Crime and Punishment Historic Environment Study: c1870 – 1900

Policing in the 1880’s

In the 1880’s, policing was still in it’s infancy. Almost all the methods used to tackle and solve crimes today were unknown. Police work was mostly concerned with preventing crime, rather than catching criminals.

Training was very basic and was spent marching up court yards. Policemen were expected to wear their uniform even when off duty, attend church every Sunday and never be seen with women.

The purpose of the “ Bobby” was to “walk the beat” of an area around 7 miles, which saw street crimes, such as mugging go down, but burglaries of houses go up.

The police had a reputation for heavy handedness. A typical police response to violent protests was for officers to charge with their batons. The most serious incident was in 1887 during “Bloody Sunday” when violence broke out in Trafalgar Square between demonstrators and 2000 officers, which resulted in numerous casualties and one man who was not a demonstrator was killed by a horse. Police Commissioner was heavily criticised afterwards and the reputation of the police was tarnished.

In 1878, the Criminal Detective Department (CID) was set up, in which plain clothed, trained detectives investigated crimes and led to considerable improvements:

1879 1884 Number of detectives 216 294 Number of arrests 13,128 18,344

Photographs were being taken of known criminals and kept at in their “Rogue’s Gallery”, however it was believed that criminals could be instantly identified by the shape of their head. The importance of preserving a crime scene was now understood and foot and finger prints being recorded. However, a detective’s first line of enquiry was to interview “suspicious characters”, rather than to acquire evidence.

Whitechapel

By 1888, London was the largest capital in the world and the centre of the British Empire. The public face of Britain reflected Queen Victoria’s lifestyle; proud, dignified and above all, proper.

However, in the East End lay the district of Whitechapel. Seedy by any standards, it was a crime-ridden sordid quarter, where 78,000 residents lived in abject poverty. It was an area of doss houses, sweatshops, abattoirs, overcrowded slums, pubs, a few shops and warehouses, leavened with a row or two of respectably kept cottages.

Whitechapel housed London’s worst slums and the poverty of its inhabitants was appalling. Malnutrition and disease was so widespread newly born children only had a 50/50 chance of living past the age of five, making the average age of life expectancy at around 19 years. Here, three classes existed:

• The poor (Builders, laborers, shopkeepers, dock workers & tailors) • The very poor (Women & children usually being seamstresses, weavers or clothes washers) • The Homeless (living in a permanent state of deprivation)

Poverty had caused a large influx of Irish immigration in the mid 1800′s along with the Jewish population who had fled religious persecution in Russia, Germany and Poland who had reached 50,000 in 1888. The presence of the Jews in particular had caused much social unrest within Whitechapel. In 1887, Jewish immigrant Aaron Lipski was convicted and hanged for the brutal murder of his pregnant wife, despite weak evidence against him. This led to claims of anti-Semitism against the police, which added to a racially tense atmosphere.

Overcrowding and a shortage of housing created the abyss of Whitechapel. For most of the population in the East End, one lived and died in the same neighborhood in which they were born. Hope was in short supply.

A maze of entries, alleyways and courtyards were all lit by single gas lamps, giving out about 6 feet of light that at times was so thick, that you would struggle to see your own hand in front of your face.

Sanitation was also practically non-existent and raw sewage would be thrown into the street, making the stench of the whole district unbearable.

For the poor and destitute, common lodging houses offered a bed for the night. Here you would be cramped into a small dormitory with up to 80 others and for 4 pence you could get a bed which was practically a coffin lying on the ground. For tuppence you could lean against a rope, which was tied from one end of the wall to the other. Every night 8,500 men, women and children would seek shelter within these walls. These doss houses lay just off the main roads. Areas such as Thrawl Street, Flower and Dean and Dorset Street (a street so bad the police wouldn’t go down unless than in fours) were run by greedy landlords that had one motto: ‘No pay no stay.’ No money meant sleeping in doorways, lavatories or huddled up in the church yard, nicknamed “Itchy Park”. For men, work could sometimes be obtained down by the docks, offloading ships or as market porters. For women, work was scarce and any they could find paid very little, so out of sheer desperation and with little alternative, many turned to prostitution. They would sell themselves for as little as three pence, or a stale loaf of bread and carry out their trade in the streets. In October 1888, there were just over 1,200 prostitutes working the streets in Whitechapel alone.

