Orsam Books

Diary Deep Dive

PART 1 - THE MAYBRICK BITS 

The forger naturally wanted to show off his knowledge of the life of James Maybrick.  I'm going to attempt to identify every single example and the possible sources (albeit that I don't include very vague statements such as 'The bitch has no inclination' which could mean just about anything and which doesn't seem to need any kind of source). 

Beneath each heading is a quote from the Diary followed by whether that information is in any of the three key secondary sources ('the sources'): Nigel Morland's 'This Friendless Lady' (1957), Bernard Ryan's 'The Poisoned Life of Mrs Maybrick' (1977) and Richard Whittington-Egan's 'Tales of Liverpool: Murder, Mayhem and Mystery' (1967).  As the latter is a very short chapter it can be assumed that, where it's not referred to by me, it doesn't deal with the issue in question.

For the trial evidence, if consulted at all, the forger (assuming he was from Liverpool) could have used the Liverpool Daily Post or the Echo (which both carried the same reports) although he could also have used library copies of Levy (1889) or Irving (1922).  These sources are, to all intents and purposes, the same.

THE 79 ITEMS OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT JAMES MAYBRICK (SOME INVENTED) BEING SHOWN OFF BY THE FORGER 

1. He had a brother called Michael

'Received a letter from Michael perhaps I will visit him.'

That James had a brother called Michael (who lived in London) can be found in both Morland (p. 6) and Ryan (p.20).

2. He had children

'Will have to come to some sort of decision regards the children'.

There isn't really a decision to be made, bearing in mind that the diarist is confirming at the same time that he's going to start murdering women in London but I guess the forger is showing that he knows the Maybricks had more than one child as confirmed in Morland (p.11 & 14), Ryan (p.23 & 27) and Whittington-Egan (p. 53).

3. His wife had a lover 

'Foolish bitch, I know for certain she has arranged a rondaveau with him in Whitechapel'

ALSO

'The thought of him taking her is beginning to thrill  me' 

Ryan introduces Alfred Brieley on page 30, Morland on page 24 and Whittington-Egan on page 53. 

All the evidence, however, suggests that the relationship between Florence and Brierley didn't begin until late 1888 and this is found expressly in Morland:

'The attachment with Alfred Brierley was of brief duration. He had never been to the house before the late summer of 1888...' (Morland, p.24).

According to Ryan, the first appearance of Alfred Brierley at Battlecrease was in December 1888 when James Maybrick entertained a small dinner party at home and'Florence found him charming.  She invited him to Battlecrease House frequently through the winter, and she and James were often joined by Brierley when they went out for the evening'.  

The evidence of Brierley, given in an affidavit dated 16 August 1889, after Florence's trial, was as follows (HO/144/1638/A50678):

'I first met Mrs Maybrick at her own house at dinner about two years ago. I met her in company once or twice between that occasion and  November 1888. In that month I went to a dance  at her house. I subsequently met her at various dances and became on intimate terms with her, and her husband.  Mr Maybrick was at home on each occasion on which I visited or called at the house...I never was improperly intimate with her until our meeting in London on 22nd March last.' 

Brierley also stated, 'I verily believe that was the only occasion on which Mrs Maybrick was unfaithful to her husband.' 

The forger has Florence meeting with her lover in Whitechapel, Liverpool, during the spring and summer of 1888.  There is no hard evidence of Florence having had a lover at this stage but, for the dramatic narrative of the Diary, Florence simply must have been having an affair with someone prior to 31 August 1888 otherwise Maybrick's murderous campaign designed to have his revenge on Florence would have made no sense.

Although Robert Smith tells us in his book that it was'strongly rumoured' that Florence was having an affair with Edwin Maybrick (Smith, 2019, p.140), he can't have been the whore master referred to in the Diary because he left for the United States on 18 August 1888 whereas the Diary continues to refer to the whore master long after this date.

The forger appears to be have been well aware that Brierley didn't enter the picture until late 1888, hence the statement shortly before Christmas 1888 that, 'the  whore is not satisfied with one whore master, she now has eyes on another' and then, in the new year, 'The whore may take as many whore masters as she wishes'

While Christie's 1969 book 'Etched in Arsenic' mentions that it was common knowledge that Florence was involved at various times with Edwin Maybrick and a London lawyer named Williams (p.49), and says that love letters from both of them were discovered in her room after she was arrested (p.64), so that a forger could have easily known about it, there is no reason to think that either individual is the 'whore master' referred to at the start of the diary.  In this aspect, a lover from early 1888 needed to be invented by the forger to fit the story or the whole thing wouldn't have worked.   

A slight curiosity here is that Mike Barrett's research notes (supposed to have been from August 1991) state:'Florence Maybrick had at least two lovers. Alfred Brierly (a supposed friend of James) Fits in with diary 'A friend has turned'. Then Mike adds, 'Find out about her first lover -  Brierly, I'm sure was the second.  To date nothing known'.  I have no idea where Mike could have got the information that Maybrick had two lovers.  I've only ever seen it said that she had three (i.e. Edwin, Williams and Brierley).  It's possible that it's in the Liverpool Echo, which is one of the sources Mike uses for his research notes.  I'm not aware of any such story but, in his opening speech (reported in the Liverpool Echo of 31 July 1889), Mr Addison for the prosecution said that on the night of 21 March 1889, 'at about half-past six a gentlemen whose name never appears again as far as we know anything about him in the case, came and fetched her'.  This was a reference to John Baillie Knight, not a lover of Florence, but Addison's speech did give the impression that he was one.  This statement was cited in Morland p.111 (although Morland adds, 'This contained implications for untutored minds. No doubt Addison's motives were innocent or well meant, but they were unfortunate. Possibly he did not know the man was John Knight...').

We may also note that Mike writes 'Fact: Florence had an affair with Brierly. Therefore if she had one lover, why not others?'  This is exactly the same thinking that I would ascribe to the forger.

4. He drank at the Poste House

'I took refreshment at the Poste House'

Here is where the forger makes his first major error by relying on his own knowledge rather than the sources.  There was no Poste House in Liverpool in 1888, although the pub called the Muck Midden in 1888 was renamed 'Poste House' during the 1960s and was thus in existence with this name when the Diary was likely forged in 1992.  

5. He visited London frequently

'Indeed do I not frequently visit the Capital and indeed do I not have legitimate reason for doing so.'

Ryan tells us (p.26) that, "Men like Maybrick thought nothing of stepping aboard the London, Midland and Scottish to go up to London for the day.  Maybrick in particular thought nothing of staying overnight. Frequently he stayed two or three days at a time" ,and (pp.28-29) that “James continued…to travel often to London for a day or two 'on business'.”  

The source or sources behind these statements are unknown (but may, at least in part, be derived from the fact that Maybrick is known from the trial evidence to have stayed with his brother, Michael, in London for three days in April 1889).

There is no similar statement in Morland although it is noted that Michael Maybrick had apartments near Regent's Park in London (Morland p. 6).

6. He had cold hands

'As usual my hands are cold' 

This is not in the sources.

Morland refers to 'Maybrick's habit of constantly rubbing the backs of his hands in the morning, and of complaining of a feeling of numbness in the hands and legs' (Morland p. 11) but he was referring here to the 1870s (based on the evidence of Mr Bateson). In the section on the trial, Ryan also cites Bateson's evidence as being that, in 1877, 'He constantly rubbed the back of his hands in the morning...and complained of numbness in his hands and limbs'.  There is evidence from the court proceedings (Alice Yapp and Edwin Maybrick) that Maybrick constantly needed his hands rubbed during April and May 1889 because they were numb but, despite extensive evidence from a number of Maybrick's doctors about his symptoms, there is no record of Maybrick ever complaining that his hands were cold, either in 1888 (when this diary entry is supposed to have been written) or 1889. The forger may be showing off his own knowledge of supposed arsenical symptoms here.  Medical text books give cold hands as one symptom of arsenic poisoning (among many others).  

However, it should be noted that in his closing speech, Sir Charles Russell said:

'And it is a peculiar feature of this case that some of the symptoms in the illness which resulted in death - I mean that coldness and numbness of the extremities, the hands legs and feet - are symptoms spoken of as far back as his residence in America, by Mr Bateson and others' (Liverpool Daily Post, 6 August 1889).

Mr Bateson hadn't actually referred to coldness in Maybrick's hands.  He had said only that Maybrick, 'constantly rubbed the back of his hands in the morning and complained of numbness in his hands and limbs'.  He did, however, also say that he suffered from'chills'.  It's possible that it was Russell's own interpretation that Maybrick rubbed his hands because they were cold (which is very likely if there was no circulation) and so it's equally possible that the forger, aware of Maybrick's desire to have his hands rubbed, took this to be because they were cold.

7. His daughter was regularly ill

'My dearest Gladys is unwell yet again, she worries me so.' 

This is another occasion where the forger makes a mistake based on faulty information in the sources.

Morland refers to the Maybrick children's 'bad spell of whooping cough two years ago' (Morland p.30), by which he meant in two years prior to 1889, but he was clearly deceived by an error in the reporting of the trial evidence of Dr Humphreys' visit to treat the children for whooping cough which actually occurred in March 1889 (not March 1887 as some newspapers, such as the Liverpool Daily Post of 2 August 1888, stated).  

Similarly, according to Ryan, during the trial, Dr Hopper was asked 'about a visit to Battlecrease House two years earlier, when the children had whooping cough ' (Ryan, p.137).  This is incorrect because the doctor was being asked about a visit to Battlecrease a few months earlier, in March 1889, not two years earlier in March 1887.

James had Scarlet Fever in 1887 (Ryan, p. 28) but Gladys is not known to have become ill until 1889.

8. He had pain in his head and arms

'True my head and arms pain me at times, but I am not duly worried'

Also

'My mood is no longer black, although my head aches' 

According to Ryan, 'Maybrick complained of a ceaseless headache..' (Ryan, p. 29) and 'pains in the head and numbness of the limbs' (Ryan, p.42).

Morland says that, in April 1889, Maybrick 'complained of pains in his head, numbness and a fear of being paralysed' (Morland, p.39). 

Whittington Egan says that Maybrick was 'constantly experiencing the most distressing aches and pains...and a certain numbness in his head and extremities, which he frequently experienced' (Whittington-Egan, p.54) .

The ultimate source of this is the trial evidence of Doctors Fuller, Hopper and Humphries.

Dr Fuller said that when he examined Maybrick on 14 April 1889, 'he complained of pains in the head and of numbness' (Liverpool Daily Post, 2 August 1889).  Dr Hopper also stated in his evidence that during 1888 Maybrick frequently complained of numbness, 'In the hands, feet, and also the legs' (Liverpool Daily Post, 1 August 1889).  In a witness statement shortly before the trial, in July 1889, Hopper stated that during 1888 Maybrick'used to complain of pains in the head and a numbness of the limbs' (HO 144/1639/A50678).

In a witness statement provided in July 1889, Dr Humphreys also stated that in early 1889, Maybrick complained to him 'about having a headache' (HO 144/1639/A50678). During the trial, Dr Humphreys said that Maybrick's complaint about a headache had existed for about twelve months, since he attended the Ascot races (in June 1888) and in April 1889 he complained of'a stiffness of the lower limbs...extending from the hips down to the feet' (Liverpool Daily Post, 3 August 1889)

There is no specific mention in the evidence that Maybrick ever had pain in the arms (just numbness of the limbs) so that is probably the forger once again showing off knowledge of symptoms of arsenic poisoning of which pain in the limbs is one. 

Ryan includes a statement by a confessed arsenic eater, Somer B Yume, that 'his arm swelled up once every twenty-four hours until relieved by his daily dose' (p.226).

9. His doctor was called 'Hopper'

'although I am certain Hopper believes to the contrary'

Dr Hopper is mentioned as Maybrick's doctor in Ryan (p. 29), Morland (p.34) and Whittington-Egan (p. 53).

10. He had a brother called Thomas

'Thomas has requested that we meet as soon as possible' 

According to Ryan, "The eldest brother, Thomas Maybrick...dined frequently with James and Florence when his business brought him the twenty-nine miles from Manchester to Liverpool…" (Ryan p.22).

According to Morland, "Thomas, a big and burly man, was a shipping agent in Manchester in an excellent way of business – generally he did not maintain particularly close touch with the Liverpool end of the family, and the exchange of letters was infrequent" (Morland, p.6) 

11. His business was flourishing

'Business is flourishing so I have no inclination as regards the matter he describes as most urgent'.

Also

"Edwin asked [regards] Thomas and business, I informed him that Thomas was well and business was flourishing, both true"

According to Ryan, "Maybrick’s cotton brokerage flourished" (p.26).

George Smith gave a written statement to the Treasury Solicitor in July 1889 in which he said that Maybrick 'had a good business and was in prosperous circumstances'(HO 144/1639/A50678).

Levy in his 1899 book states the very opposite: 'But the business was not flourishing, and they appear to have been exceeding their income' (Levy, p.8).  The source for this is not given. 

There is nothing in Morland concerning the state of Maybrick's business. 

12. He had a mistress

'Tonight I shall see mine'

Page 28 of Ryan: 'Florence Maybrick had learned of her husband's mistress.  She learned that he was the father of three children born out of wedlock before his marriage, and that he had sired two more children by the same woman since he and Florence had been married'.

Page 32 of Ryan: 'Florence was aware that the world would censure her husband very lightly, if at all, for maintaining a mistress.'  

