Police 4: Two Police Forces and the Goulston Street Graffito
Read the text below or watch the video - it’s your choice.
Hello, I’m Richard Walker. Here is the fourth of my posts looking at the history, background, and role of the police in investigating the Jack the Ripper murders of 1888.
As said in earlier posts, the London police in 1888 lacked important advantages that our modern police force enjoys, from fingerprinting to modern forensic science.
If we accept the views of those like Donald Rumbelow, who believe that the Metropolitan Police and the City of London Police were practically at war with each other, then it follows that this lack of cooperation was also a serious handicap.
The other problem in investigating the Jack the Ripper murders was the very society in which the police of 1888 had to operate. The divide between rich and poor in London in the 19th century was staggering, and maintaining law and order was not an easy task.
Perhaps when Sir Robert Peel got his bill passed through parliament to create the Metropolitan Police Force six decades before Jack the Ripper made headlines, his goal was to create a strong but politically neutral police force to maintain social order.
It would seem to be a big ask for anybody to be ‘politically neutral’ when the level of poverty was such that foreign visitors were shocked into recording their views.
In The People of the Abyss, Jack London contrasted the lot of the working men in San Francisco or New York with the brutal conditions experienced by the working men of London.
He was not alone. An overseas visitor who came from the East was equally appalled.
Yiddish theatre actor, Jacob Adler was forced out of the Russian Empire, ending up with a successful career in New York, where he wrote about his experiences in London. He wrote:
“The further we penetrated into this Whitechapel, the more our hearts sank was this London. Never in Russia nor later in the worst streets of New York were we to see poverty like the poverty we saw in the London of the 1880s.”
Robert Peel may well have wanted a politically neutral police force, but the very fact that he had to articulate such a goal with such statements as, “The police are the public and the public are the police”, shows he was aware that he faced a battle.
It could be argued that the social conditions in which police officers operated were a bigger handicap in solving the crimes assigned to ‘Jack the Ripper’ than the problems caused by differences between the Metropolitan Police Force and the City of London Police Force.
The night of the “Double Event” on September 30th 1888, though, certainly saw a clash between the two forces.
At 1:00 a.m. on Sunday, September 30th, a woman’s body was discovered in an area covered by the H Division of the London Metropolitan Police Force. The body was lying in the entrance to a yard on Berner Street, now called Henriques Street. Her throat had been cut.
She was just a 15-minute walk from where Polly Nichols had had her throat cut one month earlier in Buck’s Row, now called Durward Street.
She was an 18-minute walk from where Annie Chapman had had her throat cut three weeks earlier in Hanbury Street.
Then, just 44 minutes after the discovery in Berner Street so, at 1:44 am, a body was discovered in Mitre Square.
The throat had also been cut and was again only an 18-minute walk from the body found just three-quarters of an hour earlier in Berner Street.
After the discovery in Berner Street at 1 am, local police constables were alerted, and Detective Inspector Reid and Dr Blackwell arrived at 1:16 by Dr Blackwell’s watch.
At 1:30 am, Dr Blackwell was joined by Dr George Bagster Phillips, who examined the body. Dr Phillips was the police surgeon who examined the body of Annie Chapman, who was also murdered in H Division just three weeks earlier.
At 1:44, City of London Police Constable Edward Watkins discovered the body of a woman in Mitre Square.
At 1:58, City of London Police Detective Constable Daniel Halse arrived at Mitre Square, shone his light onto the body, and then gave orders for the whole area to be searched. He then headed east to Middlesex Street and Wentworth Street.
At 2:00 am, City of London police surgeon Dr Frederick Gordon Brown examined the body at the scene of the crime.
At 2:20 am, Metropolitan Police Constable Alfred Long passed down Goulston Street, and at the same time, City of London Police Detective Constable Daniel Halse continued his search down Goulston Street.
Detective Halse was not the only City of London Police officer searching in the territory of the Metropolitan Police.
So perhaps the idea that Jack the Ripper could cross between the two police forces to avoid capture may not be a significant fact in explaining why these crimes were not solved.
At 2:55 am, Metropolitan Police Constable Alfred Long discovered a piece of cloth in the doorway of the Wentworth Model Dwellings.
It could be asked why a disgusting rag ‘covered in blood and faecal matter’ lying among the grime of London’s East End should be of interest to anyone.
Police Constable Alfred Long came across this rag at 2:55 am, which is nearly two hours after the discovery of the murder less than 20 minutes away in Berner Street, so PC Long, we can assume, would have received the information about it and would be on alert for any clue.
The piece of cloth had blood on it, and above it was a chalk message: “The Juews are the men who will not be blamed for nothing”.
This was enough for him to quickly check out the stairway before going to the Commercial Street Police Station, where he handed in the cloth to be examined.
He explained that he had left another police officer at the Wentworth Model Dwellings to check anyone entering or leaving.
The piece of cloth that this Metropolitan Police Officer had found matched a piece missing from the apron of the woman who had just been murdered in Mitre Square in the City of London Police district.