Most would seek comfort in alcohol as the only refuge from reality. Drink was cheap and drunkenness rife, at any time of day or night, leading to brutality and violence as a direct result. Brawls were common and, as one Whitechapel inhabitant put it, cries of “Murder!” were “nothing unusual in the street.” A life of hard drinking led to most having missing teeth and wearing the same clothes day in and out. Life for most would have been short, unpleasant and tragic.

The victims of

Mary Ann “Polly” Nichols

She was born Mary Ann Walker in London, the daughter of a locksmith in 1845, making her 43 at the time of her death. She was described as "a very clean woman”, with the doctor at the post mortem also remarking on the cleanliness of her thighs. However, she was also an alcoholic with 5 missing front teeth and a scar on her forehead.

“Polly” had married William Nichols in1864 and had five children. Their marriage grew unstable and she left William and their children in 1881. With no other way to support herself, she became a street prostitute. She lived with her father until he evicted her for persistent drunkenness, then in a series of different workhouses and was occasionally forced to sleep rough. Her last known address was a dosshouse , Whitechapel, where men and women were allowed to share a bed.

On 31th August 1888, Polly was told to leave her dosshouse at 1.30 AM as she could not pay for her lodgings. "Never Mind!" She said, "I'll soon get my doss money. See what a jolly bonnet I've got now."

By 2:30 AM a friend of hers sees her drunk and stumped against a wall, claiming she had earned her doss money, but had spent it all on drink instead. This is the last sighting of her alive.

At 3:40 AM Pollys' body is discovered in Buck's Row by Charles Cross, who claimed her body still felt warm and rearranged her skirt, but left to find a police officer. Next to the scene was PC John Neil.

At 4:00AM Dr Rees Llewellyn arrives at the scene and pronounces Polly dead.

The body was examined at the mortuary at 6:45AM and was examined by Dr. George Bagster Phillips. "There was a bruise running along the lower part of the jaw on the right side of the face. That might have been caused by a blow from a fist or pressure from a thumb. There was a circular bruise on the left side of the face which also might have been inflicted by the pressure of the fingers. On the left side of the neck, about 1 inch below the jaw, there was an incision about 4 inches in length, and ran from a point immediately below the ear. On the same side, but an inch below, and commencing about 1 inch in front of it, was a circular incision, which terminated at a point about 3 inches below the right jaw. That incision completely severed all the tissues down to the vertebrae. The large vessels of the neck on both sides were severed. The incision was about 8 inches in length. The cuts must have been caused by a long-bladed knife, moderately sharp, and used with great violence. No blood was found on the breast, either of the body or the clothes. There were no injuries about the body until just about the lower part of the abdomen. Two or three inches from the left side was a wound running in a jagged manner. The wound was a very deep one, and the tissues were cut through. There were several incisions running across the abdomen. There were three or four similar cuts running downwards, on the right side, all of which had been caused by a knife which had been used violently and downwards. The injuries were form left to right and might have been done by a left handed person. All the injuries had been caused by the same instrument."

Annie Chapman

She was born Annie Eliza Smith in 1841, the daughter of a soldier. She was 47 at the time of her death and was said to be in very poor health, suffering from tuberculosis and possibly . She was a heavy drinker.

She had married coachman John Chapman in 1869, living around London and they had 3 children – one of whom was crippled and another who had died of meningitis at 12. She and John then separated in 1884 due to her drinking & she earned money selling flowers.