Morland refers to Maybrick's mistress, saying, "It is certain that Florence had grounds for complaint about her husband's behaviour in regard to a certain woman...the secret laisser-aller seen as not unusual in the husband..." (Morland, p,21-22) and (citing MacDougall), "There is a woman, who calls herself Mrs Maybrick, and who claims to have been James Maybrick's real wife...her usual and present address is 265 Queen's Road, New Cross, London" (Morland, p.126).

During the trial, Michael Maybrick admitted that, 'there were complaints on both sides' and said that he knew that 'the name of a woman has been introduced into the case' (Liverpool Daily Post, 1 August 1889).

The admission that there were 'complaints on both sides' is quoted by Ryan who specifically draws the reader's attention to it by saying, 'The last two questions and answers sank into the spectators.  If there were complaints on both sides...' (p.125) and then says,'Much larger was the question of complaints on both sides.  It stood to reason that an adulteress need not murder an adulterer in order to gain her freedom.  Obviously if another woman was involved, Mrs Maybrick could have obtained a legal divorce' (Ryan, p.125). 

Christie also deals with it: 'Some time in 1887 Florie discovered to her dismay that her husband was maintaining a mistress and that he had seen her on numerous occasions since their marriage' (Christie, page 45).

Mike Barrett's 'Research Notes' confirm that Maybrick had a mistress who gave him five children 'according to the Liverpool Echo'.  This might be a reference to the Liverpool Echo of 25 January 1957.

13. He lived in a house called Battlecrease

'I may return to Battlecrease and take the unfaithful bitch'

Morland, Ryan and Whittington-Egan all state that the Maybricks took up residence in Battlecrease House (Morland, p.14, Ryan, p.27, Whittington-Egan, p.52). Morland correctly says this occurred in 'early 1888' but Ryan, who appears to have misread Morland, wrongly says this occurred prior to June 1886 when Gladys was born (whereas Morland was actually saying that Gladys was born at Beechville in that month).  Whittington-Egan also gets it wrong, saying that the couple moved into Battlecrease in 1884 (p.52).

14. He took 'medicine' being arsenic or strychnine

'My medicine is doing me good, in fact I am sure I can take more than any other person alive.'

Also

'I cannot live without my medicine' 

There is only limited support for the notion that Maybrick actually referred to whatever drug he was taking as his 'medicine' being the trial evidence of Sir James Poole who told the court that Maybrick once told him, 'I take poisonous medicines'.  This is found in Morland (p. 200) and Ryan (p.40). 

Whittington-Egan says that Maybrick was 'an inveterate patent-medicine swallower' (p. 54). 

The strongest evidence from the trial that Maybrick took arsenic was probably the evidence of Edwin Heaton who said that he recognised Maybrick as a customer who had come in regularly for ten years 'to get his 'pick me up', a tonic indulged in by many members of the Exchange' (Ryan, p. 161).  Both Ryan (p.161) and Morland (p. 204) refer to the defence suggestion that Maybrick took arsenic for aphrodisiac purposes, although Morland suggests that he probably just took it 'as a tonic'.  

Also supporting the notion that Maybrick was an arsenic addict is the post-trial evidence of Valentine Blake referred to in Ryan and Morland (see No. 58 below).

15. He had an employee called Smith

'If Smith should find this then I am done before my campaign begins'.

George Smith is stated to be Maybrick's bookeeper in both Ryan (p.45) and Morland (p.141) .

16. Maybrick was known as a mild man 

'For how could one suspect that I could be capable of such things, for am I not, as all believe, a mild man, who it has been said would never hurt a fly.'

There is nothing in the sources or the evidence that Maybrick was known as a mild man who would never hurt a fly.  This appears to be a invention by the forger.

17. He had a brother called Edwin

'Indeed only the other day did Edwin not say of me I was the most gentlest of men he had encountered.'

Edwin is referred to as Maybrick's younger brother by Morland (p. 6) and Ryan (p.19).

Christie, in his 1969 book (p.212), quotes W.T. Stead saying that Maybrick's friends will say he was 'a good kind of fellow' despite him being a seducer, adulterer and a debachee' which could potentially have been the inspiration behind the thought that Maybrick was said by Edwin to have been 'the most gentlest of men' but it wasn't necessary for the forger to have been aware of Stead's quote for this. 

18. He was made a fool of by his wife

'The bitch has made a fool of me'

It is unclear to what this supposed to be a reference. Presumably it's meant to be something to do with his wife's liaisons with Brierley.

19. He caught a chill

'I believe I have caught a chill.  I cannot stop shaking.  My body aches.'

There is nothing in the sources about this. Ryan notes that, at the Wirral races, Maybrick was said by one observer to have been 'shaking in the saddle' but this was on 28 April 1889, long after the diary entry here, which is early 1888, and not due to a chill (Ryan, p.46).  Christie does say that Maybrick 'suffered a chill' at the Wirral races (p.57) but again this was long after the supposed diary entry.

In his trial evidence Dr Hopper said of Maybrick that 'on one occasion he had a cold and sore throat' (Liverpool Daily Post, 1 August 1889).

20. Battlecrease House had a drive

'Strolled by the drive' 

Ryan - 'The policeman settled her quickly into one of the hall armchairs, picked up the chair, and carried Mrs Maybrick out of Battlecrease House to the cab that was waiting in the drive' (p. 87) AND 'A new cause for the curious to linger in Riversdale Road was found on Saturday morning.  Vans drew into the drive...' (.p.91). 

Morland - 'The main door was approached by a drive closed off from the road by double gates' (p. 15).

Mike Barrett claimed in a letter to Shirley Harrison dated 20 October 1994 that Aigburth Park Drive was known by locals as 'the drive'. There is no known evidence to corroborate this.

21. He knew a woman called Mrs Ham[m]ersmith

'encountered Mrs Hamersmith...Mrs Hammersmith is a bitch'

There is nothing in the sources or evidence about such a woman.

22. His son's nickname was 'Bobo'

'she enquired of Bobo and Gladys'

Also

'I worry so over Bobo and Gladys'

Morland states that young James Chandler Maybrick was'always known as "Bobo"' (Morland, p. 11) 

Ryan also refers to James Chandler as "Bobo" eg. 'Bobo and Gladys were brought sleepy-eyed into the sickroom to see their father' (p.67 and p.55).

Feldman quotes a letter from Florence to her mother from August 1887 in which Florence refers to her son as 'Bobo' (p.71). There is a also a letter from Baroness von Roque to MacDougall after the trial in which she relates that on arrival at Battlecrease she asked Alice Yapp, 'Are you Bobo's and Gladys' nurse?'.  In an 1897 interview with the Chicago Inter-Ocean, Florence referred to her son as both 'James' and 'Bobo', saying, 'James has grown so tall' and 'Bobo has passed his examination admirably'. When he died in 1911 the headlines were:'Death of Bobo'.  Nevertheless, it doesn't seem to be established on the evidence that Master James was always known as 'Bobo' nor that he was called this by his father.  In her written statement for the prosecution in July 1889, the cook Elizabeth Humphries referred to the boy as'James Chandler' and 'Master James'.   Feldman tells us that he was also sometimes called 'Sonny' (p. 70).

23. He had an office (in Liverpool)

'Felt completely refreshed when I returned to my office'

Ryan states: 'He maintained a fine office in the  Knowsley Buildings, off Tithebarn Street' (Ryan, p. 26).

Morland refers to 'his offices in Tithebarn Street in the heart of the city - Knowsley Buildings, headquarters of Maybrick and Company, was a hive of brokers and merchants' (Morland, p. 10) and later says, 'On the morning of the race, James left for his office as usual...'  (Morland, p. 30).

24. He went to London in June to see his brother

'I will visit Michael this coming June...Michael is expecting me towards the end of June, henceforth from July my campaign will gather momentum'.

There is nothing in the published sources to the effect that James saw Michael in London in June 1888.  However, an unpublished letter dated 24 August 1889 from G.A. Witt to the Home Office, which is found in the Maybrick file at the National Archive, states that:

'Last year in June Mr and Mrs M both came up from Liverpool and were our guests'.

Mr Witt lived in London so that this shows that James and Florence did visit London during June 1888 and, one assumes, visited Michael too while they were in the capital.

However, although there is a suggestion in the Diary that Florence wanted to come to London (i.e. 'The whore has suggested she accompany me on my trip to Michael'), the forger writes, 'Under no circumstances can I let the bitch accompany me, all my hard work and plans will be destroyed if she were to do so' . It is clear from the Diary that James visited Michael alone because he had to be locked into his bedroom to prevent him from sleepwalking (and there is no way this story could have been used if Florence had been staying with Michael too because she would have questioned it).   

The solo trip to London to see Michael in June, therefore, must be an invention on the part of the forger.  

25. Florence found one of his bottles

'I believe the bitch has found one of my bottles, it had been moved.'

There is nothing in the sources or evidence about this and it would appear to be a deliberate set-up by the forger, for later in the narrative, to explain how Maybrick knows that Florence was aware of his medicine in order to have told Dr Hopper and/or his brother, Michael, about it (see No. 45 below).

26. He belonged to a club

'Frequented my club'

According to Ryan, "James continued to spend frequent evenings 'at the club' " (Ryan, p.28-29)  

Morland notes the evidence of Sir James Poole that he was 'a fellow member of the Palantine Club with James Maybrick' (Morland, p.200). This is also referred to in Ryan (p.40). 

27. Florence changed her mind about something

'believe the bitch has changed her mind'

If this means anything, it must be that Florence had changed her mind about accompanying Maybrick to London to visit Michael in June 1888.  

As stated above (No. 24), we know from an unpublished letter in the National Archives that Florence accompanied her husband on a visit to Mr and Mrs Witt in London in June 1888.

28. He had a brother called William with whom he did not dine and who hated his wife

'I cannot understand why William will not accept my offer to dine.  He is not unlike me, he hates the bitch'. 

James' fourth brother, William, is mentioned by Morland  and Ryan as living in Liverpool (Morland, p. 6; Ryan, p.20).  Ryan also states that William 'scarcely seemed interested to learn of the proposed marriage' which is the closest one gets to him hating Florence (Ryan p.20).

Ryan also notes that Thomas 'frequently dined with James and Florence'  (Ryan, p.22) and, in the absence of any record that William did so too, the forger must have woven into the narrative that William was refusing to dine with James. 

MacDougall states in his 1891 book that 'William Maybrick lives in Liverpool; but so far as I can ascertain, Mrs Maybrick herself had scarcely seen him, and the servants had never seen him at the house' (MacDougall, p. 63). 

29. He married Florence in St. James's Church

'I believe if chance prevails I will burn St James's to the ground'

Also

'I am still thinking of burning St James's to the ground' 

St James's Church, Piccadilly, is stated to be where James married Florence in Morland (p.8), Ryan (p.19 & p.21) and Whittington-Egan (p. 52).  It wasn't burnt to the ground. 

30. He liked gambling

'tomorrow I will make a substantial wager. I feel lucky'

Not expressly stated in the sources or the evidence but Ryan says that Maybrick and his wife were seen 'at the races at Birkenhead and Wirral across the Mersey' (Ryan, p.26) showing that he presumably liked to wager on horses.

Morland refers to Maybrick as 'that determined racegoer' (p.30) and at one point says that 'Wirral races the next afternoon proved so irresistible an attraction for James that he decided to ride over and enjoy himself there' (Morland, p.40).

31. He had an employee called Lowry

'If I could have the bastard Lowry...'

Morland refers to Thomas Lowry as George Smith's co-worker (Morland, p. 141) and Ryan refers to him as Maybrick's clerk (Ryan, p. 46).

32. Lowry took or did something

'Damn him damn him damn him should I replace the missing items? No that would be too much of a risk. Should I destroy this? My God I will kill him.'

There is nothing in the sources or evidence to support what seems to be a deliberately vague and unexplained incident.

33. He claimed to sleepwalk

'The struggle to stop myself was overwhelming, and if I had not asked Michael to lock me in my bedroom for fear of sleepwalking, to which I had said I had been prone to do recently, was that not clever?'

There is no source for this.  Michael Maybrick never said anything about his brother being prone to sleepwalking in his evidence during the criminal proceedings and it isn't mentioned as something Maybrick was supposed to suffer from in the sources.

34. He took a room in Middlesex Street

'I have taken a small room in Middlesex Street'

There is no source for this, which is an obvious invention by the forger.

35. Edwin was in America

'Edwin....I hope he is enjoying the fruits of America'

Also

'I miss Edwin.  I have received but one letter from him since his arrival in the whores country' 

Also

'I wonder if Edwin is well? I long for him to return.' 

Ryan tells us that Edwin 'had been in America since the previous August [i.e. of 1888](Ryan, p.44).  Morland says the same (Morland, p.40).

There is no source for the lack of correspondence.

36. His brother Michael was a songwriter

'Michael would be proud of my funny little rhyme for he knows only too well the art of verse.'

Also

'damn Michael for being so clever the art of verse is far from simple.' 

Also

'Michael...writes a merry tune.'

Ryan says that Michael was well known "under the name of Stephen Adams as the composer and author of many songs" (Ryan, p. 20).

Morland says that 'Michael's unusual and faintly improper taste for musical composition was tolerated because of the strong religious and moral nature of his lyrics' (Morland, p.7).

Whittington-Egan describes Michael as 'composer of many popular songs' (Whittington-Egan, p. 54) .

37. His wife was in debt

'The whore is in debt. Very well I shall honour the bitches notes...'

