the protection of our unfortunate sisters in the East-end. First and foremost we demand the dismissal of those two conspicuous monuments of failure, Mr. Home Secretary Matthews and Sir Charles Warren. We expect little consideration from the present Government. We are, after all, only women - and women have no votes. We are, however, confident that our demand will be backed by everything that is chivalrous in the manhood of our country.
Mrs. Langworthy writes: A few months ago all England was shocked and horrified at the unprecedentedly cruel and terrible murder of a woman, accompanied by mutilation. Almost before the panic caused by this murder had ceased, a second poster proclaims "Another awful murder and mutilation of a woman; frightful details," and the papers proceed with ghoul-like minuteness to detail all the horror-inspiring particulars. Yet again we read of a third "murder and mutilation," and a fourth, till we become pretty well accustomed to murders with mutilation, and scarcely wonder that so many should occur at once. Galignani, in his issue of yesterday, writes:- "Another woman was assassinated in Whitechapel this morning. The body was mutilated in the same manner as the previous victims." Now tell me
for these miseries in great part? The daily papers not only announce to the public that a dreadful murder has taken place, but proceed with wonderful minuteness and distinctness to give the details, and even go so far as to explain "to the public" how this murder has been accomplished, what weapon has been used, how long it takes to do this deed, &c., and the consequence is that some man of a morbid and unhealthy mind, and possibly of brute instinct, who assuredly never contemplated murder of the hangman, reads, marks, and inwardly digests this murder with all its ghastly details, and his mind dwells on the subject till he feels he must go and do likewise, and so one murder described in the papers begets another. In the same way, all the foul and filthy details of the life of a fashionable co-respondent in the Divorce Courts, being duly and faithfully chronicled in the daily papers, some wretched creatures panting for notoriety or some miserable girl whose passions lie dormant, letting her mind well on subjects hitherto shunned and tabooed, becomes in time the unhappy candidate for the divorce courts.
Sir, I ask if in these instances the Press is not in measure to blame?
The Press Association says:- The report is current at Scotland-yard to-day that Sir Charles Warren has sent in his resignation. No official confirmation or denial can be obtained.
Information has been brought to The Star office tending strongly to confirm this rumor.