The Sagar Saga: Finding the Missing Link
In January 1905, former City detective inspector Robert Sagar, who had just retired, apparently gave interviews to reporters of four London newspapers in which he spoke of his knowledge of Jack the Ripper.
The articles containing these interviews, while very similar (indicating that they must have taken place at the same time) are all, nevertheless, a little bit different from each other and, in October 2020, Chris Phillips prepared a helpful comparison of the four reports on his medieval genealogy website. He had, however, only located three reports from London newspapers, but was aware that there must have been a fourth report because such a report (different from the other three) was carried by some American newspapers, hence he included the Seattle Daily Times (of 4 February 1905) as his fourth report.
I have, however, now located the additional report in a London newspaper. It was in the Evening News of Saturday, 7 January 1905. It's not identical to the Seattle Daily Times report but it's close enough, especially in respect of the bit about Jack the Ripper, that, for comparison purposes, what Chris has labelled the Seattle Times report, can be regarded as the Evening News report. There are, nevertheless, some important differences between the two which I will be discussing.
So the four "interview" reports with Sagar that we have, are:
1. City Press of Saturday, 7 January, 1905.
2. Evening News of Saturday, 7 January, 1905.
3. Morning Leader of Monday, 9 January, 1905.
4. Daily News of Monday, 9 January, 1905
A quick glance through these reports reveals that one of them is, curiously, very different to the others.
While the reports in the Evening News, Morning Leader and Daily News all contain quotes from Sagar, the City Press does not. Its report is written purely in the third person, with no hint that its reporter had ever even spoken to the former detective.
The Morning Leader on the other hand tells us that, 'To a "Morning Leader" representative Mr. Sagar related some of his experiences'. The Daily News is even more explicit as to when its reporter spoke to Sagar. Hence, we are told that Sagar spoke to 'a representative of 'The Daily News on Saturday'.
That would seem to make sense. All four reporters spoke to Robert Sagar on Saturday, 7 January 1905, right?
WRONG!
That's impossible.
The City Press newspaper was published early on Saturday morning, so that it could not possibly have interviewed Sagar on Saturday and carried a report of the interview in its Saturday edition. Here is the proof that the City Press was published on Saturday morning in January 1905:
'The City Press is published early every Wednesday and Saturday morning...'
That the City Press doesn't refer to having spoken to Sagar now starts to make sense. It never did. The information in its article which appeared on the Saturday morning must have come from a source (probably a document) earlier in the week, no later than Friday. While the term might not have been used in 1905, let's call this document a Press Release.
So let's say that on Friday, the City of London Police provided a Press Release to the City Press to enable that newspaper to publish an exclusive report about Sagar's career in its Saturday morning edition.
Knowing that its story must have been based on a Press Release, it is instructive to compare the part of its report about Sagar's early life with the way that same part of the story was reported by the Morning Leader. Let's look at that:
City Press
A Lancashire man by birth, he was educated at Whalley Grammar School,
Morning Leader
A Lancashire man by birth, he was educated at Whalley Grammar School,
City Press
and found himself, as quite a young man, in London, with the aims and aspirations of a medical student.
Morning Leader
and found himself in London, as a young man, with the aspirations of a medical student.
City Press
He became attached to St. Bartholomew's Hospital,
Morning Leader
He became attached to St. Bartholomew's Hospital
City Press
and intended prosecuting his studies there with all the vigour which he subsequently displayed in quite another and surprising direction. He took apartments in Bartholomew Close,
Morning Leader
and, in order to pursue his studies there, he took apartments in Bartholomew-close,
City Press
in the house of a celebrated City detective named Potts, who seems to have been a first edition of Sherlock Holmes.
Morning Leader
in the house of a celebrated City detective named Potts, who seems to have been a first edition of "Sherlock Holmes."
City Press
The mind and imagination of the young medical student became diverted from the study of surgery and medicine to the fascinating problem of criminology.
Morning Leader
The mind and imagination of the young medical student were diverted from the study of surgery to the fascinating problems of criminology.
City Press
and the varied means which a quick intelligence offered for the detection of crime.
Morning Leader
No equivalent
City Press
Hence it was that while engaged as a student at St. Bartholomew's, he became imbued with the instincts of a detective, and so successful was he in that direction that he appeared in a great number of prosecutions of criminals at the City Police Courts and at the Old Bailey.
Morning Leader
He had all the instincts of a detective, and so successful was he in that direction that, while a student in "Bart's," he appeared in a great number of prosecutions of criminals at the City police-courts and the Old Bailey.
City Press
Young Sagar's ability attracted the attention of the late Sir James Fraser, who was that that time the Commissioner of City Police, and he called for a special report with respect to the many cases in which the young medical student had been engaged. The report was of so complimentary a character that the Commissioner suggested that Mr. Sagar should join the police force. In the event of his declining to do so, a handsome cheque was ready as payment for his past assistance to the police.
Morning Leader
Young Sagar's ability attracted the attention of the then Commissioner of the City Police, Sir James Fraser, who suggested that Mr. Sagar should join the police force; offering, however, a handsome cheque as payment for his past services if he declined to do so.
City Press
Mr. Sagar thereupon resolved to abandon the dull routine of the medical profession in favour of the more exciting, but less remunerative, life of a detective.
Morning Leader
Mr. Sagar at once decided to abandon the medical profession for the more exciting, if less remunerative, life of a detective.