There is no source for the idea that Maybrick discovered his wife was in debt prior to the end of September 1888, when this diary entry was supposed to have been written.

38. There were Jews at the Exchange (and Maybrick didn't like them)

'I have never taken to them, far too many of them on the Exchange for my liking.'

There is nothing in the sources or in the evidence about this. 

39. His Christian name could be shortened to Jim

'I can now rise Sir Jim - I cannot think of another word to accompany Jim'

Ryan's book contains a number of references to Maybrick as 'Jim' e.g a quote from Florence being, 'I frequently tell Jim I hate him' (Ryan, p. 22).

Morland also contains a number of such references for example a telegram from Florence saying 'Jim very ill again' (Morland, p.49).

40. His parents were buried in the same grave

'I visited my mother and fathers grave.  I long to be reunited with them.' 

Also

'Soon, I trust I shall be laid beside my dear mother and father.' 

Ryan states that, "The workmen pulled up the heavy flagstones and revealed a whitewashed brick vault which contained the remains of Maybrick and of his mother and father" (Ryan. p.94).

Ryan's source was the Liverpool Daily Post of 1 June 1889 cited in MacDougall page 140 which referred to a"whitewashed brick vault, which contained not only the remains of the late James Maybrick, but those also of his father and mother"

Morland also refers to the 'whitewashed vault where James had been in rest with his parents' (Morland, p.82). 

41. His wife was ignorant of his knowledge of her affair

'The whore still believes I have no knowledge of her whoring master. I have considered killing him, but if I was to do so I would surely be caught.'

On the evidence, as discussed above, Florence's relationship with Brierley had not yet begun.  Edwin was in the United States at this stage (September 1888) so Maybrick can't have been talking about him.  Knowing the diary is a forgery we can say that this is pure invention by the forger.

42. He wined and dine George

'Tonight I will celebrate by wining and dining George'

There is nothing in the sources or the evidence about such an occasion (and see No. 51 below).

43. Florence went out to 'a concert' on her own in early October 1888

'I am in a good mood, believe I will allow the whore the pleasure of her whore master, will remark an evening in the city will do her good, will suggest a concert. I have no doubt the carriage will take the bitch straight to him.'

There is nothing in the sources or the evidence about such an evening.

44. He was unwell between 1 October and 9 November 1888

'I have been unwell. The whole of my body has pained. Hopper did not believe me'. 

As to Dr Hopper's belief, he gave evidence at the trial that he regarded Maybrick as 'hypochondriacal' (Liverpool Daily Post, 1 August 1889).  This is referred to in Ryan (p.126) and Morland (p. 130).

In an unpublished letter to the Home Office dated 24 August 1889, G.A. Witt wrote that 'a few months' after June 1888, Maybrick visited him in London when 'he complained of his eyes watering and giving him trouble.'

Otherwise there is nothing in the sources or evidence to suggest that Maybrick was unwell between 1 October and 9 November 1888.  Dr Hopper isn't known to have been called to treat him during this time. Maybrick didn't visit Dr Drysdale complaining of pains in his head and numbness down the left leg and hand until 19 November 1888 (see 52 below).

45. His wife told Hopper he was in the habit of taking strong medicine

'The whore has informed the bumbling buffoon I am in the habit of taking strong medicine'.

Ryan states that Mrs Maybrick told Hopper one day in 1888 that, 'For some time he had had a habit of 'taking a strong medicine which had a bad influence on him' (Ryan p.29 & see also p.126). 

Morland states that, 'The question was now raised that as early as June, 1888, Florence Maybrick spoke to Hopper about a strong medicine he was in the habit of taking which always had a bad effect on him' (Morland, p.132).

The source of these statements is the trial evidence of Dr Hopper: 'In June or September [1888] I am not quite sure which…She [Florence] told me that Mr Maybrick was in the habit of taking some very strong medicine which had a bad influence on him; for he always seemed worse after each dose. She wished me to see him about it, as he was very reticent in the matter.'

There are few comments to be made about this.

Firstly, there is nothing in the evidence suggesting that Hopper informed Maybrick that Florence had told him that he was in the habit of taking some very strong medicine, or anything at all. On the contrary, in a written statement shortly before the trial, Hopper stated that he 'never questioned' Maybrick about this issue.  Thus, he stated:

'I think about a few years ago Mrs Maybrick said to me "I wish you would try to find out what Mr Maybrick takes.  He takes some poison or strong medicine that he is very reticent about and I am sure it does him harm as he is always worse after it."  Next time I went to the house I looked in Mr Maybrick’s dressing room and I never questioned him about it' (HO 144/1639/A50678).

We can see that the wording used by Hopper was that Mrs Maybrick told him that her husband 'takes some poison or strong medicine' so that, if this was what she actually told him, she didn't say that he was 'in the habit of taking strong medicine' (as Hopper put it in his trial evidence).  We can also see that Hopper thought, in August 1889, that this incident occurred 'a few years ago' whereas it must have been during 1888.  

Secondly, when Hopper was cross-examined about this incident, it was put to him by Sir Charles Russell that the communication by Mrs Maybrick was made to him in June 1888.  This would have been based on Florence's memory of events.  After Hopper said that it was 'In June or September.  I am not sure which', Sir Charles stated in response, 'I put it to you, was it not in June that you first began your attendance on him?'  The doctor replied that 'It was either at the beginning of my attendance, or shortly after my return from holidays'.

If, as Florence seemed to remember it, this all happened in June 1888, it is very strange that Maybrick is supposed to be writing about this in his diary in either October or November 1888.  Even stranger if Hopper was telling the truth and he never mentioned anything about it to Maybrick! 

The short point is that this is a simple error made by the forger who probably misunderstood the evidence and certainly had no idea that Hopper had said in a written statement that he never discussed Florence's request with Maybrick.

46. He hit his wife in circa October 1888 

'So furious I hit her hard. The whore begged me not to do so again. It was a pleasure, a great deal of pleasure. If it was not for my work, I would have cut the bitch up there and then. But I am clever. Although the gentle man has turned, I did not show my hand true. I apologized, a one off instance, I said, which I regretted and I assured the whore it would never happen again. The stupid bitch believed me.'

There is nothing about this in the sources.  It is true that Florence told John Baillie Knight, when she met him for dinner on 20 March 1889 (prior to the Grand National incident), that Maybrick was cruel to her and 'had struck her' (Statement of Baillie Knight, 18 July 1889, HO 144/1638/A50678), and that this information wasn't publicly known, not being mentioned during the trial, but no date was given by Baillie Knight as to when Maybrick had struck her and there is no evidence of any such thing occurring around October 1888.  The reason given in the diary for the assault, namely that Florence had told Hopper that he had a habit of taking strong medicine, was not something of which Maybrick was even aware, per the evidence of Hopper, and had almost certainly occurred months earlier in any case.  

47. Maybrick received letters from Michael in late 1888

'I have received several letters from Michael. In all he enquires about my health and asked in one if my sleepwalking has resumed. Poor Michael he is so easily fooled. I have informed him it has not. My hands still remain cold.' 

There is nothing about this in the sources or the evidence.  And still nothing about Maybrick's hands being cold.

48. He was invited by Thomas to visit him at Christmas (and did visit him).

'Christmas is approaching and Thomas has invited me to visit him. I know him well. I have decided to accept his offer, although I know the motive behind it will strictly be business.' 

Also

'Thomas was in fine health. The children enjoyed Christmas. I did not.' 

There is nothing about this in the sources or the evidence. 

On the contrary, MacDougall in his 1891 book wrote:'Thomas lives in Manchester, and as far as I have been able to ascertain, had not visited his brother James for some years, and really had little communication with him' (MacDougall, p.62). 

49. Thomas thinks of nothing but money.

'Thomas thinks of nothing else except money unlike me' 

There is nothing about this in the sources or the evidence.

50.  He doesn't expect to see Michael at Christmas

'Michael is well...I regret I shall not see him this Christmas'

In his evidence during the trial, Michael was asked if it was known to James and Florence that his own doctor was Dr Fuller, to which he replied (Liverpool Daily Post, 1 August 1889):

'Yes, it was; I mentioned it at Christmas time, when I asked him to come to London to see Dr Fuller.' 

Given that he was saying that he informed both James and Florence of this fact, he can't have been talking about a letter to his brother written at Christmas.

Certainly MacDougall states that Michael 'had been at Battlecrease at Christmas' (MacDougall, 62) while Levy similarly states in a footnote that Michael 'had seen his brother at Christmas 1888' (Levy p.50).  

Ryan and Morland are silent on this point. The forger, relying on the sources alone, would not, therefore, have known or believed that Michael Maybrick visited Battlecrease during Christmas 1888.

51. He had a friend called George

'George visited me today...Poor George, he is such a good friend'

Also (earlier) 'George stated that he had never seen me in better health'. 

Also (earlier) - see No. 36 - 'Tonight I will celebrate by wining and dining George'

According to Morland, George R. Davidson was'Maybrick's most intimate friend' (Morland, p. 79). 

Ryan says that 'George Davidson was a close friend of Maybrick's who was a frequent visitor at Battlecrease House' (p.45).

According to MacDougall, 'There was another person also present at the time of death, Mr. George R. Davidson, or 7 Rumford Street, Liverpool, one of the very few persons who were constant visitors at Battlecrease House' (MacDougall, p. 62). 

52. Visited Hopper a lot in either November or December 1888

'I have visited Hopper too often this month.  I will have to stop, for fear he my begin to suspect.  I talk to him like no other.' 

'Dr Hopper...had been James's physician from about 1881, shortly after his marriage, until late in 1888' (Christie, p.94).

Nothing in Morland or Ryan about Maybrick still seeing Hopper in late 1888. 

In his statement, Hopper said that he attended Maybrick up to December 1888. At trial he agreed that he had attended Maybrick 'from time to time up to the end of 1888'.  But he saw him 'frequently' during June to September 1888 (perhaps 20 times).  Charles Russell said in cross-examination that Hopper had spoken particularly of having been in charge and attendance upon Maybrick 'from June 1888 to December 1888'.  Hopper confirmed at the trial that Maybrick came to his house. 

The evidence at trial was that Maybrick consulted Dr Drysdale on 19, 22 and 26 November 1888 and 5 and 10 December 1888 about pains in his head and numbness down the left leg and hand.  That Maybrick saw him three times in November and twice in December is stated in Ryan p. 29.  Morland says that Maybrick consulted Drysdale in November 1888 (p. 131).

53. He did business at the Exchange

'Encountered an old friend on the Exchange floor'

According to Ryan, 'As a member of the Liverpool Cotton Exchange he appeared daily on the exchange floor...' (Ryan, p. 26).    

MacDougall says: 'the late Mr James Maybrick was, as a cotton merchant, known in his business life to a great many cotton brokers on the Liverpool Exchange...' (MacDougall, p.2).

54. He had some Jewish friends

'I had forgotten how many Jewish friends I have'

There is nothing about this in the sources or evidence but it contradicts the statement earlier in the diary that the author had 'never taken' to Jews and that there were'far too many' of them on the Exchange Floor.

55. His wife had a second lover

'The bitch, the whore is not satisfied with one whore master, she now has eyes on another'

As discussed above, this appears to be a reference to the appearance on the scene of Brierley as mentioned in  Ryan (p.30), Morland (p.24) and Whittington-Egan (p.53). 

56. His favourite month was June

'I yearn for my favourite month, to see flowers in full bloom would please me so'

Also

'I believe I will see this June, my favourite of all months'

There is nothing in the sources or evidence about this.

No mention is made in the diary, incidentally, that June 1888 was not warm and that the weather was particularly poor during the month.

This is the recorded weather for the north-west of England in June 1888 (source Times newspaper), the temperature, where known, being in Fahrenheit:

1 June  – 50 degrees F, dull

3 June – 53 degrees, cloudy

4 June – 50 degrees, clear

5 June – 52 degrees, dull

6 June – 53 degrees, showers

7 June – 55 degrees, cloudy

8 June – 62 degrees, fine

10 June – 53 degrees, clear

11 June – 54 degrees, dull

12 June – 52 degrees, squally

13 June – 53 degrees, clear

14 June – 54 degrees, clear

16 June – 51 degrees, dull

17 June – 54 degrees, fine

18 June – 54 degrees, clear

19 June – 53 degrees, cloudy

20 June – 54 degrees, rain

21 June – 57 degrees, cloudy

22 June -59 degrees, hazy

24 June -55 degrees, dull

25 June - 67 degrees, showery  (75 degrees and fine in London)

26 June - 58 degrees, showery

27 June – 53 degrees, dull

30 June – 57 degrees, cloudy 

COMMENTS IN THE TIMES

w/e Weds 13 June – Somewhat unsettled "Weather has been dull and very rainy over the western and north-western parts of the kingdom"

w/e Weds 20 June – "The principal character of the past week's weather was unseasonably dull and cold"

w/e Weds 27 June – unsettled but "there has been a very great improvement". 

57. He left his wife penniless

'I have left her penniless, I have no regrets'

Ryan records that Florence wrote to her mother on 31 December 1888 saying, 'In his fury, he tore up his will this morning, as he had made me sole legatee and trustee for the children in it.  Now he proposes to settle everything he can on the children alone, allowing me only one-third by law!' (Ryan, p. 30).

The same extract from the letter is quoted in Morland (p. 23). 