After John’s death in 1886, Annie became a prostitute, who came to live at a Lodging House in and was having a relationship with a bricklayer named Edward Stanley, with whom she spent weekends with. Annie didn't take to prostitution until after her husband's death. Prior to that she lived off the allowance he sent her and worked doing crochet-work and selling flowers.

On 8th September 1888, Annie left her lodging house at 1:35AM to earn money for her nightly fees after being told she would not be allowed to stay without it. She was last seen at 5:30 AM by prostitute Elizabeth Long, who saw Annie talking with a man in Hanbury Street. Long heard the man say "Will you?" and Annie replied "Yes." A few moments later, Albert Cadosch, who lived in Hanbury Street overheard a woman saying "No!" in an alleyway behind his house, then heard something fall against the fence.

Annie's body was discovered a little before 6:00am by John Davis, a Hanbury Street resident, who reported it at once to the police station.

Dr. George Bagster Phillips described the body of as he saw it at 6:30 AM in the back yard of the house at 29 Hanbury Street.

This is inquest testimony provided by Dr. George Bagster Phillips: "The throat was dissevered deeply; that the incision through the skin were jagged and reached right round the neck... The abdomen had been entirely laid open: the intestines, severed from their had been lifted out of the body and placed on the shoulder of the corpse; whilst from the pelvis, the uterus and its appendages with the upper portion of the vagina and two thirds of the bladder, had been entirely removed. No trace of these parts could be found and the incisions were cleanly cut, avoiding the rectum, and dividing the vagina low enough to avoid injury to the cervix uteri. Obviously the work was that of an expert- of one, at least, who had such knowledge of anatomical or pathological examinations as to be enabled to secure the pelvic organs with one sweep of the knife, which must therefore must have at least 5 or 6 inches in length, probably more. The appearance of the cuts confirmed him in the opinion that the instrument, like the one which divided the neck, had been of a very sharp character. The mode in which the knife had been used seemed to indicate great anatomical knowledge. He thought he himself could not have performed all the injuries he described, even without a struggle, under a quarter of an hour. If he had down it in a deliberate way such as would fall to the duties of a surgeon it probably would have taken him the best part of an hour."

Elizabeth Stride or 'Long Liz'

She was born as Elisabeth Gustafsdotter in Sweden in 1843 and was 45 at the time of her death. All the teeth in her lower left jaw were missing and she was described her as a quiet woman who would do a "good turn for anyone." However she had frequently appeared before Magistrates for being drunk and disorderly, sometimes with obscene language. She made money by sewing and charring and was only an occasional prostitute.

She had originally worked as a prostitute in Sweden, before moving to London in 1866.

In 1869 she married John Stride and they ran a coffee shop until 1875 until her marriage ended, despite her claims that her husband had been killed in a shipping disaster. In 1881, she contracted bronchitis and soon moved into the Whitechapel Workhouse and then the lodging house at Flower and Dean Street.

From 1885 she lived with labourer Michael Kidney. Their relationship was often volatile, due to Elizabeth’s drinking and frequent absences, and Kidney was violent towards her. By mid-September 1888, Elizabeth had returned to the Flower and Dean Street lodging house.

On September 30th, at 12:45AM turned in front of Berner Street and saw a man stop and speak to Elizabeth, who was standing in the gateway who about 30 years old, 5' 5" tall with a fresh complexion, dark hair and small brown mustache. He is dressed in an overcoat and an old black felt hat with a wide brim. He tried to pull the woman into the street, but he turned her round and threw her down on the footway and she screamed three times. On crossing to the opposite side of the street, he saw a second man lighting his pipe. The man who threw Elizabeth down called out, apparently to the other man "Lipski". This made Schwartz flee the scene.

At 1:00 AM: Louis Diemschutz, entered Dutfield's Yard driving his cart and pony. At the gateway, his pony refused to proceed, forcing him to search the dark and dimly lit alleyway himself, where he came into contact with Elizabeth’s dead body, but believed her to be either drunk or asleep. He left and returned with 2 other men, who discovered that her throat was cut, but her blood was still warm. It is widely believed that the Ripper was still in the alley when Diemschutz's arrived, who quickly fled the scene before he had time to perform any mutilations.