City Press
The circumstances of his joining the police force were, therefore, peculiar, but that is not the only unusual feature associated with it, as Detective-inspector Sagar is the only officer of the City of London Police who has never donned a uniform.
Morning Leader
Mr. Sagar was said to be the only officer in the City Police who had never donned a uniform.
I assume I have convinced you - and there really can't be any doubt about it - that the Morning Leader was using the exact same Press Release as had been provided to the City Press as its source for this entire part of its report.
This makes sense of the fact that, immediately after the last sentence about Sagar being said to be the only officer in the City Police who had never donned a uniform (at which point the newspaper hadn't claimed to have got any of this directly from Sager), the Morning Leader report THEN says: 'To a Morning Leader representative Mr. Sagar related some of his experiences.' It still doesn't quote Sagar for another eleven paragraphs and only quotes him for the first time in the article when referring to Jack the Ripper ("We had good reason to suspect a certain person...."). We'll come back to that but for the moment it is instructive to compare how the Daily News deals with Sagar's early life in its own report because, in this newspaper, the story WAS said to have come directly from Sagar and is told in the first person, as if the words came from Sagar's mouth. Here is the same comparison between the City Press and the Daily News:
City Press
A Lancashire man by birth, he was educated at Whalley Grammar School,
Daily News
"I am a Lancashire man by birth," he told a representative of "The Daily News" on Saturday, "and was educated at Whalley Grammar School.
City Press
and found himself, as quite a young man, in London, with the aims and aspirations of a medical student.
Daily News
When quite a lad I came to London with the intention of studying medicine.
City Press
He became attached to St. Bartholomew's Hospital,
Daily News
To that end I became attached to St. Bart's.
City Press
and intended prosecuting his studies there with all the vigour which he subsequently displayed in quite another and surprising direction. He took apartments in Bartholomew Close, in the house of a celebrated City detective named Potts, who seems to have been a first edition of Sherlock Holmes.
Daily News
As it happened I went to lodge at the house of a detective then living in Bartholomew-close.
City Press
The mind and imagination of the young medical student became diverted from the study of surgery and medicine to the fascinating problem of criminology.
Daily News
Before long I found that the study of criminology had more fascinations for me than medicine or surgery,
City Press
and the varied means which a quick intelligence offered for the detection of crime.
Daily News
No equivalent
City Press
Hence it was that while engaged as a student at St. Bartholomew's, he became imbued with the instincts of a detective, and so successful was he in that direction that he appeared in a great number of prosecutions of criminals at the City Police Courts and at the Old Bailey.
Daily News
and as a consequence I was more often to be found in the well at the Old Bailey than in the laboratory at St. Bart's.
City Press
Young Sagar's ability attracted the attention of the late Sir James Fraser, who was that that time the Commissioner of City Police, and he called for a special report with respect to the many cases in which the young medical student had been engaged. The report was of so complimentary a character that the Commissioner suggested that Mr. Sagar should join the police force. In the event of his declining to do so, a handsome cheque was ready as payment for his past assistance to the police.
Daily News
"Sir James Fraser, then Commissioner of Police, interested himself considerably in my work, and as the result of a special report he suggested that I should join the force.
City Press
Mr. Sagar thereupon resolved to abandon the dull routine of the medical profession in favour of the more exciting, but less remunerative, life of a detective.
Daily News
That is how I came to be a detective, although I had not previously belonged to the police.
City Press
The circumstances of his joining the police force were, therefore, peculiar, but that is not the only unusual feature associated with it, as Detective-inspector Sagar is the only officer of the City of London Police who has never donned a uniform.
Daily News
In that way my position was unique, as it was also from the fact that I am the only City detective who has never been in uniform.
You should now be satisfied that the Daily News has been rather naughty. It's clear that Sagar did not say to its representative on Saturday, "I am a Lancashire man by birth" but that what has happened is that its reporter has taken the Press Release and turned it from the third person into the first person, as if Sagar had actually said it. The same with everything in the entire section of the report, slightly rewritten. This makes it very dangerous to rely on anything that is directly attributed to Sagar in this report.
It may well be that representatives from the Evening News, Morning Leader and Daily News did speak to Sagar on Saturday because they include a fair amount of stuff not included in the City Press story. The City Press might have edited out parts from the Press Release which were included by the other three as if coming directly from Sagar's mouth and this is a possibility that we can't entirely ignore. One assumes that the City Press would have faithfully reproduced what it had been given either in whole or large part but this is by no means certain.
When it comes to the Evening News, incidentally, it has a less detailed account of Sagar's early life but what it does print is clearly sourced to the Press Release.
Hence it says (and you will recognize everything below, which I'm putting into a slightly different order to way it appears in the newspaper):
A Lancashire man, and educated at a grammar school in his native county, he first saw life and London as a Bart's medical student.
It happened that in the house near Smithfield in which young Sagar took lodgings there dwelt a sergeant detective in the City Police.
The detective and the student made friends. The thrill and excitement of the former's work infected the younger man. Crime investigation became his hobby, and during his five years at St Bartholomew's Hospital he enjoyed the extraordinary experience of helping to arrest over a hundred wrong-doers.
Astonished at the young man's remarkable record, Sir James invited him to give up his idea of becoming a doctor, and in 1880 he joined the City Detective Force.
A unique circumstance is attached to Inspector Sagar’s career. So far is known, he is the only police detective in the kingdom who has never worn the familiar blue uniform.
