Annie Chapman - Wife, Mother, Victim: The Life & Death of a Victim of Jack The Ripper

by Covell, Mike

  THE WHITECHAPEL MURDERS. A CONFESSION. (CENTRAL NEWS TELEGRAM). LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING. A man giving the name of John Fitzgerald gave himself up at Wandsworth Police Station last night, and made a statement to the inspector on duty to the effect that he committed the murder in Hanbury street. He was afterwards conveyed to Leman street Police Station, where he is now detained. THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER. INQUEST AND VERDICT. REMARKABLE STATEMENT BY THE CORONER. (SPECIAL TELEGRAM) LONDON, WEDNESDAY. This afternoon Mr Wynne E Baxter, the coroner for South-East Middlesex, resumed the inquiry at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel, into the circumstances attending the death of Mrs Annie Chapman, aged 48, late of Windsor, who was murdered on the morning of the 8th September. There being no further evidence forthcoming the Coroner proceeded to sum up. Having recalled the facts of the case, ad the condition in which the body of the murdered woman was found, the Coroner went on to say that two things were missing, viz, the woman's finger rings and a part of her body. He continued - The body had not been dissected, but the injuries had been made by someone who had considerable anatomical skill and knowledge. There are no meaningless cuts. The organ has been taken by one who knew where to find it, what difficulties he would have to contend against, and how he should use his knife so as to abstract the organ without injury to it. No unskilled person could have known where to find it, or have recognised it when it was found. For instance, no mere slaughterer of animals could have carried out these operations. It must have been someone accustomed to the post-mortem room. The conclusion that the desire was to possess the missing abdominal organ seems overwhelming. If the object were robbery the injuries to the viscera were meaningless, for death had previously resulted from the loss of blood at the neck. The amount missing would go in a breakfast cup, and had not the medical examiner been of a thorough and searching character, it might easily have been left unnoticed that there had been any portion of the body taken. It has been suggested that the criminal is a lunatic with morbid feelings. This may or may not be the case, and it is not necessary to assume lunacy, for it is clear that there is a market for the missing organ. To show you this I must mention a fact which at the same time proves the assistance which publicity and the newspaper press afford in the detection of crime. Within a few hours o the issue of the morning papers containing a report of the medical evidence given at the last sitting of the court, I received a communication from an officer of one of our great medical schools that they had information which might or might not have a distinct bearing on our inquiry. I attended at the first opportunity, and was informed by the Sub-Curator of the Pathological Museum that some months ago an American had called on him and asked him to procure a number of specimens of the organ that was missing in the deceased. He stated his willingness to give £20 a piece for each specimen. He stated that his object was to issue an actual specimen with each copy of a publication on which he was engaged. He was told that his request was impossible to be complied with, but he still urged his request. He wished them preserved not in spirits of wine, the usual medium, but in glycerine, in order to preserve them in a flaccid condition, and he wished them sent to America direct. It is known that the request was repeated to another institution of a similar character. Now is it not possible that knowledge of this demand may have incited some abandoned wretch to possess himself of a specimen? It seems beyond belief that such inhuman wickedness could enter into the mind of any man, but unfortunately our criminal annuls prove that every crime is possible. I need hardly say that I at once communicated my information to the Detective Department of Scotland Yard. Of course, I do not know what use has been made of it, but I believe that publicity may possibly further elucidate this fact, and therefore I have not withheld from you the information." In concluding his remarks upon this part of the subject the coroner said, “Surely it is not too late yet to hope that the ingenuity of our detective force will succeed in unearthing this monster. It is not as if there were no clue to the character of the criminal or cause of his crime. His object is clearly divulged. His anatomical knowledge carries him out of the category of a common criminal, for that knowledge could only have been obtained by assisting at post-mortems, or by frequenting the post-mortem room. Thus the class in which the search must be made, although a large one, is limited. Moreover, it must have been a man who was from home, if not all night, at least during the early hours of the 8th of September. The jury found that Annie Chapman”was murdered by some person or persons unknown." (PRESS ASSOCIATION TELEGRAM) LONDON, WEDNESDAY. Dr Phillips, the divisional police surgeon for Whitechapel, who has been making inquiries into the murder near Gateshead, attended the inquest at Whitechapel for the purpose of answering any further questions which might be put to him with a view to elucidating the mystery, but he arrived when the coroner was summing up, and thus had no opportunity. When told by a reporer of the startling statement in the coroner's summing up he said he considered it a very important communicatin, and the public would now see his reason for not wishing in the first place to give a description of the injuries. He attached great importance to the applications which had been made to the pathological museums, and to the advisability of following this information up as a probable clue. With reference to the murder and mutilation near Gateshead, he stated that it was evidently not done by the same hand as the Whitechapel murder, that at Gateshead being simply a clumsy piece of butchery. A telegram from the district states that the same opinion is entertained there, the idea being that the mutilation of the body was suggested to the murderer by reading the accounts of the murders in the east end of London.