Dr. Frederick Blackwell was called and arrived at 1:16AM and pronounced Stride dead at the scene.

Dr. George Bagster Phillips (who also handled the Chapman and Kelly murders) performed the post mortem on Stride. His report is as follows:

"The body was lying on the near side, with the face turned toward the wall, the head up the yard and the feet toward the street. The left arm was extended and there was a packet of cachous (breath freshening sweets) in the left hand. The right arm was over the belly, the back of the hand and wrist had on it clotted blood. The legs were drawn up with the feet close to the wall. The body and face were warm and the hand cold.

There was a clear-cut incision on the neck. It was six inches in length and commenced two and a half inches in a straight line below the angle of the jaw, one half inch in over an undivided muscle, and then becoming deeper, dividing the sheath. The cut was very clean and deviated a little downwards. The and other vessels contained in the sheath were all cut through.”

Catherine Eddowes

Catherine Eddowes was born in Wolverhampton in 1842 the daughter of a tin worker, making her 46 at the time of her death. She was suffering from Uremia, a kidney disease caused by alcoholism and was known as an intelligent woman with a fierce temper. She had a long term relationship and 3 children with ex-soldier Thomas Conway and they eventually moved to London.

In 1881, Catherine and Eddowes split, forcing her to move to a lodging house in Flower and Dean Street, Whitechapel, where she earned a meagre living from scrounging and prostitution.

On 29th September 1888 at 8:00 PM, Catherine was found by a police officer passed out drunk, surrounded by a crowd in Aldgate High Street and taken to Bishopsgate Police Station. At 1:00 AM, now sober, she was released from police custody. "Goodnight, old cock” were her last known words to an officer as she returned to the streets, walking towards Mitre Square.

At 1:35 AM, 3 men see Catherine talking to a man on Duke Street. They described him as being 30 years old, 5 foot 7 tall, fair complexioned with a moustache and was a medium build. He was wearing a pepper and salt colored jacket which fit loosely, a grey peaked cloth cap, giving him a sailor’s appearance.

At 1:45 AM, only 45 minutes after the murder of , a police officer discovers Catherine’s body in Mitre Square. At 2:00 AM police surgeon Dr. Frederick Gordon Brown arrived at the scene and made the following report:

"The body was on its back, the head turned to left shoulder. The abdomen was exposed. Right leg bent at the thigh and knee. The throat cut across. The intestines were drawn out to a large extent and placed over the right shoulder -- they were smeared over with some feculent matter. A piece of about two feet was quite detached from the body and placed between the body and the left arm, apparently by design. The body was quite warm. She must have been dead most likely within the half hour.

The face was very much mutilated. There was a cut about a quarter of an inch through the lower left eyelid, dividing the structures completely through. The upper eyelid on that side, there was a scratch through the skin on the left upper eyelid, near to the angle of the nose. The right eyelid was cut through to about half an inch. The throat was cut across to the extent of about six or seven inches. The large vessels on the left side of the neck were severed. The larynx was severed below the vocal chord. The intestines had been detached to a large extent from the mesentery. About two feet of the colon was cut away. The sigmoid flexure was invaginated into the rectum very tightly. The throat had been so instantly severed that no noise could have been emitted. I should not expect much blood to have been found on the person who had inflicted these wounds. The wounds could not have been self-inflicted.”

Mary Jane Kelly

Mary Jane Kelly was born in Limerick, Ireland in 1863 and was the daughter of an iron worker. However, from an early age, she was raised in Wales and spoke fluent Welsh. She had blonde hair and was well known for her great beauty.