While the City Press doesn't mention Sagar's five years at St Bartholomew's, nor the fact that Sagar arrested over a hundred criminals during that time (merely referring to 'a great number of prosecutions of criminals'), both of which pieces of information are unique to the Evening News, there can't be any doubt that all four newspapers share a common source for Sagar's earlier life, being the Press Release.
After telling us that Sagar was the only detective who had never donned a uniform, the City Press report continues as follows:
"He joined the service in January, 1880, as an ordinary constable, and, as usual, was required to undergo a month's probation. After having completed half that time, he was selected by the late Sir James Fraser to make an investigation into a particularly intricate case of forgery, in the task of unravelling which several others had tried and failed. Mr. Sagar at once responded to the call, and proceeded into the country for the purpose of securing his quarry. Fortune favoured him, and he was successful in bringing the forger to justice, a sentence of twenty years' penal servitude..."
This then exposes the Daily News as continuing to lie to its readers because it's perfectly obvious that the Press Release was the source of this part of its story, as below (all of which can be found in the above paragraph from the City Press):
"I joined in January, 1880, on the usual terms of a month's probation. Fortune appeared to favour me during this period, for I was put in charge of a peculiarly intricate case of forgery which had baffled the ingenuity of my colleagues. In the end I succeeded and I ran my man [to] earth. He was sentenced to 20 years' penal servitude."
Once again, that's surely not come from Sagar. The Daily News has blatantly re-worded the Press Release as if having come directly from Sagar.
We then have a particularly troubling passage in the Daily News because we are told that Sagar said to its representative:
"In June, 1889, I was promoted to be detective-sergeant, and the following year to be detective-inspector. There's the whole story; what more could you want?"
While I can't, of course, say for certain that the information about Sagar's promotions was lifted from the Press Release, so that the statement attributed to Sagar, 'There's the whole story; what more could you want?' is a fabrication, it is to be noted that the City Press story (and thus the Press Release) includes the following:
"In December, 1888, he was promoted to the position of sergeant, there being no vacancy on the detective staff. The title was one of an honorary character, and it was conferred by the Commissioner in recognition of special services rendered. In the following June he was appointed detective-sergeant, and in November, 1890, he was promoted to the post of detective-inspector. "
All the information that the Daily News attributed directly to Sagar is right there. It's very suspicious and, given that we know for sure that the Daily News lied in respect of Sagar's early life, it seems likely that it also lied about him saying 'There's the whole story...'
Certainly, if there were three journalists listening to Sagar on the Saturday, none of the others reported him saying this. Neither the Morning Leader nor the Evening News include this information about Sagar's early police career.
The City Press report then tells a story about how Sagar received an injury to his leg from a pick [axe] which he ran into while chasing a thief: showing a tenacity and commitment to policing which was said to have struck the Commissioner. Neither the Morning Leader nor the Daily News bother to include this story in their reports but the Evening News does refer to it and, from the way it is written, seems to have summarized it directly from the Press Release (or alternatively, of course, from the published City Press newspaper report).
The City Press report then differs from all the other three reports by telling a story of how Sagar caught some thieves in Chiswell Street. It was probably a bit too dull of a story so wasn't included by the others.
The Morning Leader, however, does provide some information not in the City Press report, and was thus presumably not in the Press Release, which it attributes directly to Sagar who was said to have 'related some of his experiences'. Thus, it refers briefly to Sagar's arrest of Anthony Rowe in connection with the Great Fingall frauds. It's the only one of the four reports to refer to this. It's also the only one of the newspapers to mention, by name, the forger William Waiter. His case would appear to have been the 'intricate case of forgery' referred to by the City Press which several other detectives had tried and failed to solve because the Morning Leader says that 'the case had been unsuccessfully handled for some time' and tells us that Waiter was sentenced to 20 years penal servitude.
While it's entirely possible that Sager personally filled in the gaps from the Press Release, telling the Morning Leader representative the name of the criminal and the fact that he was Irish by birth, I am extremely suspicious that all this information had been included in the Press Release but had simply been edited out by the City Press.
It could be exactly the same regarding a story of how Sagar and another officer disguised themselves as artisans to arrest three men in relation to some drug store robberies. This isn't included in the City Press, nor does it feature in the other two newspapers, but I remain suspicious that it comes from the original Press Release, not from speaking to Sagar.
At the same time, the Morning Leader does provide one genuine sounding quote from Sager when, referring to the fact that Sagar has never met violence from criminals, Sagar is reported as saying: 'The professional thief will not do that sort of thing, if he is caught fair. He recognises that it is part of the game that his time will come'.
It is, however, a quote which is only included in the Morning Leader. If the representatives from the Daily News and Evening News were present when he said it, they didn't think it interesting enough to include in their articles.
The Morning Leader is also the only newspaper to tell the story of how a colleague kept some pickpockets at bay by making them think his pipe was a revolver.
At this point in the story of Sagar's career, the Evening News is the only newspaper of the four to recount a couple of stories whereby Sagar was assisted by a criminal gang member who protected him from an attack by another gang member, and whereby Sagar's son was protected from attack in Dorset Street by thieves who recognized the young man as Sagar's son (and this part of the report is not to be found in the Seattle Daily Times version of the article). Yet, what is curious about these stories is that it is made clear that they are NOT attributed to Sagar in the form of direct quotes and that the Evening News plainly has another documentary source from which it is quoting verbatim. You can see this visually from the fact that the story is told in smaller font as if quoting from something:
"To this day in those secret dens of the East End, where plots are planned and crimes coolly contemplated, Inspector Sagar is known as the "Doctor." And the “Doctor” is actually held in friendly esteem by some of those marauders in the night, as the following will prove.