58. He found a new source for his medicine in early 1889

'Have I not found a new source for my medicine.  I relish the thoughts that it will bring me'

According to Ryan, 'In January 1889, a man named Valentine Blake...agreed to supply [Maybrick] with what arsenic he had on hand...a month later, when they met again, Blake gave Maybrick 150 grains of arsenic in three separate paper packets' (Ryan, p.31).

The source for this information was Levy's 1899 book.  Blake didn't come forward with his evidence until five years after the trial (when it was published in a number of newspapers) which is another reason why the diary could not have been written by a forger prior to 1894.

According to Morland, 'It was in February 1889, that Blake called on Maybrick in consequence of their arrangements and handed him "all the arsenic I had at my command, amounting to 150 grains..." This James took and went straight home to Aigburth with it' (Morland, p. 224-225).

59. He was aware that his wife had told Michael of his medicine (which he denied)

'So help me God I will cut the bitch up and serve her up to the children. How dare the whore write to Michael. The damn bitch had no right to inform him of my medicine. If I have my funny little way the whore will be served up this very night. I stood my ground and informed Michael it was a damn lie.'

The trial evidence of Michael Maybrick is included in Morland in which Maybrick tells of receiving a letter from Florence in early March 1889 as follows:

'As far as I can recollect, she stated she had found my brother was taking a white powder, and that she thought it might have something to do with the pains in his head. I know it was a statement to that effect, to which I attached very little importance at the time. She also stated in the letter that he had not the slightest suspicion she had discovered it, and she would not like him to know it. I was given to understand that I was not to mention it to him' (Morland, p. 125)

Ryan includes a briefer summary of the evidence:

'Now Sir Charles brought the witness round to the letter Mrs Maybrick had written asking him to investigate his brother's habit of taking a white powder. Michael said that he had destroyed the letter, and related James's sharp response, 'Whoever told you that, it is a damned lie,' when he brought up the subject (Ryan, p.125).

Ryan also deals with the incident in the main body of the story:

"In London, about 12th March, Michael Maybrick received a letter from his sister-in-law.  Florence was concerned because her husband seemed to be in the habit of taking some pernicious drug which regularly had a bad effect on him. She had tried to reason with him about it, but he refused to discuss it. Michael brought up the subject when James came down to London the following Saturday night. 'What is it with reference to these white powders I am told about?' he said. 'I am told you take a certain powder'.  James looked at him.  'Whoever told you that, it is a damned lie.'  Michael did not pursue the subject." 

Morland too deals with the issue in the main body of the text noting that Michael said to his brother, 'What is it with reference to those white powders I am told about? I am told you take a certain powder to which James replied 'Whoever told you that, it is a damned lie' and the subject was not pursued (Morland, p. 38).

Here is Michael's evidence as reported in  the Liverpool Daily Post (1 August 1889):

'As far as I can recollect, she stated that she had been searching the house, and that she had found my brother was taking a white powder, and that she thought it might be having something to do with the pains in his head. I know it was a statement to that effect, to which I attached very little importance at the time. She also stated in the letter that he had not the slightest suspicion she had discovered it, and she would not like him to know it.  I was given to understand that I was not to mention it to him...On Saturday night, when my brother arrived, we were speaking about different things, and I said, "What is it with reference to those little white powders I am told about?" I said, "I am told you take a certain powder".  He said "Who ever told you that?  It is a ---- lie'.

Levy reproduces the last line of that answer as 'Whoever told you that, it is a damned lie' (Levy, p.50).

The forger must have missed the fact that (not included in the sources) Mr Addison for the prosecution returned to the issue in his re-examination, at which time Michael said (as reported in the Liverpool Daily Post):

'He could not fix a date, except as a fortnight before the 26th March, when he mentioned this to his brother, he said nothing more except the man who told you this is "a d---" ["a damned liar", per Levy p.50]. He did not pursue the matter further as his brother seemed much annoyed.'

We can see, therefore, that James Maybrick told his brother that he believed it was a 'man' who had given him the information about the white powder and who was a damned liar. Michael didn't tell James that Florence was his informant and, given that he said it was a man, James evidently didn't think it was her.

That it was credible that it was a man who was Michael's informant can be gleaned from the evidence of George Smith in a written statement in July 1889 in which he said of Maybrick that, 'I have often seen him taking medicine in the office'.  Similarly, Thomas Lowry gave a statement at the same time in which he said, 'I have seen Mr Maybrick taking medicine occasionally'.

The whole story as related by the diary is a bit odd.  Maybrick has already hit his wife for the 'crime' of telling Dr Hopper about his habit of taking strong medicine.  He made clear in his diary that, although he apologized, the violence was NOT a one off instance (hence 'The stupid bitch believed me').  Yet, when he supposedly finds out that she has (rather stupidly) done exactly the same thing again, this time telling his brother about his medicine, he contents himself with a short rant in his diary, taking no action against Florence whatsoever. 

In any case, as we've seen, in the real world, he never knew that anyone had ever said anything to Dr Hopper about his medicine and Michael never revealed the identity of his informant (who Maybrick thought was a man).  The forger hadn't fully understood the evidence.

60. His wife was planning to go to London in March 1889

'The bitch visits the city of whores soon.'

Morland tells us that Florence was planning to visit London on 21 March 1889 (for a week) and that James was aware of this (Morland, p. 26). Ryan says the same (p.35). 

61. He bought his wife something for her visit to London

'I shall buy the whore something for her visit'

This clumsy and unexpected statement in the diary, which is totally out of character, given the hatred Maybrick was then expressing for his wife (coming right after he has discovered she'd secretly told his brother about his 'medicine'), was derived by the cunning forger from something Elizabeth Humphreys told Alexander MacDougall and first published in MacDougall's 1891 book.  When describing the fight after the Grand National, Humphreys says in her statement to MacDougall:

'She was wearing a fur cape; he told take it off, as she was not to go away with that on; he had bought it for her to go up to London in'.(MacDougall, p. 68).

Ryan summarizes it thus:

'Maybrick turned to his wife. She was not to go away wearing the cape, he shouted.  As an afterthought, he roared that he had bought it for her to go up to London in' (Ryan, p.37).

Morland also includes it:

'James had bought the fur coat for her to go up to London in, and he now ordered her to remove it instantly' (Morland, p.32).

62. The purpose of his wife's visit to London was to visit her aunt (and see her lover)

'Will give the bitch the impression I consider it her duty to visit her aunt.  She can nurse the sick bitch and see her whoring master...'

According to Morland, 'James...accepted his wife's reason for her intended departure as her desire to take care of an aunt who was to be operated upon by Sir James Paget' (Morland p. 26).

Ryan says, 'She told her husband that an aunt was to undergo and operation, and that she had asked Florence to stay with her for a week or so during her first days of recuperation' (Ryan, p.35).

Both Morland (p.27) and Ryan (p.25) make clear that Florence was joined in London by Alfred Brierley.

Whittington-Egan says: 'Her felicity was short lived, reaching its pathetically sordid crescendo in a "daring" three-day sojourn with Brierley at an obscure London hotel, whither she escaped in March 1889, on the pretext of paying a dutiful visit to an invalid aunt' (p.53). 

The woman Florence claimed she was going to see in London was not, in fact, her aunt but her godmother, Countess de Gabriac who was supposedly visiting a surgeon in London (see Bunny's Aunt ). 

63. There was a public scandal at the Grand National

'Did not the whore see her whore master in front of all'

Ryan describes the incident thus: 'Alfred Brierley asked Florence Maybrick if she would like to see the Prince. She took his arm and under her new parasol they strolled toward the grandstand' (Ryan, p.37).

Morland is less sure what happened, even speculating that Maybrick's temper that day was caused by him backing a losing horse, but says, 'There is also the chance that Florence, thoroughly enjoying her day, may have looked on Brierley in too unguarded a fashion as they strolled about, and this even her husband observed' (Morland, p. 31).

Whittington-Egan says that the Maybricks happened to meet Brierley at the Grand National, 'and Mr Maybrick appears to have resented the attentions which [Brierley] paid to his wife.  A public scene ensued...' (Whittington-Egan, p.53). 

Based on what he had been told by the Maybricks, Dr Hopper described what had happened in his evidence at the inquest as having been 'a flirtation at the Grand National' (HO 144/1638A50678). 

64.  The 1889 Grand National was a fast race

'true the race was the fastest I have seen'

There are plenty of books, both old and modern (prior to 1992), about the Grand National which give the race times showing that the 1889 race, won by Frigate, was  won in the fastest recorded time of the 1880s. 

Maybrick, however, is the only person known to have stated that the 1889 Grand National was a particularly fast race. The reporter for the Times didn't mention anything.  While it's true that the winning time was 10 minutes and one second, compared to 10 minutes and 12 seconds in 1888 and 10 minutes and 10 seconds in 1887, the course had been shortened in 1889 to four miles and 856 yards (down from its normal four miles and 1,000 yards although, as the Times reported at the time, it had been shortened a little in 1888 down to four miles and 880 yards).

The 1887 race was actually run slightly faster at 13.18 yards per second as opposed to 13.13 yards per second in 1889.

The 1889 winning time wasn't a record or anything like that. In 1871 the National was won by 'The Lamb' in 9 minutes, 35 seconds but, in that year, the course had apparently been shortened down to 'about four miles'.

It seems highly unlikely, therefore, that anyone would have raved about the 1889 Grand National being a particularly fast race and that this was an error by the forger taking his information from the record books. 

65. The Prince of Wales attended the 1889 Grand National

'the thrill of seeing the whore with the bastard thrilled me more so than knowing his Royal Highness was but a few feet away from your truly' 

According to Ryan, 'Word had gone round that the Prince of Wales, with a large retinue, was in the grandstand….Mrs Briggs and Mrs Hughes, determined to have a look at his Royal Highness' (Ryan, p. 36).

Morland refers to 'the promise of an unusually large crowd in view of the presence of the Prince of Wales, coming as the Earl of Sefton's guest' (Morland, p. 30). 

66. He told his wife he could not afford a scandal

'I was clever....told the bitch in my position I could not afford a scandal.'

Morland records that Alice Yapp heard her master’s voice saying “Such a scandal will be all over the town tomorrow.” (Morland , p.37).  Ryan has the same thing (Ryan, p.37).

67. He struck his wife in the eye

'I struck her several times an eye for an eye'

Morland states: "Her face was white with anger and showed a bruise which later enlarged to a black eye he had given her in some sort of physical scrummage"(Morland p. 32) 

Ryan states: “When Mrs Maybrick awoke next morning, she had a black eye” (Ryan p.38).

Whittington-Egan states: 'there was a violent altercation, Maybrick so far forgetting himself as to give his wife a black eye' (Whittington-Egan, p. 53)

68. The servants interfered in the quarrel with his wife

'too many interfering servants, damn the bitches'.

The evidence at trial suggested no interference by the servants in the quarrel and only had Alice Yapp comforting Florence after it was over.  MacDougall, however, obtained more information from Elizabeth Humphreys (the cook) and Mary Cadwallader (waitress) which was included in his 1891 book and was used by Ryan and Morland so that Ryan has Humphreys intervening and saying, 'Oh master, please don't go on like this, the neighbours will hear you' to which Maybrick responds saying, 'Leave me alone. You don't know anything about this.'  Then Humphreys says, 'Don't send the mistress away tonight.  Where can she go?  Let her stay until morning...' (Ryan, p.37-38). Morland has the same thing (p. 32).  None of this featured in the evidence for the criminal proceedings in which Humphreys and the rest of the staff simply watched or listened to the quarrel and remained silent.

69. Dr Hopper intervened in the dispute with his wife

'Hopper will soon feel the edge of my shining knife, damn the meddling buffoon, damn all.'

This is how Ryan describes Hopper's involvement (after Florence went to see him at the suggestion of Mrs Briggs):

"Dr Hopper examined Mrs Maybrick’s black eye, and observed that she was distraught…In the afternoon, Dr Hopper came to Battlecrease House.  First he saw the Maybricks separately....Next the doctor met with the Maybricks together...The doctor departed from Battlecrease House under the impression that he had indeed effected a reconciliation." (Ryan, p.38) 

Morland gives a similar summary (Morland, p. 34-35).

70. His wife was in debt again

'Once more the bitch is in debt, my God I will cut her.'

According to the known evidence, this is the first time Maybrick learnt of his wife's debts (i.e. after the Grand National incident). 

Ryan tells us that:

"Mrs Maybrick told the doctor [Hopper] about her repugnance for her husband, and revealed that she had accumulated several debts.  She was afraid they might stand in the way of a reconciliation.   Dr Hopper advised her to make a clean breast of her debts and ask her husband’s forgiveness for them.  Next the doctor met with the Maybricks together.  Florence told her husband about her debts." (Ryan p.38-39)

Morland quotes Dr Hopper's own words to similar effect (Morland, p. 35). 

71. He paid his wife's debts 

'I will pay her dues' 

According to Ryan, 'Florence told her husband about her debts.  Maybrick made light of them and promised to pay them all' (Ryan p.39), and, 'when not preoccupied with business matters he had been fulfilling his agreement to settle his wife's debts' (Ryan p. 42).

According to Morland, writing about events of 13th April 1889, Maybrick, 'fulfilled his arrangement after the quarrel by dealing with his wife's debt' (Morland p. 37).

Whittington-Egan states that 'Maybrick undertook to discharge his wife's liabilities to the tune of £1,200' (p. 54). 