In 1879, Mary had married a collier named Davies, however he was killed in an explosion just 2 years later. Now a widow, Mary moved to London in 1884, where she worked in a high class West End Brothel and lived with labourer Joseph Barnett. Both of them were alcoholics and fought each other when drunk. Barnett’s debts forced them to move to Miller’s Court, Whitechapel.

On 9th November 1888, George Hutchinson, a resident of Commercial Street, sees Mary talking to a man at 2:00 AM. He described the man as having a pale complexion, a slight moustache, dark hair, dark eyes, and bushy eyebrows and according to Hutchinson, of "Jewish appearance" and about 35 or 36 years old. At 4:00 AM, residents of Miller’s Court hear a feint cry of "Oh, murder!" but, as this cry was common, no attention is paid to it.

At 10:45 AM, Thomas Bowyer knocks on Mary’s door to collect past due rent and sees through the window her badly mutilated body. He hurriedly reports this to the police. Hours later, the police smash in the door with an axe handle. When the police enter, they are shocked by the sight of the body. It was mutilated so badly, it’s been estimated it would have taken the Ripper 2 hours to carry out the wounds and Joseph Barnett could only identify the body from studying an ear.

Dr. Thomas Bond carried out the . His report is as follows:

"The body was lying naked in the middle of the bed, the shoulders flat but the head was turned on the left cheek. The left arm was close to the body with the forearm flexed at a right angle and lying across the abdomen.

The whole of the surface of the abdomen and thighs was removed and the abdominal cavity emptied of its viscera. The breasts were cut off, the arms mutilated by several jagged wounds and the face hacked beyond recognition of the features. The tissues of the neck were severed all round down to the bone.

The face was gashed in all directions, the nose, cheeks, eyebrows, and ears being partly removed. The lips were blanched and cut by several incisions running obliquely down to the chin. There were also numerous cuts extending irregularly across all the features. The neck was cut through the skin and other tissues right down to the vertebrae, the fifth and sixth being deeply notched.

The left calf showed a long gash through skin and tissues to the deep muscles and reaching from the knee to five inches above the ankle. Both arms and forearms had extensive jagged wounds.

The right thumb showed a small superficial incision about one inch long, with extravasation of blood in the skin, and there were several abrasions on the back of the hand moreover showing the same condition.”

The Police investigation into the

In 1888, the police had no idea who they were dealing with when Polly Nicholls was murdered. The police were unaware they were dealing with a , and, had no idea what a serial killer was. The Home Secretary also had no idea of the seriousness of the situation when he refused to offer a reward after the first murder. Everything suggested that the murder was a local affair.

Most people in Whitechapel; and the police officers investigating the murder, assumed that Polly Nicholls was killed by somebody local. The earlier attack on Emma Smith and the murder of led many people to believe that somebody to do with prostitution was to blame. The way that Polly Nicholls had later Annie Chapman were cut up suggested that someone with experience of dissecting bodies might be involved. These were the first two lines of enquiry that the police followed. Three horse slaughterers, who worked near Buck’s Row were arrested, but then cleared, when they were found to have been working at the time of the murder. For many weeks, however, many inquiries were made at abattoirs and slaughter houses.

Inspector Frederick Abbeline was in charge of the investigation. He had served for 26 years in the Force and most of that time had been spent in Whitechapel. The inspector and the other police officers allotted to the case acted quickly. Soon after the murder of Polly Nicholls, stories began to appear about a character called “Leather Apron”, He had the reputation of demanding money from prostitutes under threats of violence.

The Star, a popular newspaper, published a description of the man, claiming that he was a Jewish slipper maker.

From all accounts he is five feet four or five inches in height and wears a dark close fitting cap. He is thickest and has an unusually thick neck. His hair is black and closely clipped. His age is about thirty eight or forty. He has a small black moustache. The distinguishing feature of his costume is a leather apron, which he always wears. His expression is sinister, and seems to be full of terror for the women who describe it.

The article was clearly intended to inflame public opinion. When this description was published, “Leather Apron” went into hiding.