  Freeman's Journal and Daily Commercial Advertiser, a newspaper published in Dublin, Ireland, featured the following, dated September 27th 1888,

  THE WHITECHAPEL MURDERS. CORONER'S SUMMING UP AND VERDICT. STARTLING STATEMENT. (PRESS ASSOCIATION TELEGRAM). London, Wednesday. Mr. Wynne Baxter this afternoon resumed the inquest at Whitechapel on the body of Annie Chapman, who was murdered on the 8th instant in the back yard of 29 Hanbury street. The Coroner at once proceeded to sum up the evidence. He recalled the important facts of the case which have already been fully detailed. It was in a Spitalfields lodging-house that the deceased received the older bruises found on her temple and in front of the chest, in a trumpery quarrel a week before her death. It was in one of these lodging houses that she was seen a few hours before her mangled remains were discovered. She was found dead about six o'clock. All was done with reckless daring. The murder seemed like the Bucks row case to have been carried out without any cry. Sixteen people were in the house. The partitions of the rooms were of wood; the brute who committed the offence did not even take the trouble to cover up his ghastly work, but left the body exposed to view. Probably as daylight broke he hurried away. The Coroner then proceeded to observe - There are two things missing. Her rings had been wrenched from her fingers and have not been found, and the uterus has been taken away. The body has not been dissected, but the injuries have been made by someone who had considerable anatomical knowledge and skill. There are no meaningless cuts. The organ has been taken away by one who knew where to find it, what difficulties he would have to contend against, and how he should use his knife so as to abstract the organ without injury to it. No unskilled person could have known where to find it or have recognised it when it was found. For instance, no mere slaughterer of animals could have carried out these operations; it must have been someone accustomed to the post-mortem room. The desire to posses the missing organ seems overwhelming. If the object were robbery, the injuries to the viscera were meaningless, for death had previously resulted from loss of blood at the neck. There was difficulty in believing that the purpose of the murderer was the possession of the uterus. It is unnatural and abhorrent to our feelings to conclude that a life should be taken for so slight an object; but when rightly considered the reasons for most murders are altogether out of proportion to the guilt. It has been suggested that the criminal is a lunatic with morbid feelings. This may or may not be the case, bu
t the object of the murderer appears palpably shown by facts, and it is not necessary to assume lunacy, for it is clear that there is a market for the missing organ. To show you this I must mention a fact which at the same time proves the assistance which publicity and the newspaper Press afford in the detection of crime. Within a few hours of the issue of the morning papers containing the medical evidence given at the last sitting of the court I received a communication from an officer of one of our great schools that they had information which might or might not have bearing upon our inquiry. I attended at the first opportunity, and was informed by the sub-curator of the Pathological Museum that some months ago an American had called on him and asked him to procure a number of specimens of the organ that was missing in the deceased. He stated his willingness to give £20 for each specimen, and said his object was to issue an actual specimen with each copy of a publication on which he was then engaged. He was told that his request was impossible to be complied with, but he still urged his request. He wished them preserved, not in spirits of wine, the usual medium, but in glycerine, in order to preserve them in a flaccid condition, and he wished them sent to America direct. It is known that this request