Late one night the inspector was passing along Bishopsgate-street – suddenly a man – one of his former captures – rushed at him from across the road. Almost as suddenly another man sprang into sight and knocked the would be assailant down. The inspector afterwards learned that his protector belonged to a Chapel-street mob, which was opposed to the gang claiming the other individual.
In Dorset Street, Spitalfields, early one morning, the inspector’s eldest son was surrounded by thieves who were about to handle him roughly, when one exclaimed, “Why, it’s the Doctor’s son”. Instead of robbing him they gave him safe conduct to a main thoroughfare. A convict who had just completed five years borrowed a sovereign of the inspector to enable him to get to his home in Wales. Next morning by first post the money was returned with a note of thanks."
As we can see, the newspaper expressly flags that it is quoting from some kind of document by saying 'as the following will prove:-' and then using a smaller font. It's clearly not a quote from Sagar because it refers to 'the inspector' in the third person. Is the document that is being quoted from the Press Release? If so, it would tell us that the City Press excluded large chunks of it from its own report because none of this features in the City Press story.
We then reach a rather interesting part of these newspaper reports, as some of Sagar's major cases are discussed. Here the three newspapers which are supposed to have interviewed Sagar do diverge quite significantly from the City Press which only gives a vague summary of the fact that Sagar was 'instrumental in bringing into the dock at the Old Bailey a notorious gang of forgers...all of them foreigners'. It's the other newspapers who give us the details of these foreigners: the Barmashes, Schmidt and the American George Johnson.
With respect to George Johnson, the Evening News gives us reason to believe that it received information about him directly from Sagar and reverts to small font to give give us what appears to be an extensive quote from the former detective himself:
"The notorious Schmidt, who figured in the last Barmash case two years ago, is held by many to be the cleverest forger in the world. "For my part," says Inspector Sagar, "I would give the palm to the American, George Johnson, who, with another man, named Phillips, was in 1890 sentenced to seven years for forging letters of credit on a well-known City firm."
He was a man with the most polished manners, always dressed in the height of fashion, and was normally to be found in the Monico, the Criterion or the St James’s Restaurant, where he was known as the “Captain”.
He would never let even his confederates know where he lived. He would mostly meet them at railway stations, and if he thought he was shadowed would ask - say at Aldersgate-street - for a ticket for Praed-street, and then get out at King’s Cross. He had only to notice a face twice when on a journey to strike off in a new direction.
We traced him at last to a house in Bacon-street, Bethnal Green. While examining the premises I came upon a ball-head imbedded in the wainscotting on the stairs’ landing. I cut through the wood immediately below the ball-head, and heard something drop on the other side of the boards. That something proved to be a pile of the most perfect imitations of Bank of England notes I have seen. Schmidt was an excellent engraver but Johnson was better still.
When Johnson came out of prison he told the police he was going to turn over and address revival meetings."
This does look like something that came from Sagar himself, with the quote including the words 'For my part...' and then continuing into the smaller font, with the story told in the first person.
It is, however, very instructive to closely compare the quote attributed to Sagar in the Evening News about George Johnson with a similar but not identical quote in the Daily News. For in the Daily News we find:
"Well, Schmidt was very clever, but the smartest man I ever knew at that game was an American named Johnson, who, together with a man named Phillips, was awarded seven years for forging letters of credit on a City firm. Johnson was most polished in his manners, and always dressed in the height of fashion. He spent most of his time in swell West-End restaurants, and was generally known as the "Captain." He would never let even his best friends know where he lived, and would dodge in and out of stations on the Underground if he found that he was being watched.
'Well, Schmidt was very clever, but the smartest man I ever knew at that game was an American named Johnson, who, together with a man named Phillips, was awarded seven years for forging letters of credit on a City firm. Johnson was most polished in his manners, and always dressed in the height of fashion. He spent most of his time in swell West-End restaurants, and was generally known as the "Captain." He would never let even his best friends know where he lived, and would dodge in and out of stations on the Underground if he found that he was being watched.
"One day we tracked him down at a house in in Bethnal Green. Whilst examining the premises I came across the head of a wire nail which had been driven into the partition on the stair landing. I had almost cut away the wood underneath the nail when I heard something drop on the other side. This I afterwards found was a bundle of the finest imitations of Bank of England notes I have ever seen."'
This is all supposed to have been said by Sagar to the Daily News representative but to me it looks like the same quote which appears in the Evening News, re-worded. I mean, look at what we've got:
Evening News
The notorious Schmidt, who figured in the last Barmash case two years ago, is held by many to be the cleverest forger in the world.
Daily News
Well, Schmidt was very clever,
Evening News
For my part," says Inspector Sagar, "I would give the palm to the American, George Johnson,
Daily News
but the smartest man I ever knew at that game was an American named Johnson,
Evening News
who, with another man, named Phillips, was in 1890 sentenced to seven years for forging letters of credit on a well-known City firm."
Daily News
who, together with a man named Phillips, was awarded seven years for forging letters of credit on a City firm.
Evening News
He was a man with the most polished manners, always dressed in the height of fashion,
Daily News
Johnson was most polished in his manners, and always dressed in the height of fashion.