72. His body felt numb

'I feel a numbness in my body, the whores will pay for that'

Morland, referring to a slightly later period in April, when Maybrick went to see Dr Fuller, says, 'The patient complained of pains in the head, numbness and a fear of being paralysed; he had lost some sensation and disliked the feeling of being numb' (Morland, p.39).

Ryan, referring to the same period in April, says that'James complained to his brother of his persistent symptoms: pains in the head and numbness of the limbs' (Ryan, p.42).

Fuller's evidence at trial was that, during his visit on 14 April, 'He complained of pains and numbness, and said he was apprehensive of being paralysed...He had lost some sensation and felt numb' (Liverpool Daily Post, 2 August 1889). 

73. Dr Fuller said he wasn't ill

'Fuller believes there is very little the matter with me' 

According to Ryan, Fuller 'told his patient that he could find very little the matter with him' (Ryan, p.42).

Morland says that, 'Dr Fuller found nothing wrong except the patient was suffering from indigestion'  (Morland, p.39).

Fuller's evidence at trial was, 'I found there was nothing the matter with him. I told him there was very little the matter with him, but that he was suffering from indigestion.  When I told him this he seemed more cheerful' (Liverpool Daily Post, 2 August 1889).

74. He called his wife 'Bunny'

'visions of my dear Bunny overwhelm me'

Also

'Bunny and the children are all that matter'

Also

'I no longer take the dreaded stuff for fear I will harm my dear Bunny...' 

According to Morland, at a time when Florence fainted,'Maybrick was affectionate and anxious, crying out his Florence's pet name"Bunny, Bunny, here's your hubby" ' (Morland, p. 36).

According to Ryan, 'Maybrick came into the room crying, "Bunny, Bunny, here's your hubby".' (Ryan, p. 39).

75. Edwin returned from the United States in April

'My dear brother Edwin has returned'

According to Ryan, "Edwin Maybrick had arrived in Liverpool on Thursday, 25th April" (Ryan, p.44).

According to Morland, 'Edwin Maybrick...returned from the United States after a visit on business lasting since the previous August'  (Morland, p.40).

76. He confesses to his wife to being the Ripper

'My dear Bunny knows all. I do not know if she has the strength to kill me..Have begged Bunny to act soon'

There is nothing in the sources or the evidence about this. 

77. He changes his will

'have redressed the balance of my previous will'

According to Ryan, 'On the day of his brother’s arrival, Maybrick was preoccupied with drawing a will to replace the one he had torn up on New Year’s Eve' (Ryan, p. 4). 

Morland says, 'The will was written in a big, shaky hand on blue paper on the day that Edwin Maybrick returned from the States' (Morland, p.79).

78. He took care of his wife in his will (and made Michael and Thomas his executors) 

'Bunny and the children are well cared for and I trust Michael and Thomas will carry out my wishes.'

The terms of the will are stated in Ryan (p.45) and in Morland (p.78) as follows: 

“I leave all my worldly possessions…in trust with my brothers Michael Maybrick and Thomas Maybrick for my two children James Chandler Maybrick and Gladys Evelyn Maybrick….My widow will have for her portion of my estate and policies on my life, say, £500 with the Scottish Widows Fund and £2,000 with the Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association of New York, both policies being in her name.” 

79. He was able to sign his diary on 3rd May 1889

'Yours truly Jack the Ripper, Dated this third day of May 1889' 

Morland chronology states:

"(May 3)  Illness of Mr Maybrick for a second time"(Morland, xvii)

Ryan states:

'On 3rd May he stayed in bed, and Cadwallader again hurried to fetch Dr Humphreys...Soon after Dr Humphyeys had gone, Maybrick decided he felt better, went to his office, stayed only a short time, went home again...By late afternoon he again felt better. He decided to see about that Turkish bath the doctor had approved. ...Maybrick came home and took to his bed again.' (Ryan, p. 50). 

PART 2 - THE RIPPER BITS

BOOKS

Robin Wilson and Robin Odell, 'Jack the Ripper: Summing up and Verdict' 1987 

Robin Odell, 'Jack the Ripper in Fact and Fiction' 1965

Paul Begg: 'Jack the Ripper: The Uncensored Facts' 1988

Peter Underwood: 'Jack the Ripper: One Hundred Years of Mystery' 1988

Donald Rumbelow: 'The Complete Jack the Ripper' 1988

Paul Begg, Martin Fido, Keith Skinner, 'The Jack the Ripper A to Z' 1991 (this book is only partly considered as a source due to its size)

The main text is highlighted in white, extracts from the rhymes in yellow.  

1. The murders occurred close to Middlesex Street

'I have taken a small room in Middlesex Street, that in itself is a joke'  

Odell - 'The stalls in Petticoat Lane or Middlesex Street sold virtually everything from a pair of kippers for tuppence to a suit of clothing for ten shillings' (p. 22)  AND Odell features a map showing Middlesex Street (p.105) AND Odell quotes Hutchinson saying that 'I fancied I saw him in Petticoat Lane on Sunday morning' (p.113).

Middlesex Street is referred to as being close to where the writing on the wall was discovered in Begg, p. 125. 

Underwood - 'George Hutchinson...thought he had seen the man at least once before, at the Sunday market in Petticoat Lane' (p.29) AND 'Petticoat Lane, the Middlesex Street market, lies behind White's Row' (p. 142). 

Rumbelow refers to Middlesex Street as being where Frances Coles and James Saddler went for some drinks (p.29).

The A to Z has a map of Whitechapel at the front of the book showing the location of Middlesex Street.  

2. There is a Whitechapel in Liverpool

'Whitechapel Liverpool, Whitechapel London, ~ No one could possibly place it together'

Underwood mentions the possibility that a Ripper letter was posted from Whitechapel General Post Office in Liverpool hoping that the letter would be franked Whitechapel but was in fact franked 'Central' (p. 104).  But any resident of Liverpool would probably have been familiar with Whitechapel in Liverpool and would have been able to make the connection on their own.  

3. Nichols was killed in silence

'There was no scream when I cut'

Odell - 'four men each approaching Buck's Row from different directions had neither seen nor heard anything unusual' (p. 30). AND...'if there had been any noise or screams Mrs Green thought that she would have heard them' (p.32).

Wilson & Odell - 'The police questioned residents living close to the scene of the murder but no-one heard any noise or scream amounting to an alarm' (p. 20).  

Underwood - 'No-one, it seemed, had heard anything and no one knew anything' (p. 3).

Begg - 'Mrs Green, who claimed to be a light sleeper, said that she slept undisturbed by any unusual sounds' (p.41). 

Harrison - 'Subsequent enquiries in Bucks Row revealed that no-one had heard or seen anything suspicious'...and it appeared that the murder had been committed in total silence...' (p. 31). 

Rumbelow - 'she must have met her death without a cry or shout for help' (p.44).

4. Apparent attempt to cut off Nichols' head

'I was more than vexed when the head would not come off.' 

Odell - Quotes the Star saying that there was 'a wide and horrible hole, nearly severing the head from the body' (p.31)  AND 'The post mortem revealed that Nicholls' throat had been cut from ear to ear' (p.33).

Wilson & Odell - 'A livid incision about four inches long started an inch below the left side of the jaw and below it was another larger, deeper incision which had cut the throat back to the vertebrae and finished about three inches below the right jaw' (p.18) AND with respect to the murder of Chapman) - 'The throat had been cut right down to the backbone with savage force.' (p. 22).

Underwood - Not said (although he mentions a 'great gash in her throat' (p.2), probably not enough).

Fido - 'The murderer had slashed through her jugular veins, windpipe and half her spinal column.  In truth, he had almost cut her head off' (p. 23).

Begg - 'There were two cuts in the throat.  One was four inches long and the other eight, both cuts reached through to the vertebrae' (p. 46)  AND with respect to the murder of Chapman: 'It looked as though the murderer had attempted to cut through the spine to remove Chapman's head' (p.60).

Harrison - 'windpipe, gullet and spinal cord being cut through' (p. 31). 

Rumbelow - 'The windpipe and gullet had been completely severed, cut back to the spinal cord' (p.38) and 'cut the throat back to the vertebrae' (p.39).

5. Nichols suffered a deep cut

'I struck deep into her'

Odell - quoting the Star: 'The knife which must have been a large and sharp one, was jabbed into the deceased at the lower part of the abdomen, and then drawn upwards, not once but twice. The first cut veered to the right, slitting up the groin, and passing over the left hip, but the second cut went straight upward, along the centre of the body, and reaching to the breast bone' (p. 31).  

Wilson & Odell - 'Several jagged incisions had ripped the abdomen open down its full length and there were two stab wounds in the genitals' (p. 18-19). 

Underwood - 'Later examination revealed an enormous and deep gash that extended from the abdomen almost as far as the diaphragm' (p.3). 

Fido - 'great gash ran from the bottom of the ribs...to the pelvis...and there were two deep obscene stabs in her genitals' (p. 23). 

Begg - 'lower part of the abdomen...there was a jagged wound, very deep and having cut through the tissues' (p.46).

Harrison - 'The abdomen had been cut open from centre of bottom of ribs' (p. 31).

Rumbelow - 'a deep jagged incision' (p.39).

6. Knowledge of press reaction to first murder in London

'The wait to read about my triumph seemed long, although it was not. I am not disappointed, they have all written well.'

Odell quotes the Star reporter's description of the injuries to Nichols and says, 'Seeing that the murder was beyond description, this reporter displayed considerable initiative in giving the public the facts' (p. 31). 

Fido lists newspaper references to reports of Nichols' murder in the Pall Mall Gazette, the Star and the Times of 1 September 1888 and Reynolds of 2 September (p. 222).

Underwood - No mention.

Begg - Says that the fact Nichols' fingers bore the impression of a ring was 'widely reported in the press on 1 September' and quotes part of the Times of 1 September saying that it was 'hard to believe Nichols was killed where she was found' (p. 46-47).

Harrison - Not really but mentions that the press linked the Nichols murder with various other crimes in the district and implied that the killer was 'some kind of super-being in the form of a beast, half-man, half-animal' (p. 36).

Rumbelow - No mention. 

7. Murder of Chapman followed soon after the first

'I will not allow too much time to pass before my next.'

Odell - 'On Friday September 7th, the inhabitants of Hanbury Street, Spitalfields, the drew the blinds of their shops and homes as the hearse bearing the body of Mary Nicholls passed through the street. On the following day the body of a mutilated woman was found in a backyard at 29 Hanbury Street' (p. 35). 

Wilson & Odell - '...on the morning of 31 August...PC Neil saw...the body of a woman..on 8 September, another sensational murder occurred in the East End' (p. 21). 

Underwood, Fido, Begg, Harrison and Rumbelow obviously all record the dates of the two murders.

8. The killer carried chalk with him (or intended to)

'I was vexed with myself I realized I had forgotten the chalk' 

AND

'Next time I will remember the chalk' 

Odell - 'on the doorway near by, scrawled in chalk...' (p. 64).  

Wilson & Odell (referring to the night of the double event - 'On the black dado of the staircase wall in the model dwellings was a chalked message' (p.35).  

Underwood- 'chalked on the black wall' (p. 20). 

Fido - 'chalked message' (p.48).

Begg - 'message written in white chalk' (p. 126).

Harrison - 'chalked upon a wall in red chalk' (p. 63). 

Rumbelow - 'The message had been written in chalk' (p. 67).

9. A part of the Chapman's insides was taken away  

'I took some of it away with me. It is in front of me....I ripped open'

Odell - 'From the pelvis the uterus and its attachments with the upper portion of the vagina and part of the bladder had been entirely removed' (p.41).  

Wilson & Odell - '...from the pelvic region of the body the uterus with its ovaries, part of the vagina and a portion of the bladder had been cut out and entirely removed' (p. 24). 

Underwood - 'removal of a kidney' (!) (p. 8) AND 'body had been virtually disembowelled and the uterus and appendages removed' (p. 9). 

Fido - 'Her uterus and its appendages had been removed' (p. 34).

Begg - 'the uterus and its appendages with the upper portion of the bladder had been entirely removed' (p. 60). 

Harrison - 'the medical evidence suggested the victim's uterus had been removed by the killer for a special purpose' (p. 45). 

Rumbelow - 'the uterus and its appendages with the upper portion of the vagina and the posterior two-thirds of the bladder had been entirely removed' (p.51).

10. Knowledge of claimed cannibalism in Ripper correspondence

'I intended to fry it and eat it later...I ate all of it'

See No. 38 below. 

11. Killer left a clue 

'I have left the stupid fools a clue which I am sure they will not solve.' 

Not in the sources or the evidence; surely an invention of the forger. 

12. Involvement of pills

'One pill that's true' (crossed out)

AND

'No pill left but two' 

Odell - 'Two pills were found' (p. 36).  

Wilson & Odell - 'There was also a piece of paper enclosing two pills' (p.23). 

Underwood - 'Two medicinal pills'  (p.9).

Fido - 'They found two pills' (p.31). 

Begg - 'screwed up piece of paper containing two pills' (p. 63). 

Harrison - Not mentioned.  

Rumbelow - 'piece of paper containing two pills' (p.48)

13. Knowledge of 'M'

'M will catch Sir Jim' (crossed out)

AND

'the whores M' 

Odell - 'the address portion, with the exception of the single letter "M", was torn off' (p. 36).  

Wilson & Odell - 'Near the spot where the victim's head had lain was found part of an envelope...on the front, the letter 'M'...' (p. 23).  

Underwood - 'the letters M...' (p.9). 

Fido - Not mentioned!  

Begg - 'had the letter 'M' in a man's handwriting' (p. 63).