The second murder, of Annie Chapman, was in Spitalfields and not Whitechapel, so it was not investigated by Inspector Joseph Chandler of H Division. Inspector Abberline worked with Chandler and the two men agreed that the murders had been carried out by the same person. Three days after the murder, “Leather Apron” was arrested.

“Leather Apron” was in fact John Pizer, who had at least one conviction for stabbing, but none for bullying prostitutes. He was soon found to have alibis for both murders. At the time of the death of Polly Nicholls, he was at a lodging house, which the owner had backed up and at the time of the killing of Annie Chapman he was in hiding in a relative’s house. A number of people corroborated this. So John Pizer was released and a good deal of police time had been wasted.

But the release of John Pizer did not make the job of the police and easier in the short term. Many informants came forward and passed on information about suspicious individuals acting strangely. Some were arrested, but all suspects were subsequently released.

Much of the blame for the wasting of police time lay with the press. Some newspapers publicised the story of “Leather Apron” and virtually forced the police to chase him. They also picked on the statement by Elizabeth Long, who stated that the man that she saw talking to Annie Chapman “looked to me like a foreigner”. This led to a concentration of foreigners, which was not helped by The Star’s statement that “Leather Apron” was Jewish. The people of Whitechapel did not need much encouragement to turn on the growing community of Jewish immigrants. Fortunately, the formation of the Mile End Vigilance Committee helped to shift attention away from the Jewish community for the time being.

Unfortunately, Inspector Chandler was not so impressed by Elizabeth Long’s evidence as the press had been. He decided that her estimate of the time of Annie Chapman’s death, 5.30 am, was wrong. Chandler’s reason for ignoring Elizabeth Long was that her evidence conflicted with that of Dr Phillips, who was an experienced and highly regarded surgeon. In fact, at the inquest, Dr Phillips did suggest that his estimate of the time of Annie Chapman’s death might have been accurate, but this was again ignored by the police.

However, the police did take notice of the evidence that suggested that the murderer had medical knowledge. This suggested that the killer might not be a local man, but a visitor to Whitechapel. They also took seriously Elizabeth Long’s statement that he might have been a foreigner, even though there was no evidence to support her at all. The police increased the number of patrols in Whitechapel, as the events surrounding the two murders on 30th September show. Police Constables on the beat were criss-crossing Whitechapel at regular intervals and both the murders must have been carried out in very short periods of time, possible as little as 5 minutes.

After the night of the double murder (of Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes), the number of police patrols increased even more. Several policemen dressed as prostitutes in an effort to trap the killer, as there were no women police at that time. The police visited most of the lodging houses in Whitechapel and interviewed more than 2000 lodgers. 76 butchers and slaughterers were questioned, even though many had previously been questioned, even though they had previously been questioned and dismissed as suspects after the murder of Annie Chapman. Sailors were also interrogated and bloodhounds were also used to try to follow the scent of the killer, but this proved hopeless.

The desperation of the police was shown in a leaflet that was printed and distributed to 80,000 houses.

POLICE NOTICE

TO THE OCCUPIER

On the morning of Friday, 31st August, Saturday 8th, and Sunday, 30th September 1888, women were murdered in or near Whitechapel, supposed by someone residing in the immediate neighbourhood. Should you know of any person to whom suspicion is attached, you are earnestly requested to communicate at once with the nearest Police Station Metropolitan Police Office, 30th September 1888.

There were three startling points about the handbill. First, the police were unable or unwilling, to give any description of the killer. Secondly, they still apparently believed the killer lived in Whitechapel, and thirdly, despite it being a whole month since Polly Nicholl’s murder, they were still appealing for information regarding suspicious characters, which shows they still had no leads. The final point is that the police are still using their standard method of detective work, even after the great mass of evidence that had been collected about the Ripper and his victims.