was repeated to another institution of a similar character. Now is it not possible that knowledge of this demand incited some abandoned wretch to possess himself of specimens? Our criminal annals prove that every crime is possible. I at once communicated my information to Scotland Yard. I do not know what use has been made of it, but I believe that publicity may further elucidate this fact, and therefore I have not withheld from you the information. By means of the Press some further explanation may be forthcoming from America if not from here. I have endeavoured to suggest to you the object with which this crime was committed, and the class of person who committed it. The greatest deterrent from crime is the conviction that detection and punishment will follow with rapidity and certainty, and it may be that the impunity with which Mary Anne Smith and Anne Tabram were murdered suggested the possibility of such horrid crimes as those which you and another jury have recently been considering. It is therefore great misfortune that nearly three weeks have elapsed without the chief actor in this awful tragedy having been discovered. It is not as if there were no clue to the character of the criminal or the cause of his crime. His object is clearly divulged. His anatomical knowledge carries him out of the category of common criminals, for that knowledge could only have been obtained by assisting at post-mortems, or by frequenting the post-mortem room. Thus the class in which the search must be made, although a large one, is limited. Moreover, it must be a man who was from home, if not all night, at least during the early hours of the 8th September. His hands were undoubtedly blood-stained, for he did not stop to use the tap in the yard, as the pan of clean water under it shows. If the theory of lunacy be correct (which I have much doubt) the class is still further limited; while if Mrs Long's memory does not fail and assumption be correct that the man who was talking to the deceased at half-past five was the culprit, he is even more clearly defined. He was a foreigner of dark complexion, over forty years of age, a little taller than the deceased, of shabby-genteel appearance, with a brown deerstalker hat on his head, and a dark coat on his back. We are confronted with a murder of no ordinary character, committed not for jealousy, revenge, or robbery, but from a motive less adequate than the many which still disgrace our civilisation, mar our progress, and blot the pages of Christianity. The jury immediately returned a verdict of wilful murder against some person or persons unknown. The Press Association reporter had an interview with Dr Phillips, the Divisional Police Surgeon for Whitechapel, who has been making inquiries into the murder near Gateshead. Dr Phillips attended the inquest at Whitechapel for the purpose of answering any further questions which might be put to him with a view to elucidating the mystery, but he arrived while the Coroner was summing up, and thus had no opportunity. When told by the reporter of the startling statements in the Coroner's summing up he said he considered it a very important communication, and the public would now see his reason for not wishing in the first place to give a description of the injuries. He attached great importance to the applications which had been made to the pathological museums, and to the advisability of following this information up, as a probable clue. With reference to the murder and mutilation at Gateshead, he stated that it was evidently not done by the same hand as the Whitechapel murder, that at Gateshead being simply a clumsy piece of butchery. A telegram from the district states that the same opinion is entertained there, the idea being that the mutilation of the body was suggested to the murderer by reading the accounts of the murders in the East End of London.

  The Hull Daily Mail, a newspaper based in Hull, England, featured the following, dated September 27th 1888,