Evening News
and was normally to be found in the Monico, the Criterion or the St James’s Restaurant, where he was known as the “Captain”.
Daily News
He spent most of his time in swell West-End restaurants, and was generally known as the "Captain."
Evening News
He would never let even his confederates know where he lived. He would mostly meet them at railway stations, and if he thought he was shadowed would ask - say at Aldersgate-street - for a ticket for Praed-street, and then get out at King’s Cross. He had only to notice a face twice when on a journey to strike off in a new direction.
Daily News
He would never let even his best friends know where he lived, and would dodge in and out of stations on the Underground if he found that he was being watched.
Evening News
We traced him at last to a house in Bacon-street, Bethnal Green.
Daily News
"One day we tracked him down at a house in in Bethnal Green.
Evening News
While examining the premises I came upon a ball-head imbedded in the wainscotting on the stairs’ landing.
Daily News
Whilst examining the premises I came across the head of a wire nail which had been driven into the partition on the stair landing.
Evening News
I cut through the wood immediately below the ball-head, and heard something drop on the other side of the boards.
Daily News
I had almost cut away the wood underneath the nail when I heard something drop on the other side.
Evening News
That something proved to be a pile of the most perfect imitations of Bank of England notes I have seen.
Daily News
This I afterwards found was a bundle of the finest imitations of Bank of England notes I have ever seen."'
I don't know about you but I don't think for one second that this is the result of two separate interviews with Sagar. If that's the case, and there was just one interview with three reporters present, only one of the above can be an accurate reflection of what Sagar actually said. But the fact that one is so different from the other (eg. with 'ball head' replaced by 'head of a wire nail' and 'wainscotting' replaced by 'partition'), yet at the same time so similar, suggests (if we can rule out the notion that Monday's Daily News simply plagiarised from Saturday's Evening News) that both newspapers were taking the entire story from the Press Release and putting it into the first person as if Sagar was telling the story. This would again have to mean that the report in the City Press was a heavily edited version of a much longer Press Release but that doesn't seem to be impossible.
Some English forgers, the Devonports, are also mentioned in the newspaper reports, and it is likely that the newspapers added their own knowledge of this case, which had been widely reported three years earlier, because the Morning Leader refers to the forgers involvement in 'flash fivers' while the Evening News calls them 'forged fivers' , suggesting to me the addition of their own information to flesh out the story. The Evening News also mentions something unique to itself, namely that one of the group of forgers was paralyzed and was sentenced at the Old Bailey while lying on an ambulance, which might have been from the newspaper's own knowledge.
The Evening News and Morning Leader (but not the City Press and Daily News) also refer to Sagar's involvement in 'the Great Pearl Robbery case' with the Evening News saying that Sagar 'brought the beautiful Mrs. Osborne from Dover to the Guildhall dock' and the Morning Leader contenting itself by saying that Sagar 'arrested Mrs. Osborne at Dover'.
The City Press and the Morning Leader, however, but not the Evening News and Daily News, both tell of the fact that Sagar "personally conducted" a million pounds in bullion to the Bank of France in Paris. The fact that they both put the words "personally conducted" in quotation marks tells us that this is not a report of what someone has said but that they were both copying from the Press Release which, for some reason, also had those words in quotes.
"We now come on to the Jack the Ripper part of the story. The Press Release had clearly begun the subject by stating (as we find in the City Press) that Sagar's:
professional association with the terrible atrocities which were perpetrated some years ago in the East End by the so-styled "Jack-the Ripper" was a very close one. Indeed, Mr. Sagar knows as much about those crimes, which terrified the Metropolis, as any detective in London."
and that he:
"was deputed to represent the City police force in conference with the detective heads of the Metropolitan force nightly at Leman Street Police Station during the period covered by those ghastly murders."
Likewise, the Evening News tells us that:
"Inspector Sagar was the chief officer appointed to confer with the metropolitan police in the search for the terrible Whitechapel murderer. "
The Morning Leader says:
"Mr. Sagar represented the City Police at the nightly meetings which took place at Leman-st., Whitechapel, to consider what should be done to find the murderer.
The Daily News makes no mention of these meetings."
But the Morning Leader has some additional information, saying that, while on the hunt for Jack the Ripper, Sagar disguised himself as a labourer and 'was actually tracked himself by two police officers, who thought they had reason to regard him as a suspicious character.' This incident isn't mention by the City Press or the Daily News but the Evening News (in a passage omitted from the Seattle Daily Times version) says:
"One night Mr. Sagar was out looking for “Jack the Ripper.” He had dressed himself in pea-jacket, corduroy trousers, and a cap with ear-flaps. So well was he disguised that for two hours he was followed through East End courts and alleys by a couple of his own detectives, until they were astonished to see him enter the Old Jewry."
As it contains more detail, the Evening News seems to have been reporting the full version of this story, with the Morning Leader merely summarizing it.
Then the Morning Leader reveals something Sagar is supposed to have said about the Ripper:
"Asked about these mysterious crimes, Mr. Sagar said, despite the many stories which are told, the police never had any proof who committed them."
That's not mentioned by any of other newspapers but the Daily News has a unique question and answer moment with Sagar being asked what his most sensational case was and responding:
'Well I can hardly say. Possibly that series of tragedies which came to be known as the 'Jack the Ripper' murders'.
That in itself is kind of odd because we know that the Press Release had already stated that Sagar's professional association with 'the self-styled "Jack the Ripper"' was a very close one and that Sagar knew as much of those crimes, 'which terrified the Metropolis' as any detective in London. Strange then that Sagar hesitated when supposedly asked, in person, to describe his most sensational case, with the comment that he could hardly say.