City of London Police Detective Daniel Halse, giving evidence at the inquest, said:
“When I saw the dead woman at the mortuary, I noticed that a piece of her apron was missing. . . When I got back to Mitre Square I heard that a piece of apron had been found in Goulston Street. I went there with Detective Hunt to the spot where the apron had been discovered. There, I saw some chalk writing on the wall. I stayed, and I sent Hunt to find Mr McWilliam.”
Again, we have a number of City of London Police Officers crossing the border into Metropolitan Police territory.
Regarding timing, it takes almost half an hour to get the body to the mortuary in Golden Lane. Dr. Frederick Gordon Brown didn’t get to Mitre Square until 2 am. He then did quite a thorough examination before the body was lifted onto a cart and taken to Golden Lane, so it would be sometime after 3 am before Detective Halse could have examined it and seen the apron.
Halse then has to get from Golden Lane to Goulston Street, so he looks at the chalk message at around 3:45 am.
Metropolitan Police Superintendent Arnold also arrived and, five weeks later writing in a report on November 6, wrote:
“I beg to report that on the morning of the 30th Sept. last, my attention was called to some writing on the wall of the entrance to some dwellings at No. 108 Goulston Street, Whitechapel, which consisted of the following words: "The Juews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing", and knowing in consequence of suspicion having fallen upon a Jew named 'John Pizer' alias 'Leather Apron' having committed a murder in Hanbury Street a short time previously, a strong feeling existed against the Jews generally, and as the Building upon which the writing was found was situated in the midst of a locality inhabited principally by that Sect, I was apprehensive that if the writing were left, it would be the means of causing a riot and therefore considered it desirable that it should be removed having in view the fact that it was in such a position that it would have been rubbed by persons passing in & out of the Building.”
Then, the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Charles Warren, arrived. Again, writing on November 6 to the Home Secretary, he wrote:
“On the 30th September, on hearing of the Berner Street murder, after visiting Commercial Street Station, I arrived at Leman Street Station shortly before 5 A.M. and ascertained from Superintendent Arnold all that was known there relative to the two murders.
The most pressing question at that moment was some writing on the wall in Goulston Street evidently written with the intention of inflaming the public mind against the Jews, and which Mr Arnold, with a view to preventing serious disorder, proposed to obliterate and had sent down an Inspector with a sponge for that purpose, telling him to await his arrival.
I considered it desirable that I should decide the matter myself, as it was one involving so great a responsibility whether any action was taken or not.
I accordingly went down to Goulston Street at once before going to the scene of the murder: it was just getting light, the public would be in the streets in a few minutes, in a neighbourhood very much crowded on Sunday mornings by Jewish vendors and Christian purchasers from all parts of London.
There were several Police around the spot when I arrived, both Metropolitan Police and City Police.
The writing was on the jamb of the open archway or doorway visible in the street and could not be covered up without danger of the covering being torn off at once.
A discussion took place on whether the writing could be left covered up or otherwise or whether any portion of it could be left for an hour until it could be photographed, but after taking into consideration the excited state of the population in London generally at the time, the strong feeling which had been excited against the Jews, and the fact that in a short time, there would be a large concourse of the people in the streets, and having before me the Report that if it was left there the house was likely to be wrecked (in which from my own observation I entirely concurred) I considered it desirable to obliterate the writing at once, having taken a copy of which I enclose a duplicate.
After having been to the scene of the murder, I went on to the City Police Office and informed the Chief Superintendent of the reason why the writing had been obliterated.”
This was a major clash between two very different views of the action that was taken. The Metropolitan Police Commissioner’s view that the message had to be removed to avoid a riot and the view held by senior City of London Police officers who believed that important evidence had been deliberately destroyed.
This clash is often cited as an example of the conflict between the two London Police forces.
It does appear, though, to be caused more by a difference of opinion as to the best cause of action to take rather than a systemic failure brought about by competition between the two police forces.
It should be noted that commentators on the events writing more recently are equally divided. Some support and some condemn the action taken by the Metropolitan Police in washing off the writing at 5:30 am.
Had Superintendent Arnold and Commissioner Sir Charles Warren arrived and demanded to know what the City of London Police thought they were doing interfering with Metropolitan Police territory; then we could say a lack of cooperation between the two police forces could well have adversely affected the investigation into these crimes.
There is evidence that shows whatever happened in the early hours of Sunday morning in Goulston Street, cooperation existed.
Sir Charles Warren’s statement, “I went on to the City Police Office and informed the Chief Superintendent of the reason why the writing had been obliterated,” shows that a degree of professional cooperation existed.
At 2:30 that Sunday afternoon, Dr George Bagster Phillips of the Metropolitan Police joined the City of London Police Surgeon, Dr Frederick Gordon Brown, to perform the autopsy at the City mortuary in Golden Lane.
Now, Dr Brown was the City of London Police’s police surgeon, and the victim he was examining had been murdered in the City of London, but Dr Phillips, who was a Metropolitan Police police surgeon, was in attendance at that autopsy. So, cooperation between the two police forces was not completely absent.
There were, however, issues with the way both police forces dealt with the investigation into these two murders that were not ideal. Issues to be looked at in the next post.
Thank you for checking out this post.