  THE WHITECHAPEL MURDERS. A CONFESSION. The Central News understands that a man, giving the name of John Fitzgerald, gave himself up at the Wandsworth Police station last night, and made a statement to the inspector on duty to the effect that he committed the murder in Hanbury Street. He was afterwards conveyed to the Leman Street Police Station, where he is now detained. The Press Association says, as a consequence of the startling statement made by the Coroner yesterday public interest in the fate of the unfortunate Annie Chapman has been stimulated afresh and this morning the subject again disrupted the foremost place in conversation. The clue afforded by the Coroner is, of course, being followed up by the police, who have now had the information in their possession for a week, but it has not transpired whether they have yet led to any tangible results. The inquiries of the police would necessarily extend to America, and on that account it may be some time before fresh facts could be in the hands of the public. An important point yet to be made clear is as to whether the object of the murderer was the same in the case of the woman Nicholls and of Annie Chapman. - The Coroner in the former case, when he summed up last Saturday, appeared to take that it was, and at the time expressing the opinion that he must have been in receipt of an important commission from the sub-curator of the Pathological Museum attached to one of the Metropolitan hospitals to which he referred in his summing up on the body of Annie Chapman. The opinion he expressed last Saturday regarding Nichol's case thus carries weight. The “shabby genteel” who was seen in Chapman's company shortly before her murder is being sought for, but up to the present it would appear without success. Inquiries at some of the Metropolitan medical institutions show that similar requests have been made for anatomical specimens, but the conditions could not possibly be complied with.

  The Eastern Morning News, a newspaper based in Hull, England, featured the following, dated September 27th 1888,

  THE WHITECHAPEL TRAGEDY. ADJOURNED INQUEST. VERDICT. SUPPOSED DREADFUL MOTIVE FOR THE CRIME. Yesterday afternoon Mr Wynne Baxter, Coroner for South-East Middlesex, resumed the inquiry into the circumstances attending the death of Annie Chapman, the last victim of the Whitechapel murderer. No further witnesses were called, and the coroner commenced summing up at twenty minutes to three. He pointed out that the evidence of various witnesses seemed to prove that the murder was committed between half past five and six o'clock, notwithstanding that the doctor who examined the body at half past six occurred not less than two hours previously. The woman, although she had been drinking, was fairly sober, but there had been no struggle. Her rings were wrenched from the fingers, but it was probably only a blind, the real object of the murder being to obtain possession of the missing organ of the body. There were no meaningless cuts. The organ had been removed by someone who knew where to find it, and how to remove it without injury to it. No mere slaughterer of animals could have carried out these operations; it must have been some one accustomed to the post-mortem room. It was not necessary to assume that the murderer was a lunatic, “it is clear that there is a market for the missing organ. To show you this, gentlemen of the jury, I must mentioned a fact, which at the same time proves the assistance which publicity in the newspaper press affords in the detection of crime. Within a few hours of t
he issue of the morning papers, containing a report of the medical evidence given at the last sitting of the court, I received a communication from an officer of one of our great medical schools that they had information which might, or might not, have a distinct bearing on our inquiry. I attended at the first opportunity, and was informed by the sub-curator of the Pathological Museum that some months ago an American had called on him and asked him to procure a number of specimens of the organ that was missing in the deceased. He stated his willingness to give £20 apiece for each specimen with each copy of a publication on which he was then engaged. He was told that his request was impossible to be complied with, but he still urged his request. He wished them preserved, not in spirits of wine (the usual medium), but in glycerine, in order to preserve them in a flaccid condition, and he wished to sent to America direct. It is known that this request was repeated to another institution of a similar character. Now, is it not possible that the knowledge of this demand may have incited some abandoned wretch to possess himself of a specimen? It seems beyond belief that such inhuman wickedness could enter into the mind of any man, but, unfortunately, our criminal annals prove that every crime is possible. I need hardly say that I at once conveyed my information to the Detective Department at Scotland Yard. Of course I do not what use has been made of it, but I believe that publicity may possibly further elucidate this fact, and therefore have not withheld from you the information. By means of the press some further explanation may be forthcoming from America, if not from here.” The Coroner concluded his summing up at three minutes to three, and the jury immediately returned a verdict of “Wilful murder against some person or persons unknown.” The Coroner's remarks respecting the motive for the crime caused a profound sensation.

  The Daily News, a London based newspaper, featured the following, dated September 27th 1888,