What is then particularly interesting is that all three newspapers which purport to have interviewed Sagar tell a story not included in the City Press report about the Ripper coming close to capture by a police constable who saw a man of Jewish appearance leaving Mitre Square. Both the Evening News and Daily News quote Sagar directly while the Morning Leader summarizes his words. Thus:
Evening News
"We believe," he said, "that he came nearest to being captured after the Mitre-square murder in which the woman Kelly was the victim. She had been detained in Bishopsgate Police Station until 1 a.m. At 1:45 a. m. she was dead. A police officer met a well dressed man of Jewish appearance coming out of the court. Continuing on his patrol he came across Kelly’s body.
He blew his whistle, and set the other officers who rushed up in pursuit, the only thing to guide them being the sound of retreating footsteps. The sounds were followed to King's Block in the model dwellings in Stoney-lane, but the search got no further. On the wall was found scrawled in chalk, 'The Jews shall not be blamed for this.'"
Daily News
"As you know, the perpetrator of these outrages was never brought to justice, but I believe he came the nearest to being captured after the murder of the woman Kelly in Mitre-square. A police officer met a well-known man of Jewish appearance coming out of the court near the square, and a few moments after fell over the body. He blew his whistle, and other officers running up, they set off in pursuit of the man who had just left. The officers were wearing indiarubber boots, and the retreating footsteps of a man could be clearly heard. The sounds were followed to King's-block in the model dwellings in Stoney-lane, but we did not see the man again that night."
Morning Leader
"He believed the police were nearer to catching the "Ripper" on the occasion of the Mitre-st. murder than on any other. The woman Kelly, who was the victim, left Bishopsgate Police-station at 1 a.m. Three-quarters of an hour later she was found dead, and just before her body was discovered a police-constable met a man of Jewish appearance hurrying out of the court. "
We can see that while all three versions describe the suspect as a man of Jewish appearance, one says that he was "well-known", another that he was "well dressed" (while the third includes neither description). Unless Sagar went through the same story in almost word-for-word fashion with two different reporters at different times on the same day, telling one that the man was well known, the other that he was well dressed, it would seem that at least one of the descriptions can't be correct and can, presumably only be explained by the reporter's handwriting being misread by the newspapers sub-editors (or some such mistake). On the basis that only one can be correct, which was it? They carry rather different meanings. Well-known could either be famous in the area or well known to the police, the latter of which is something rather different. Well dressed obviously implies someone with money. But it's impossible at this distance to know what Sagar actually said.
The papers all then move on to the discovery of the apron following the Mitre Square murder and it is the City Press, working from the Press Release, which has the most detail about this:
There was a peculiar incident in connection with those tragedies which may have been forgotten. The apron belonging to the woman who was murdered in Mitre Square was thrown under a staircase in a common lodging house in Dorset Street, and someone - presumably the murderer - had written on the wall above it, "The Jewes are not the people that will be blamed for nothing." A police officer engaged in the case, fearing that the writing might lead to an onslaught upon the Jews in the neighbourhood, rubbed the writing from the wall, and all record of the implied accusation was lost; but the fact that such an ambiguous message was left is recorded among the archives at the Guildhall.
This is mentioned in the three other newspapers in much shortened form but the really curious thing is that while the Daily News precisely mirrors the version of the writing on the wall in the City Press, with the close-to-correct 'The Jewes are not the people that will not be blamed for nothing', we find that the Evening News and the Morning Leader both transcribe this as something totally different, with a different (correct) spelling of 'Jewes', namely:
'The Jews shall not be blamed for this'.
From the fact that the City Press was reporting from a press release, we can be sure that they didn't transcribe something that Sagar had said, and the Daily News was obviously also relying on that Press Release. So, unless Sagar did mention the writing on the wall while speaking to the reporters (but got it wrong), there must be some connection between the Evening News report and the report in the Morning Leader. We may even have to consider whether they were both written by the same person but in different ways for different newspapers. If, as the Daily News tells us, Sagar was speaking on the Saturday about his retirement, the report in the Evening News would have had to have been written quite fast to get it into that day's paper, while there would have been more time to polish the story for Monday's Morning Leader.
Indeed, if we go back to the way the Evening News report spoke of the Devenports being of 'forged fivers' fame, we find that the Morning Leader report seems to improve on that by referring to 'the medium of "flash fivers"'. Flash fivers had been all the rage in the 1902 newspapers:
'Forged fivers' while meaning the same thing, and also being a headline from 1902, isn't quite as snappy. Hence why I call it an improvement.
That said, there's no obvious similarity for the most part between the Evening News and Morning Leader stories which would lead one to conclude that they must have been written by the same person but we will see that there is one more possible indication.
We now come to the most critical part of the story. The identification of a possible suspect. As to this, it is quite striking to find that what appears to have been written in the prepared Press Release was no more than this:
The police realised, as also did the public, that the crimes were those of a madman, and suspicion fell upon a man, who, without doubt, was the murderer. Identification being impossible, he could not be charged. He was, however, placed in a lunatic asylum, and the series of atrocities came to an end.
On its own, this could certainly be Kosminski because it matches closely with the Anderson/MM/Swanson suspect.