In fact, after the double murder, there was evidence that the Ripper did not live in Whitechapel. All of the killings had taken place at weekends, which suggested that the killer had a job and that he travelled into Whitechapel to carry out his work. It was also very likely that in a community like Whitechapel, where people lived very closely together, that someone would have spotted the Ripper by then. There was no shortage of informants and no sign that anyone had any sympathy for him.

The police also attempted to jog the public’s memories by publishing the “Dear Boss” letter. This did nothing but alarm them and signing the letter “Jack the Ripper” gave a new level of media interest in the already high selling story.

The murder of Mary Kelly led to more police patrols and also the outbreak of mob violence against suspicious individuals. Inspector Abberline took the description given by William Hutchinson very seriously and had it circulated to all police stations. In fact, it was also too good a description, particularly the later information. More than one writer has suggested that he may have been trying to avoid any suspicion himself. However, the police did not investigate him at all.

Eventually, the case became so high profile, even Queen Victoria showed concern for what was going on. She told the Prime Minister;

This new most ghastly murder shows the absolute necessity for some very decided action. All these courts must be lit, and our detectives improved. They are not what they should be.

Queen Victoria was voicing what was a common reaction. The police just were not doing enough, however what more could they do? A more balanced verdict on the police efforts was given by The Times.

The murders, so cunningly continued, are carried out with a complete ruthlessness which altogether baffles investigators. Not a trace is left of the murderer, and there is no purpose in the crime to afford the slightest clue. All the police can hope is that some accidental circumstance will lead to a trace which may be followed to a successful conclusion.

This was good insight into the case. All the evidence suggests Jack the Ripper struck at random. He worked so quickly that his victims were unable to struggle. He was cunning and changed his tactics to keep him ahead of the police.

More than 90% of murders are committed by persons known to their victim, but it appears the Ripper did not know his victims and was the result of a chance meeting. Even today, murderers like this are very hard to catch.

Source A

From “Punch” Magazine, published in 1888 at the time of the Whitechapel murders.

Source B

THE terror of Whitechapel has walked again, and this time has marked down two victims, one hacked and disfigured beyond discovery, the other with her throat cut and torn. Again he has got away clear; and again the police, with wonderful frankness, confess that they have not a clue. They are waiting for a seventh and an eighth murder, just as they waited for a fifth, to help them to it. Meanwhile, Whitechapel is half mad with fear. The people are afraid even to talk with a stranger. Notwithstanding the repeated proofs that the murderer has but one aim, and seeks but one class in the community, the spirit of terror has got fairly abroad, and no one knows what steps a practically defenceless community may take to protect itself or avenge itself on any luckless wight who may be taken for the enemy.

“The Star” newspaper, published 1st October 1888

Source C

“I saw a man and a woman standing on the pavement talking. The man's back was turned towards Brick-lane, and the woman's was towards the market … I did not see the man's face, but I noticed that he was dark. He was wearing a brown low-crowned felt hat. I think he had on a dark coat, though I am not certain. By the look of him he seemed to me a man over forty years of age. He appeared to me to be a little taller than the deceased… He looked like a foreigner … what I should call shabby-genteel. … I overheard him say to her ‘Will you?’ and she replied, ‘Yes.’ That is all I heard, and I heard this as I passed. I left them standing there, and I did not look back, so I cannot say where they went to.”

A witness statement made by Elizabeth Long. This was used in the police inquest for the murder of Annie Chapman

Source D

POLICE NOTICE

TO THE OCCUPIER

On the morning of Friday, 31st August, Saturday 8th, and Sunday, 30th September 1888, women were murdered in or near Whitechapel, supposed by someone residing in the immediate neighbourhood. Should you know of any person to whom suspicion is attached, you are earnestly requested to communicate at once with the nearest Police Station Metropolitan Police Office, 30th September 1888.

A police leaflet distributed to the public following the night of the double murder on 30th September 1888

Source E

A map of Whitechapel in 1888

Source F

From the magazine “The illustrated Police News”, 21st September 1888.