Harrison - 'the letter M and a postmark' (p. 39). 

Rumbelow - 'the letter M and a post office stamp' (p. 48).

14. Rings of second victim were wrenched off her fingers

'one ring, two rings, bitch, it took a while before I could wrench them off'

Odell - 'Neatly laid in a row at the woman's feet were two brass rings, which had evidently been wrenched from her fingers' (p. 35).

Wilson & Odell - 'Close to the position of the feet lay two rings, removed from the fingers of the victim' (p.23).  

Underwood - 'the murderer had found his victim...wrenched off her rings...' (p. 10). 

Fido - 'Donovan and other occupants of 35 Dorset Street confirmed that she had been wearing three brass rings when she left...Their marks were still visible on her hands' (p. 32).

Begg - 'Annie Chapman was wearing two cheap brass rings on the night she was killed and that these appeared to have been forcibly removed from her finger' (p.46).  

Harrison - mentions the two brass rings (p. 39) but says nothing about them having been removed or wrenched from the victim's fingers.

Rumbelow - 'As if he was taking part in some elaborate ritual the killer had laid the two rings he had torn from her fingers...' (p. 48).

15. Involvement of farthings

'two farthings'

AND 

'The bitch was not worth the farthings.'

Odell - 'together with a few pennies and two new farthings' (p. 35).  

Wilson & Odell - '...some pennies and two new farthings' (p. 23). 

Underwood - 'Chandler...was not a little surprised to find two brass rings (presumably wrenched from the victim's fingers) a few pennies and a couple of farthings...Chandler also retrieved two medicinal pills' (p. 9). 

Fido - 'There were also two farthings, though these were not mentioned at the inquest. Possibly the police believed they were worth keeping secret as a clue...they suggested handiwork of a  young medical student, known to pass off polished farthings on prostitutes as sovereigns' (p.31) AND 'The legend that the rings and farthings (with steadily increasing numbers of pennies) were piled symbolically at her feet has grown up over the years' (p.32).

Begg - No mention of the farthings in the text but in a footnote he says: 'An error perpetuated by almost every writer on the subject of Jack the Ripper...is that laid at Chapman's feet were two brass rings together with a few pennies and two farthings...there were no coins or rings...the press and the police report make it abundantly clear that there were no coins and certainly no rings' (p.224-225).

Harrison - 'Where her feet had lain, two brass rings and two new farthings were found' (p. 39). - In his Research Notes, Barrett notes that Harrison doesn't mention the pennies and concludes: 'He being a policeman doing his research would not have missed such a fact.  Therefore, if true, Maybrick would never mention pennies..'   

Rumbelow - 'some pennies and two new farthings at the woman's feet' (p.48).

16.  Knowledge of left handed suspect

'I had to laugh, they have me down as left handed'  

Odell - 'Dr Llewellyn stated that the injuries were from left to right and might have been done by a left-handed person' (p.138). 

Wilson & Odell - 'The doctor thought the mutilations might have been inflicted by a left-handed person using a long-bladed knife' (p. 19).  

Underwood - Nothing about killer having been left-handed prior to the double event.

Fido - 'Dr Llewellyn deduced that the killer was left-handed' (p.23).

Begg - notes that the injuries to Nichols 'appeared to have been made by a left-handed man' (p. 46). 

Harrison - 'The only clue the police had was the fact that the killer might be left-handed' (p. 32).

Rumbelow - 'Dr Llewellyn thought that these mutilations might have been done by a left-handed person' (p. 40).

17. Knowledge of suspect as a doctor

'I had to laugh, they had me down as...a Doctor'

The widely reproduced Dear Boss letter (in all the books) says, 'they say I am a doctor now ha ha' 

Odell - 'The close proximity of the London Hospital to the scenes of the Whitechapel murders led to the rumour that not only was the killer a doctor, but he also worked in the London Hospital' (p. 96) AND 'after Annie Chapman's murder...the papers were full of well-dressed doctors and their like being the Ripper' (p. 257). 

Wilson & Odell - 'the injuries had been made by someone who had considerable anatomical skill and knowledge' (p. 29) AND 'It was perhaps natural that Victorians, unfamiliar with the mutilating excesses of sex crimes, should think in terms of Jack the Ripper being a doctor' (p. 93).

Underwood - 'the idea arose that the murderer must be a doctor or someone versed in medical knowledge' (p.8).

Fido - 'The misleading phrase 'sweep of the knife' has led to the persistent belief that the Ripper was a doctor'(p.35) AND 'knowledge of the missing uterus spread fast and the idea of a man with medical training took wing' (p. 35).

Begg - Refers to suspicion falling on medical students (pp. 66-67).

Harrison - ' a bewildered police force was no inundated with claims that the killer must be a mad doctor' (p. 46). 

Rumbelow - Citing Baxter, 'it must have been someone accustomed to the post-mortem room' (p. 58).

18. Knowledge of suspect as a slaughterman

'I had to laugh, they had me down as....a slaughterman'

Odell -  Odell's entire Chapter 16 discusses whether the killer was a Jewish slaughterman AND 'The proximity of 29 Hanbury Street to a slaughter-house did not escape attention, for this was the case in Nicholls' murder in Buck's Row' (p. 42).

Wilson & Odell - 'Dr Phillips...conjectured that a post-mortem knife might have been the murder weapon or a well ground down slaughterman's knife...' (p. 29). 

Underwood - No real mention of slaughterman. 

Fido - No mention of a slaughterman as suspect (other than after double event when Dr Brown is said to have ruled out the murder weapon as being a shochet's knife, p. 208).

Begg - notes that Dr Phillips referred to a'well-ground slaughterman's knife' as possibly having been the murder weapon in the case of Chapman (p. 60). 

Harrison -  'It could well be..a well ground slaughterman's knife' (p. 46) AND under heading 'Butcher/Slaughterman', 'The belief that the Ripper might have belonged to this profession was extremely rife during the times of the murders...Police enquiries turned to the abundant number of slaughterhouses and other such establishments in the district' (p.143). 

Rumbelow - 'Those knives used by slaughtermen, which were well ground down, were possible alternatives...'(p. 51) AND discusses Odell's theory that the killer was a slaughterman (pp.220-227)

19. Knowledge of suspect as a Jew

'I had to laugh, they had me down as...a Jew.'

Odell - ''Thicke arrested a Polish Jew called John Pizer' (p. 47). 

Wilson & Odell - '...the Polish Jew, known as 'Leather Apron' whose name was John Pizer...came under suspicion following the murder of Annie Chapman' (p. 134).

Underwood - 'No real mention of a Jew as the killer. 

Fido - 'The Star had run a long piece of Leather Apron...it described a short thickset Jew' (p. 33) AND 'The sensational publicizing of 'Leather Apron' had given the murder scare an anti-semitic turn.  There was nothing inherently prejudiced in suggesting that the murderer might have been a Jew' (p.36). Fido also reproduces an article from the East London Observer saying, 'it was repeatedly asserted that...it must have been done by a JEW' (p. 37).

Begg - 'It soon became implanted in the public mind that the murders were so hideous that no Englishman could have sunk to such bestial depths and that therefore they had to be the work of a foreigner, by which a Jew was usually, although not exclusively meant' (p.70).  

Harrison -  describes arrest of Pizer before saying, 'The ordeal of the 33-year-old Jewish bootmaker was over' (p.42).

Rumbelow - cites East London observer as saying 'that no Englishman could her perpetrated such a horrible crime, and that it must have been done by a Jew...' (p.47).

20. Knowledge of Punch cartoon

'I read Punch there for all to see was the first three letters of my surname.  They are blind as they say.

'Turn round three times, and catch whom you MAY'

Cartoon and caption reproduced in Odell.  

On dust cover of Fido (which also shows the date of publication as being 22 September 1888). 

Reproduced in the 1987 edition of Rumbelow but it's not in the 1988 edition.

But not in Wilson & Odell or Underwood, Begg or Harrison.

21. Knowledge of name of lead investigator

'Abberline says...'

Odell - 'A large force of divisional detectives under the supervision of Inspector Abberline of Scotland Yard dealt with the murders' (p. 36).  

Wilson & Odell - 'Telegrams were despatched to a number of senior police officers including Detective Inspector Frederick Abberline at Scotland Yard' (p. 22), 

Underwood - 'Inspector Abberline headed the team of CID officers investigating the Ripper murders' (p. 4). 

Fido - 'Inspector Abberline was sent over from Scotland Yard to work with Helson and co-ordinate the investigation' (p.111).

Begg  - 'Inspector Abberline...headed the investigation on the ground (p. 26) BUT also says that 'The man selected to take charge of the investigation into the Whitechapel murders was Detective Chief Inspector Donald Sutherland Swanson' (p. 51).

Harrison - 'Meanwhile at Scotland Yard Inspector Frederick Abberline was the latest addition to the squad in search of the Whitechapel killer' (p. 44).  

Rumbelow - 'Chandler...hastily arranged for telegrams to be sent to Detective Inspector Frederick Abberline at New Scotland Yard, who had been called in to assist in the Buck's Row murder' (p.47) AND 'In charge of the investigation was Inspector Frederick George Abberline' (p.71).

We may note that Inspector Abberline was sufficiently famous due to Michael Caine's portrayal of him in a 1988 television series. A source probably isn't necessary.

22. Killer nearly caught on night of double event 

'To my astonishment I cannot believe I have not been caught...I would have dearly loved to have cut the head of the damned horse off'

Odell - 'It seemed that the murder had been committed not long before Diemschutz arrived in the court.  The murderer may well have been lurking in the darkness, and the steward's pony had perhaps sensed his sinister presence' (p. 63) 

Wilson & Odell - 'it must seem likely that when Louis first poked the body and then disappeared into the Club, the Ripper must have been hiding in the shadows of the dark court' (p. 15) AND 'the steward's pony may have shied less at the body lying on the ground than on sensing the presence of the killer in the pitch blackness' (p. 33).

Underwood - 'it must seem likely that when Louis first poked the body and then disappeared into the Club, the Ripper must have been hiding in the shadows of the dark court...' (p. 15) AND 'Was the Ripper seen on this occasion?  A Mrs Mortimer, who lived close by, said she was standing in the doorway of her house between 12.50 and 1.00am enjoying the night air.  She heard the sound of an argument nearby and a stifled cry and a bump. Shortly afterwards she saw a young man carrying a shiny black bag walk briskly down the street.' (p.14).

Fido doesn't really suggest that the murderer was nearly caught.  Nor does Begg. Nor does Harrison. Nor does Rumbelow.

23. Stride not mutilated (and killer interrupted)

'I had no time to rip the bitch wide'

Odell - 'the body had not been mutilated.  It was assumed that the arrival of Diemschutz had disturbed the killer and prevented him from carrying out his surgery' (p.63) AND 'the murderer must have been disturbed by the distant sound of the approaching pony and cart on the cobbled streets. Thus prevented from carrying out any mutilations on his victim's body he hid in the pitch blackness and made his escape when the club steward ran into the concert room after finding the body' (p.68).

Wilson & Odell - 'the suggestion was quickly put about that the killer had been prevented from mutilating his victim by the arrival of Diemschutz' (p.32) AND 'found to be dead from a deep cut in the throat...there were no other injuries...' (p.33)  AND 'No mutilations; murderer thought to have been disturbed' (p.139).

Underwood - 'apart from the deep cut in the throat there were no other wounds on the body' (p.14) AND 'It must seem likely, given the estimated time of death and the circumstances of the discovery of the body, that the murderer was interrupted by the arrival of Louis Diemschutz' (p. 15).

Fido - 'Apparently alarmed by Diemschutz's approaching pony, he had slipped away unseen' (p. 46).  [Doesn't expressly mention the lack of mutilations]

Begg - 'The body was not mutilated'.  The conclusion was that either Stride was not murdered by Jack the Ripper or her killer was interrupted before he could inflict injuries from which he obtained his soubriquet' (p. 109).

Harrison - 'Perhaps if the Ripper did kill Liz Stride, he was disturbed by the return of the club steward on the horse and cart and had insufficient time to commit any mutilations' (p. 171).  

Rumbelow - No suggestion of the killer being interrupted. Doesn't expressly mention the lack of mutilations but cites the Macnaghten memorandum stating 'nothing in the shape of mutilation attempted'.

24. Was nearly spotted

'I find it impossible to believe he did not see me, in my estimation I was less than a few feet from him'...The fool panicked, it is what saved me'.

See No. 22 above. Presumably relates to Diemschutz but could possibly be the story of Schwartz discussed in Begg (p.101-105) and more briefly in Harrison (p.58).

25. Found a new victim within 15 minutes

'Within the quarter of the hour I found another dirty bitch willing to sell her wares'

Odell - 'they were killed within an hour of each other, at spots separated only by fifteen minutes' walking distance' (p.62).  

Wilson & Odell - 'The sequence of the night's events appeared to be that the killer had first been murdered in Berner Street at about 1 a.m. when he was disturbed and then moved eastwards to Mitre Square, a walk of about fifteen minutes, when he murdered again between 1.30 and 1.45' (p.36). 

Underwood - 'The murderer, if it was the same man, probably made straight for Mitre Square, no more than fifteen minutes walking distance, intent on finding someone on whom to vent his blood lust and probably infuriated and frustrated beyond endurance at being disturbed and unable to complete his vile activities' (p. 17).