The Daily News, once again, while providing a direct quote from Sagar, seems to mirror the press release because Sagar's words are:
'I feel sure we knew the man, but we could prove nothing. Eventually we got him incarcerated in a lunatic asylum, and the series of murders came to an end'.
Remember that we've already caught the Daily News lying about Sagar's words and to me this looks like another possible fabricated quote based on the Press Release.
Then we find once more a strange connection between the Evening News and the Morning Leader which both, alone, tell us that the suspect worked in Butcher's Row. But there are no less than FIVE significant differences between the two newspapers in this respect.
The first significant difference is that the Morning Leader provides a direct quote from Sagar whereas the Evening News only summarizes what is, remarkably, said to be the view not of Sagar, but of the City Police.
The Morning Leader reports Sagar as saying:
"We had good reason to suspect a certain man who worked in 'Butcher's-row,' Aldgate," he said, "and we watched him carefully. There was no doubt that this man was insane, and after a time his friends thought it advisable to have him removed to a private asylum. After he was removed there were no more Ripper atrocities."
When it comes to the Evening News, however, which gives similar information, not only is it not in the form of a quote by Sagar, but it's printed in such a way to make clear that it's not a quote. Look at this:
After an extended quote of Sagar in small font, wrapped in quotation marks, about how Sagar believed the Ripper was nearly caught after the Mitre Square murder, the report goes back into normal font with a mere statement in the passive tense that:
'The theory of the City police is that "Jack the Ripper" was a butcher, who worked in "Butcher's-row," Aldgate, and was partly insane. It is believed that he made his way to Australia and there died. Only then is Sagar quoted as saying that, 'The police are satisfied as to the identity of the man, but what became of him we don't know', which somehow seems to contradict the police's belief that he went to Australia.'
We can see that the other four key differences are:
1. The Morning Leader makes no mention of Sagar saying that Jack the Ripper was a butcher, only that he worked in Butcher's Row, whereas the Evening News says that the City police theory was that he was a butcher.
2. The Morning Leader says that the suspect was insane and and committed by friends to a private asylum whereas the Evening News makes no mention of him going to an asylum and says that he was only 'partly insane'.
3. The Evening News says that he went to Australia, whereas there is no mention of this in the Morning Leader (or elsewhere)
4. The Evening News says that the suspect died, but this isn't indicated in the Morning Leader (and its claim is then somewhat contradicted in its own story, by Sagar saying that the police didn't know what had happened to him).
Something is obviously very wrong here. One could just about accept that reasons of space or editing meant that the Morning Leader didn't include the belief that the Ripper was a butcher and that he was dead. But the Ripper either ended up in an asylum or in Australia. It's one or the other. Those two versions are entirely contradictory.
Given everything that we know about this supposed "interview" with Sagar, and the fact that none of this can be found in the Press Release and isn't mentioned in the Daily News story, I can't help thinking that this entire section about the Butcher's Row suspect needs to be treated with a great deal of caution. One simply doesn't know if the Evening News and Morning Leader were supplementing the story about Sagar's career with information about Jack the Ripper from other sources. The newspapers don't seem to have been beyond putting words into Sagar's mouth.
CONCLUSION
A lot of things about the Sagar "interview" are unclear and uncertain but there is one hard fact. This is that the City Press representative did not interview Sagar on Saturday (which is when the Daily News says he was interviewed by their representative). That would have been literally impossible. In fact, it seems entirely clear that the City Press did not interview Sagar at all, but based its report on some form of what I have described as a Press Release received during the week, prior to publication of the newspaper late on Friday night/early hours of Saturday morning.
As for the other three newspapers, it's hard to deny that they all must have made some use of the same Press Release, although, of course, by Saturday morning all of them could have been in possession of a copy of the City Press newspaper and plagiarised that report as source material. Given, however, that these papers were evidently provided with additional material either by the City of London Police or by Sagar himself, the plagiarism theory doesn't make sense. But it seems very unlikely that Sagar would have repeated verbatim during an interview what was stated in the Press Release, especially given the way the Morning Leader and Evening News both fail to report as quotes from Sagar those parts of his early life which match the City Press report.
Everything else is hard to fathom. Was Sagar interviewed on the Saturday by three reporters (or by two) or was it just one journalist who then wrote the story up in three different ways for three different newspapers in order to earn himself three fees? If by three journalists (or by two), was Sagar interviewed separately by each one, repeating what was essentially the same story verbatim to each of them, or did they all do one joint interview?
Noting the strange document that the Evening News reporter alone appears to have quoted from about a couple of incidents in Sagar's career involving threats against him and his son, does this mean that the Press Release given to the City Press was supplemented by additional material which was given to the other reporters on Saturday? Or was the Press Release a much longer document, with additional information included that was used by the other newspapers but omitted by the City Press?
Obviously I can't answer these questions but what I can say is that the Evening News report - which would have had to have been prepared very quickly if there was an interview on Saturday morning in order to get it into its paper which was printed early on Saturday afternoon - is very much an outlier. It is the only one of the four reports which tells us that the Jewish suspect was a well dressed butcher who ended up in Australia. For that reason, I think it needs to be treated with extreme caution. But it's the one report which is used to suggest that Sagar's suspect wasn't Kosminski. I think it's a mistake to use that report to form this conclusion.
We can see that the original and official story, which was presumably produced by the City of London Police, rather than by Sagar himself, was no more than that the police suspected an insane man who they could not charge because they didn't have enough evidence, and that when this man was placed in an asylum there were no more murders. That's it. And that's what the Daily News story, which expressly states that their representative spoke to Sagar on the Saturday, also tells us.
It's only the reports in the Evening News on Saturday and the Morning Leader on Monday which introduce Butcher's Row into the story. When the Evening News published that piece of information on Saturday, it appears to have been sourced to the City Police rather than directly to Sagar but, on the Monday, it was reported as a direct quote from Sagar but one which totally omitted the claim that the suspect was a butcher (who ended up in Australia) and which added in the claim that he was committed to a (private) asylum.
Given the inevitable time pressure of filing a report for a Saturday evening newspaper, presumably a handwritten one (from shorthand?), and how easy it would have been to assume that a man who worked in Butcher's Row was a butcher, it hardly seems beyond the bounds of possibility that the claim that the suspect was a butcher was an erroneous interpolation. One would also think that the Jewish suspect was probably said to have been "well known" (to the police) rather than well dressed but you can take your pick. Given that one report says, 'A police officer met a well dressed man of Jewish appearance coming out of the court' while the other says 'A police officer met a well-known man of Jewish appearance of Jewish appearance coming out of the court...' they must surely have been attempting to report the exact same sentence (either from a source document or from what Sagar said) so that one of them must contain an error. I personally suspect that it's the later report (i.e. the one published on the Monday) which is more likely to have been correct due to less time pressure to prepare the story for publication.
The short point is that I really don't think the Sagar reports can possibly be used to eliminate or discount Kosminski as the City of London Police suspect.
LORD ORSAM
14 April 2023
Re-published 13 June 2026
The Curious Case of the Fake Pensioner
In his 2015 book, Deconstructing Jack, Simon Wood puts forward an argument that the alibi provided by Edward Stanley, the so-called 'Pensioner' friend of Annie Chapman, that at the time of the murder of Polly Nichols, he was at Gosport on duty with the Hampshire militia (between 6 August and 1 September 1888), cannot be true, given what is known of Stanley's history.
According to Wood, it is clear that Edward Stanley 'could not have been on duty with the Hampshire militia' and, he says, it is a mystery as to how he was able to provide Coroner Wynne Baxter with accurate dates of the whereabouts of 'a militia artillery brigade to which he could not have belonged...' . Without wishing to spoil the book for anyone who hasn't read it, Wood 's explanation is that the poor pensioner known as 'Edward Stanley' was really a wealthy Important Person in disguise who was a senior officer in the Hampshire Militia.
Why does Simon Wood say that Stanley could not have belonged to this militia?
At first, it seems that Wood wants to say that the problem is with Stanley's age. Thus he says, 'Edward Stanley was too old to be in the Militia Reserve.' Pointing to a reference in the Evening Standard (which Wood accepts unquestioningly) that Stanley was 47 years old, Wood tells us that men over 35 could not enlist in the Militia Reserve. However, he then explains that there was an exception, a loophole, whereby men who had served less than 3 years in the army or army reserve, without having earned a pension, were allowed to enter the militia within 3 years of the day of their discharge, if they were under 45 years of age.
So, as Wood accepts, Stanley could have been a member of the Hampshire Militia in 1888 at the age of 47, having been discharged from the army or army reserve at the age of 41 and having then joined the Militia at the age of 44.
It is not therefore, Stanley's age that was a problem, and Wood's statement that Stanley was 'too old' to be in Hampshire Militia seems to have been too hasty.
The real problem, Wood tells us, was one of residence. The reason Stanley could not have been in the Hampshire Militia was because recruitment to that Militia was restricted to residents of the county of Hampshire or to residents of a county immediately adjoining Hampshire.
According to Wood, Stanley, 'by all accounts', had been a long term resident of Middlesex, which did not adjoin Hampshire, so it was impossible for him to have enlisted in the Hampshire Militia. Although he uses the phrase 'by all accounts', Wood only gives us a single account as evidence of Stanley having lived in Middlesex. This is from another newspaper report in which Charles Agent, proprietor of a lodging house in Osborn Street, was quoted as saying, 'I have known Ted Stanley for about 12 years. During that time he has mainly lodged here.'.
Wood ignores the problem caused to his argument by the word 'mainly'. What if Stanley had lived in Hampshire, perhaps in Basingstoke, or in a county adjoining Hampshire, for just one year out of the twelve that Charles Agent said he had known him? Could he not have joined the Hampshire Militia then?
It is worthy of note that the county of Surrey adjoined Hampshire and, contained within Surrey in 1888, was Lambeth, Southwark, Lewisham and Wandsworth - all areas easily accessible to Stanley with no great effort. Had he lived in one of these places for part of those 12 years, he would have qualified to join the Hampshire Militia.
So when Simon Wood says that he could not have been on duty with the Hampshire Militia in 1888, well, in fact, he could.
But the problem for Simon Wood is much worse than that. As we have seen, to establish that Stanley had lived in Middlesex for most of the period since 1876, he quoted Charles Agent as saying that Stanley had lodged with him during that time. But if Stanley was, as Wood claims, really the Important Person, this must mean that the Important Person had been living in a shabby east end lodging house for the best part of 12 years! It's ludicrous.
If, on the other hand, Charles Agent was incorrect about Stanley having lived in his lodging house for most of those 12 years then it is plain that Stanley could have been living in Hampshire during much of that period and joined the Hampshire Militia.
Either way, the whole of Wood's argument falls apart.
LORD ORSAM
First published: 18 November 2015