Fido - 'From Henriques Street to Mitre Square is about fifteen minutes walk with traffic on Commercial Road and Aldgate to contend with.  But the police estimate in 1888 was that the two sites were eight minutes apart' (p. 46). 

Begg - Not stated. 

Harrison - Not stated (other than saying, 'Fleeing the scene he calmly walked to Mitre Square, with his appetite for blood forcing him on' (p. 171)).

Rumbelow - 'two more equally brutal murders...within a quarter of an hour's walking distance of each other' (p.61). 

26. Heavy mutilations on Eddowes including nose and eyes

'I cut deep deep deep. Her nose annoyed me so I cut it off, had a go at her eyes left my mark'

Odell - ''horribly mutilated about the face' (p. 71)... who knew the woman alive would never recognize her by the face' (p.70) AND 'the poor woman's face had been disfigured by knife-slashes'  (p. 71) AND 'both eyes had been injured' (p. 71). - nothing about nose. 

Wilson & Odell - 'Her throat had been savagely cut, and the clothing pushed up to her chest exposing the lower part of her body which had been hacked open. The woman's face bore a large gash across the nose and down one cheek...' (p. 34)  AND 'The face was mutilated with several cuts.  Both eyelids were nicked and the skin below the left eye had been cut through.  There was a clean cut over the bridge of the nose...This cut went into the nasal bone and divided all the tissues of the cheek, with the exception of the mucous membrane of the mouth.  The tip of the nose was quite detached by an oblique cut from the bottom of the nasal bone...'(p. 40). AND 'the knife leaving a mark on the vertebral cartilage' (p.40).

Underwood - 'both eyes had been injured' (p. 19). - nothing about nose. 

Note: Fido p. 75 'a murderer who was precisely and quasi-artistically putting his personal mark on his victim's face' .  Fido also reproduces Dr Brown's full autopsy report confirming the cuts to eyes and nose (p. 70-71).

Begg - 'Catharine Eddowes was horribly mutilated.  Her face had been severely cut, her eyes, nose, lips and cheek having been attacked with calculated ferocity' (p. 124).  

Harrison - 'there was a terrible disfigurement to the facial area, with Vs cut into each cheek, a slice removed from her nose and cuts across the eyelids' (p. 61).

Rumbelow - 'One large gash across her right cheek had severed the tip of her nose and part of her right ear' (p.64). 

27. Knowledge of a failed attempt to remove head of Eddowes?

'could not get the bitches head off'

Odell - 'Her throat was cut....through the vocal cords'(pp.71-72).

Wilson & Odell - 'The throat was cut for about six inches...the deeper structures in the neck were divided down to the backbone, the knife leaving a mark on the vertebral cartilage' (p. 40).

Underwood - Nothing other than that 'the throat was cut' (p.19).

Fido - 'The larynx was severed, and below the vocal cord all the deep structures were severed to the bone, the knife marking intervertebral cartilages' (p.71).

Begg - Nothing other than that 'the throat had been cut' (p. 124).

Harrison - 'A six-to-seven inch gash ran from one side of the throat to the other, with the blade of the knife passing so deeply that it scratched invertebrae' (p. 68). 

Rumbelow - Nothing other than 'the throat had been cut' (p.64). 

28. No-one heard any screams of Eddowes 

'The whore never screamed' 

Odell - 'Another point made by Dr Brown was that the killer made sure of silencing his victim by first cutting through the vocal cords' (p. 72). 

Wilson & Odell - 'Dr Brown thought that...there had been no struggle' (p.43). 

Underwood - 'The night watchman...heard no sounds in the square...' (p. 19). 

Fido - 'The murderer had struck again with amazing speed and silence' (p.45). 

Begg - 'PC James Harvey...I heard no cry or noise' (p.123). 

Harrison - Nothing from which such inference can be drawn. But the Dear Boss letter says 'I gave the lady no time to squeal'.

Rumbelow - Nothing expressly stated from which such inference could be drawn.  But the Dear Boss letter says 'I gave the lady no time to squeal'.

29. Removed internal organs

'I took all I could away with me'

Odell - 'a kidney and and the ovaries had been removed from the body' (p.71-72) AND 'in the course of the mutilations inflicted on...Eddowes...abdominal organs were removed...' (p. 138).

Wilson & Odell - 'When the doctors came to examine the contents of the abdomen they discovered what they had perhaps feared from the start - that there were organs missing from the body' (p. 41). 

Underwood - 'kidney and the ovaries had been removed' (p.19).  

Fido - 'Removal of internal organs (kidney and uterus)' (p.74). 

Begg - 'The left kidney and, again, the uterus were missing' (p.124). 

Harrison - 'The left kidney had been removed' (p. 68).

Rumbelow - 'extraction of the left kidney' (p. 86). 

30. Knows name of Chief Commissioner

'Perhaps I will send Abberline and Warren a sample or two'

Sir Charles Warren mentioned as Metropolitan Police Commissioner in Odell at p.51, Wilson & Odell at page 36, Underwood p. 20, Fido p,110 Begg, p. 21 et seq, Harrison, p.24, Rumbelow p.33-35.

31. Knowledge of Ripper correspondence

'Perhaps next time I will keep some of the red stuff send it courtesy of yours truly.'

AND 

'I will not play my funny little games on my doorstep' 

Lots of 'ha ha' throughout (23 times apparently)

Odell (quoting the Dear Boss letter signed 'Yours truly, JACK THE RIPPER') - 'wasn't good enough to post this before I got all the red stuff off my hands curse it' (p. 91) AND 'You will soon hear of me with my funny little games'.  Wilson & Odell reproduce p.45.  Underwood p. 99, Harrison, p.49-51, Rumbelow, p.116 et seq. 

Begg - Doesn't quote from the letter. 

32. Knowledge of writing on the wall

'I wonder if they enjoyed my funny Jewish joke?'

Odell transcribes as 'The Jewes are not the men to be blamed for nothing' (p. 64). 

Wilson & Odell (referring to the writing on the wall):'Written in a rounded schoolboy hand in inch-high lettering in five lines were the words: The Juwes are The men That Will not be Blamed for nothing' (p. 35).

Underwood transcribes as 'The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing'. (p. 20). 

Fido - 'And what do the words mean? With the dialect double negative taken into account, surely 'The Jews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing' (p. 52).

Begg - Gives two different versions and says, 'The only real point of interest at our present state of knowledge is that the killer had that night struck near to clubs largely frequented by Jews, but how this and the writing is to be interpreted is difficult to say' (p.126). 

Harrison - 'The word 'Juwes' should have been spelt 'Jewes' and was mean to refer to the nickname used by the majority of the Metropolitan Officers when referring to their City opponents' (p.65).

Rumbelow - Transcribed as 'The Juwes are not the me that Will be Blamed for nothing' 

33. Knowledge of Central News Agency as recipient of correspondence

'Before my next will send Central another to remember me by'

Odell - 'a letter signed "Jack the Ripper" had been received by the Central News Agency' (p.78). 

Wilson & Odell - 'Shortly before the killings the Central News Agency in London received a letter.... ' (p. 44).

Underwood p. 98.

Fido - Doesn't mention! 

Begg - 'The Central News Agency had by this time received a letter dated 25 September 1888...' (p. 90). 

Harrison - 'the Central News Agency in London received a letter dated 25 September 1888' (p.49).

Rumbelow 'was sent to the Central News Agency' (p.118). 

34. Stride had a red rose

'With a rose to match the red' 

Fido 'She wore a black cloth jacket to which was pinned a red rose set in a spray of maidenhair' (p.53).  

Harrison - 'Small bunch of flowers pinned to right side of jacket (Maidenhair fern and red rose)' (p. 55).

Odell - No.

Underwood - No.  

Begg - 'Spooner...said...that there was a white and red flower pinned to the jacket' (Begg, p. 109). 

Rumbelow - 'Some red and white flowers were pinned to her black fur-trimmed jacket' (p.62) 

35. There was a horse involved which shied

'horse...went and shied'

Odell - 'his pony refused and shied nervously' (p. 62).  

Wilson & Odell - 'As he turned into the court, Diemschutz's pony shied...' (p. 32).

Underwood - 'Suddenly the horse pulled up sharp...' (p. 13). 

Fido - 'Diemschutz turned his pony's head in at the gate...As he did so, the best shied' (p.41) .

Could there be significance in Underwood's use of the word 'horse' when the others refer to a 'pony'? 

Begg - quotes Diemschutz's words from his inquest, as reported in the Guardian, that his pony 'bore too much toward the left hand side against the wall' (although the report in the Times records him as saying it 'shied to the left' ). And Diemschutz calls it a pony.

Harrison - 'On entering the yard Diemschutz found that his pony appeared to shy away from something and pulled to the left' (p. 53) BUT later, when discussing suspects, refers to his 'horse and cart' (p. 171).

Rumbelow  - 'The pony shied to the left and wouldn't pull straight' (p.62).

A to Z has sketch of Diemschutz finding the body of Stride showing his horse and cart and in the entry for Stride refers to his horse. 

36. Use of cachous

'her sweet scented breath'

Begg - 'Her left arm was extended and there was a packet of cachous - a pill used by smokers to sweeten the breath - in her hand' (p. 108).

Underwood...'In her right hand the victim still clutched a small packet of pink cachous, used to sweeten the breath' (p.14) .

Not in Odell, Wilson & Odell, Fido, Harrison or Rumbelow (which only mention the cachous).

Mike Barrett's 1992 Research Notes contain the following dictionary definition for CACHOU: 'An aromatic preparation in the form of a tablet or pellet, used to perfume the breath'

Oxford Dictionary of English - Cachou: 'a pleasant smelling lozenge sucked to mask bad breath'

The Concise Oxford Dictionary (7th edition, 1987 reprint): 'lozenge to sweeten breath'

37. Knowledge of Eddowes' possessions

'tin match box empty,...cigarette case....the whores knife... tea and sugar'....bonnett'

Harrison - 'black straw bonnett...One tin box containing tea.  One tin box containing sugar....One white-handled table knife... One red leather cigarette-case...One tin matchbox, empty.... ' (p.67).

Fido - 'Black straw bonnett...1 Tin Box containing Tea. 1 do do do Sugar. 1 White Handle Table Knife...1 Tin MatchBox, empty' (p. 70).

Rumbelow - 'Her black straw bonnet, trimmed with black beads and green and black velvet, was still tied to the back of her head...one tin box containing sugar and anotehr tea,...a blunt white bone handle table knife...a red cigarett case with white mental fitting, an enpty tin match box...' (p.64).

Not in Underwood, Begg, Odell or Wilson & Odell.

The A to Z carries the full list of contents including '1 Tin Match Box, empty' 

38. Kidney taken away and eaten

'cold kidney for supper' 

Odell - 'They discovered that a kidney and the ovaries had been removed from the body, and there was no trace of these organs' (p. 72). Also quotes the From Hell letter (p.81).  

Wilson & Odell (quoting Dr Brown's testimony): 'The left kidney was completely cut out and taken away' (p. 41) AND citing From Hell letter: 'I send you half the Kidne I took from one woman....I fried and ate it was very nise' (p.46).

Underwood p.100-101 

Fido notes kidney removed p. 74 and quotes 'From Hell' letter p.10.

Begg - Notes the kidney removal but doesn't quote the 'From Hell' letter.

Harrison - Quotes from the 'From Hell' letter (p. 75). 

Rumbelow - Reproduces 'From Hell' letter and transcribed at p.119. Extraction of left kidney noted on page 86.

39. Police were holding back information

'Oh Mr Abberline is a clever little man/he keeps back all that he can'

There is nothing in the sources or evidence about this in respect of the double event (Fido suggests that the police held back information about the farthings in respect of the Chapman murder). 

In his 1992 Research Notes, Mike Barrett (somewhat impressively) suggests that the killer might have taken a pawn ticket away with him, which information Abberline held back in case the killer redeemed it and that this was what the diarist was referring to here. 

40. Knowledge of pawn tickets?

'redeem it near....I could not possibly redeem it here' 

Fido - 'The mustard tin contained two pawn tickets' (p. 67). 

Begg - 'a small mustard tin containing two pawn tickets' (p. 125). 

Harrison - 'One mustard tin containing two pawn tickets' (p. 67). 

Rumbelow - 'In her pocket were two pawn tickets' (p. 66).

Not mentioned in Odell or Wilson/Odell or in Underwood (albeit that Underwood says that Eddowes pawned Kelly's shirt and boots, p. 17). 

41. Killer names himself after the double event

'...wonder if they have enjoyed the name I have given'

Odell reproduces Dear Boss correspondence signed 'JACK THE RIPPER'  (p. 91).  Wilson & Odell also reproduce it (p.45).

Underwood p. 99, Fido p.7, Harrison p.50, Rumbelow p.116, 118-119.

Begg mentions the letter 'which bequeathed the soubriquet 'Jack the Ripper'  to posterity' (p. 90). 

42. Placed parts of Kelly's body all over the room (and was thus murdered in a room)

'I placed it all over the room'

Odell - 'The whole room was described as looking like a slaughter-house and there were actually pieces of flesh hanging from the picture nails in the walls' (p. 106). 

Wilson & Odell - 'two lumps of flesh on the table by the bed' (p. 53). 

Underwood - 'by the bed there were little piles of flesh, neatly laid out: the breasts, the heart and the kidneys and, horror of horrors, other parts of her body and dripping intestines hung from the picture nails like grotesque and fiendish whims of a disordered mind'(p.25-26).

Fido - citing a newspaper report, 'The breasts had been cleanly cut off an placed on a table which was by the side of the bed...The kidneys and 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' (p.92). 

Begg - Cites the sight which greeted McCarthy when he accompanied police 'into the room''She had been completely disembowlled and her entrails had been taken out and placed on the table..' (p. 161). 

Harrison - 'Various body organs which had been removed from the corpse by the killer had been laid upon the bedside table in a curiously neat fashion'(p.81). 

Rumbelow - 'Bowyer...saw two pieces of flesh lying on the table in front of the bed' (p.91).

See also No. 46 below. 

43. Cut off Kelly's nose and mutilated face

'like the other whore I cut off the bitches nose, all of it this time. I left nothing of her face to remember her by.' 

Odell citing the Star of 10 November 1888: 'The ears and nose had been cut clean off'...while the face was slashed about, so that the features of the poor creature were beyond all recognition' (p. 106).  

Wilson & Odell (quoting the Illustrated Police News): 'The nose had been cut off, the forehead skinned..' (p. 54).

Underwood - 'the ears and nose severed' (p.25). 

Fido citing same newspaper report as Odell (Star): 'The ears and nose had been cut clean off...while the face was slashed about, so that the features of the poor creature were beyond all recognition' (p. 92). 

Begg citing McCarthy: 'The woman's nose had been cut off, and her face gashed and mutilated so that it was beyond recognition' (p. 161).

Harrison - 'The nose had been cut off, the forehead skinned' (p.90) 

Rumbelow - citing the Illustrated Police News, 'The flesh from the thighs and legs, together with the breasts and nose, had been placed by the murderer on the table' (p.93).

44. Kelly was young

'So young unlike I'

Odell - 'A young woman called Marie Kelly...' (p.104)  

Wilson & Odell - 'Mary Jane Kelly, a 24-year-old prostitute' (p. 52). 

Underwood - 'twenty-four year old' (p.21). 

Fido - 'twenty-five years old' (p.84). 

Begg - 'about 25 years old' (p. 141). 

Rumbelow - '24-year-old Mary Jane' (p.90).

45. Kelly's breasts were cut off 

'I thought it a joke when I cut her breasts off, kissed them for a while.'

Odell - 'the  breasts had also been cleanly cut off' (p.106).

Wilson & Odell - (quoting the Illustrated Police News) 'both of the breasts had been cut from the body' (p. 54). 

Underwood - 'he cut off her breasts' (p.75).  

Fido - 'The breasts had also been cleanly cut off' (p.92).

Begg - 'Both her breasts, too, had been cut clean away' (p. 161). 

Harrison - 'both breasts cut from the body' (p. 90).

Rumbelow - 'both of the beasts had been cut from the body' (p.93). 

46. Left breasts on the table with other stuff

'Left them on the table with some of the other stuff. Thought they belonged there.'

Odell (citing the Star) - 'the breasts had also been cleanly cut off and placed on a table which was by the side of the bed' (p. 106). 

Wilson & Odell (quoting the Illustrated Police News) - 'The flesh from the thighs and legs, together with the breasts and nose, had been placed by the murderer on the table' (p. 54).

Underwood - 'on a table by the bed there were little piles of flesh, neatly laid out: the breasts, the heart and the kidneys and, horror of horrors, other parts of her body and dripping intestines hung from the picture nails...' (p. 25-26). 

Fido citing a newspaper report (same as Odell) - 'The breasts had also been cleanly cut off and placed on a table which was by the side of the bed' (p. 92). 

Begg - citing McCarthy: 'Both her breasts, too, had been cut clean away and placed by the side of her liver and other entrails on the table' (p. 161) AND 'The first thing he saw was two lumps of flesh on the bedside table.  These were Mary Kelly's breasts' (p. 158).

Harrison -  'The flesh from the thighs and legs along with the breasts and nose, had been placed on the bedside table in an attempt by the murderer to display his artistic talent' (p. 90). 

Rumbelow - 'The flesh from the thighs and legs, together with the breasts and nose, had been placed by the murderer on the table' (p.93).

N.B. The A to Z carried Dr Bond's full report (in the entry for 'Bond, Dr Thomas' showing that one breast was under the head and another by the right foot.  It's also in the 1989 reprint of Fido's 1987 book, having only come to light in 1987. 

47. Heavy mutilations

'Like the other bitches she ripped like a ripe peach.'

Odell - 'The stomach and abdomen had been ripped open' (p.106).

Wilson & Odell - '...appalling nature of the mutilation....the abdomen had been partially ripped open' (p. 53-54).

Underwood - 'terribly mutilated' (p.25). 

Fido - 'The stomach and abdomen had been ripped open' (p.92). 

Begg - citing McCarthy - 'She had been completely disembowelled' (p. 161). 

Harrison - 'The abdomen had been ripped open' (p.90) 

Rumbelow - 'The abdomen had been particularly ripped open...the liver and entrails wrenched away' (p.93)

48. Aware of an issue with the key and burnt clothing in the fire

'The key and burnt clothes puzzle them ha ha' 

AND

'The hat I did burn' 

Odell - 'The ashes in the grate revealed the charred remnants of a woman's felt hat' (p.108) AND 'The door to the room was locked, with no trace of the key' (p. 108).

Wilson & Odell - 'Parts of a woman's skirt and the rim of a hat remained. Who the garments belonged to, bearing in mind that the dead woman's clothes were still in the room, and why they were burned were questions that pundits would debate in later years...Another puzzle was that of the locked door' (p. 55).

Underwood - 'The ashes revealed remnants of a woman's hat...What was odd was the evidence that the fire had been an extremely fierce one. Neither the cause nor the reason nor the means of this ferocious blaze has ever been established '(p.26)  AND 'the key was never found.  These and other equally mysterious and unanswered questions were dealt with briefly...' (p.26).

Fido - 'included the charred rim of a woman's hat' (p.95)  BUT no mention of issue with key.

Begg - Doesn't mention. 

Harrison - 'Within the fireplace Abberline found various items of women's apparel including a hat and skirt, which had all but been destroyed by the fire. The spout of an old tin kettle had been melted off by some form of intense heat, but whether this is linked to the Millers Court murder or not is debatable.  A simple explanation for the burnt clothing is that it was a cold damp November evening' (p.82) BUT no real indication that the missing key was a puzzle (nor that the police were puzzled by the fire). Note that Harrison believed Barnett was the killer so that he was always in possession of the key (p.166).

Rumbelow -  'After the photographs had been taken, M'Carthy broke open the door with a pickaxe  This again is a so far unexplained mystery'.  AND 'According to Inspector Abberline, giving evidence at the subsequent inquest, the murderer had not locked the door  and walked off with the key as some newspapers supposed. The key, he said, had been missing for some time.  Barnett confirmed this...Yet someone had a key, and used it, which is why the door had to be forced'(p.94) AND 'There were parts of a woman's skirt and the rim of a hat in the grate' (p.94) AND 'the unanswered question is what had been burnt in that grate?' (p.103).

49. Burnt the hat for light

'The hat I did burn for light I did yearn.'

Odell - 'The purpose of the fire, it has been suggested, was to provide light for the killer by which to perform his ghastly operations'. (p. 115). 

Wilson & Odell - 'Abberline believed the clothes had been burned to provide illumination for the murderer's ghastly work' (p.55).

Fido - 'Abberline surmised that the fire had been intended to supply light for the murderer to work by'(p.95).  

Underwood - Doesn't mention. 

Begg - Doesn't mention.

Harrison - 'There is something of a belief that the clothing had been placed upon the fire by the Ripper in an attempt to gain light. However, as anyone who has ever attempted to burn old clothing will be aware, it does not ignite into a ball of flame but simply smoulders and smokes' (p. 82). 

Rumbelow - 'A large fire had been burning in the grate...it was presumed that he had done this to enable him to see what he was about' (p.94).

50. Killer took the key away

'With the key I did flee'

Odell - 'The door of the room was locked, with no trace of the key' (p. 108).  

Wilson & Odell - 'The popular view was that the killer had locked the door when he departed, taking the key with him' (p. 55). 

Underwood - 'the key was never found' (p.26). 

Fido - Not mentioned. 

Begg - Not mentioned. 

Harrison - Quotes Abberline: 'An impression has gone abroad that the murderer took away the key of the room.  Barnett has since informed me that it has been missing for some time...' (p. 90). [although Harrison still says there was a mystery about it].

Rumbelow - 'Yet, someone had a key, and used it...' (p.94)

51. Killer had red handkerchief

'A handkerchief red led to the bed'

Odell (citing witness George Hutchinson): 'She said she had lost her handkerchief. He then pulled his handkerchief a red one out and gave it to her.  They both then went up the Court together'  (p.113) Wilson and Odell cite (p.63), Fido cites, p. 90, Begg, p.154, Harrison, p. 90, Rumbelow, p. 101. 

Underwood - Not mentioned. 

52. Didn't take any parts away

'Regret I did not take any of it away with me it is supper time, I could do with a kidney or two'   

Odell - 'The lower portion of the body and the uterus had been cut out and these appeared to be missing' (p. 106) BUT ALSO 'In the course of the mutilations inflicted on Chapman and Eddowes abdominal organs were removed, but of the remaining murders, in both of which there were mutilations, no organs were missing...why did he [the murderer] not avail himself of the opportunity presented by the murder of Marie Kelly?  She was killed in the seclusion of her room, the only victim to be so murdered, and she was completely dissected, yet no organs were missing' (p.138). 

Wilson & Odell quote from the Illustrated Police News in which they say, 'The entrails and other portions of the frame were missing, but the liver, etc, it is said, were found placed between the feet of the poor victim' (p.54) AND 'This truncated form of medical evidence took no account of...whether any parts of the body were missing' (p. 61).

Fido - 'The Times confirmed..that the uterus was not in fact missing; all organs were accounted for' (p. 92).  

Underwood - 'nothing had been taken away' (p.26). 

Begg - 'Although many newspapers stated that no parts of the viscera was missing, the Daily Telegraph reported, that notwithstanding all that has been said to the contrary,a portion of the body organs was missing. The Central News also reported 'that the uterus, as in the case of the Mitre Square victim, has been removed' (p.161).  

Harrison - 'It has generally been accepted that the Ripper took away all of the missing organs, but this has never been proved, and it is more likely that he destroyed them by burning them on the fire or cutting them into such tiny pieces that it was impossible for the authorities to identify them.  It is not reasonable to assume that after committing this horrific crime he took away with him various parts of the anatomy.  He would have had no need for such items and to do so would have increased the likelihood of his capture' (p. 90).  

In his 1992 Research Notes, Mike cites the above excerpt from Harrison in his research notes and says: 'In all the books I have read no full medical report has proved that any part of the body was taken away...'. 

Rumbelow - 'The entrails and other portions of the frame were missing, but the liver etc., it is said, were found placed between the feet of this poor victim' (p.93)

53. Left some sort of clue in Kelly's room

'An initial here and an initial there...I left it here for the fools to see but they will never find it.  I was too clever. Left it in front for all eyes to see'

Photograph of Kelly's room (showing supposed "FM") is in Begg, Underwood, Harrison and Rumbelow (although the 'F' is quite indistinct in Rumbelow).  It is also found in the A to Z.

Not in Odell, Fido or Wilson & Odell. 

54. Issue regarding Kelly's heart

'May God forgive me for the deeds I committed on Kelly, no heart no heart'

Odell (citing a newspaper report) - 'The kidneys and heart had been removed from the body and placed on the table by the side of the breasts' (p. 106). 

Fido cites same report (p.92). 

Wilson & Odell - Not mentioned. 

Underwood - 'He cut out her heart' (p.75). 

Begg - Not mentioned. 

Harrison - Not mentioned. 

Rumbelow - Not mentioned.

55. Knowledge of five victims in London (from Nichols to Kelly) 

Odell - Tabram plus C5

Wilson & Odell - Mention Smith and Tabram but say they have been 'discounted as true victims' so end up with the C5 

Underwood - C5 only

Fido - Mentions Emma Smith, Ada Wilson and Martha Tabram in Prelude then focus on C5

Begg - while including an introductory chapter entitled 'The Beginning' which mentions the Smith and Tabram murders nevertheless has Nichols as the first named victim in his list of contents, ending with Kelly (and says, 'Mary Jane Kelly is generally regarded as having been the last victim of Jack the Ripper'p.141). More importantly, Begg states that, 'The police would seem at one time to have thought that there were possibly six [victims], but it would seem that Anderson, Macnaghten and Swanson only credited Jack with five: Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes and Kelly' (p.213).

Harrison - C5 only 

Rumbelow - mentions Smith and Tabram briefly but clearly C5.  Quotes Macnaghten '5 victims - & 5 victims only'.

The A to Z highlights the C5 as Ripper victims in the Introduction.  

56. Knowledge of Ripper poetry

'One whore in heaven/Two whores side by side/Three whores all have died/Four'

AND

'my funny little rhymes' 

Odell  - Has Eight Little Whores poem (p. 86), so does Fido (p. 9), so does Wilson & Odell (p.52) which also has the I'm not a butcher/I'm not a Yid' poem (p.51), Underwood also has 'Eight Little Whores' poem (p.168) and 'I'm not a butcher/I'm not a Yid' poem (p. 76 and p.100), Rumbelow includes Eight Little Whores, p. 121

Begg doesn't have it.

(N.B. Eight Little Whores involves the killing of seven prostitutes the same as in the Diary, including the two in Manchester, hence the possible connection).