The officials
Police memoirs: what the men in charge said later
Several senior officers wrote or spoke about the case years afterwards. They do not agree on whether it was solved, or on who did it. Their own words are quoted where the text is out of copyright; otherwise they are cited by reference only.
About this pageQuotations only from public-domain texts (Anderson 1910, Henry Smith 1910, Macnaghten 1914, Abberline's 1903 Pall Mall Gazette interview); the Macnaghten memorandum, Swanson marginalia, Littlechild letter, Dew's 1938 memoir and Reid's statements are by reference only (claims link to their records).
Each view below links to the claims that record it, with their status and evidence. A memoir written twenty years later is not contemporary evidence, and some of these accounts depend on one another.
Featured comparison
Anderson changed his words: Blackwood's Magazine (March 1910) against the book (1910)
- Well supported Retrieved Anderson's Ripper passage exists in two printed versions that differ. Blackwood's Magazine (March 1910) says the police concluded the murderer and his people "were low-class Jews". The 1910 book says "certain low-class Polish Jews" and adds a new paragraph: "In saying that he was a Polish Jew I am merely stating a definitely ascertained fact."
- Well supported Retrieved The two versions describe the identification differently. Blackwood's (footnote): when the suspect "was caged in an asylum", the only person who had had a good view of the murderer "at once identified him, but when he learned that the suspect was a fellow-Jew he declined to swear to him"; Anderson adds he would name the murderer if the publishers accepted the risk of "a possible libel action". The book moves this into the main text, drops the asylum and the 'fellow-Jew' reason, and says the witness "unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him; but he refused to give evidence against him."
Who the police concluded he was
Blackwood's Magazine, March 1910
Historical text, verbatim:And the conclusion we came to was that he and his people were low-class Jews, for it is a remarkable fact that people of that class in the Hast End will not give up one of their number to Gentile justice. And the result proved that our diagnosis was right on every point. For I may say at once that “undiscovered murders” are rare in London, and the “Jack -the- Ripper” crimes are not within that category.
The Lighter Side of My Official Life (book), 1910
Historical text, verbatim:One did not need to be a Sherlock Holmes to discover that the criminal was a sexual maniac of a virulent type ; that he was living in the immediate vicinity of the scenes of the murders ; and that, if he was not living absolutely alone, his people knew of his guilt, and refused to give him up to justice. During my absence abroad the Police had made a house-to-house search for him, investigating the case of every man in the district whose circumstances were such that he could go and come and get rid of his blood-stains in secret. And the conclusion we came to was that he and his people were certain low-class Polish Jews ; [...] people of that class in the East End will not give up one of their number to Gentile justice.
Historical text, verbatim:In saying that he was a Polish Jew I am merely stating a definitely ascertained fact. And my words are meant to specify race, not religion.
The identification
Blackwood's Magazine, March 1910
Historical text, verbatim:Having regard to the interest attaching to this case, I should almost be tempted to disclose the identity of the murderer and of the pressman who wrote the letter above referred to, provided that the publishers would accept all responsibility in view of a possible libel action. But no public benefit would result from such a course, and the traditions of my old department would suffer. I will only add that when the individual whom we suspected was caged in an asylum, the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer at once identified him, but when he learned that the suspect was a fellow-Jew he declined to swear to him.
The Lighter Side of My Official Life (book), 1910
Historical text, verbatim:Scotland Yard can boast that not even the subordinate officers of the department will tell tales out of school, and it would ill become me to violate the unwritten rule of the service. So I will only add here that the " Jack-the-Ripper " letter which is preserved in the Police Museum at New Scotland Yard is the creation of an enterprising London journalist. Having regard to the interest attaching to this case, I am almost tempted to disclose the identity of the murderer and of the pressman who wrote the letter above referred to. But no public benefit would result from such a course, and the traditions of my old department would suffer. I will merely add that the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him ; but he refused to give evidence against him.
The cases he excluded
Blackwood's Magazine, March 1910
Historical text, verbatim:here assuming that the murder of Alice M‘Kenzie on 17th July 1889 was by another hand. I was absent from London when it occurred, but the Chief Commissioner investigated the case on the spot. It was an ordinary murder, and not the work of a sexual maniac.
The Lighter Side of My Official Life (book), 1910
Historical text, verbatim:I am here assuming that the murder of Alice M'Kenzie on the 17th of July, 1889, was by another hand. I was absent from London when it occurred, but the Chief Commissioner investigated the case on the spot and decided that it was an ordinary murder, and not the work of a sexual maniac. And the Poplar case of December, 1888, was a death from natural causes, and but for the " Jack the Ripper " scare, no one would have thought of suggesting that it was a homicide.
Highlighted words mark the wording that differs. Anderson's 1907 wording ("caged in an Asylum", Criminals and Crime) matches the magazine, not the book.
The 1907 wording
Historical text, verbatim:"...he had been safely caged in an Asylum." (Criminals and Crime, 1907) "In saying that he was a Polish Jew I am merely stating a definitely ascertained fact." (The Lighter Side of My Official Life, 1910) "...there was no doubt whatever as to the identity of the criminal..." (Police Encyclopedia, 1920) Source: Begg, Fido, and Skinner.
Why it matters
- Well supported Retrieved Henry Smith's attack on Anderson was written against the Blackwood's article, not the book. He names "Blackwood's Magazine, of March this year", and his quotation reads "low-class Jews", the magazine wording, without the book's "Polish".
- Well supported Retrieved Both versions exclude Alice McKenzie (July 1889) on the Chief Commissioner's view that it was "an ordinary murder, and not the work of a sexual maniac". Only the book adds that the Poplar case of December 1888 (Rose Mylett) "was a death from natural causes".
The officials, side by side
Robert Anderson
Assistant Commissioner (CID) from 31 Aug 1888
View: A Polish Jew, identified by an eyewitness
- Blackwood's Magazine instalment, March 1910 quoted (public domain)
- The Lighter Side of My Official Life, 1910 quoted (public domain)
In his words (1)
Historical text, verbatim:In saying that he was a Polish Jew I am merely stating a definitely ascertained fact. And my words are meant to specify race, not religion.
- Well supported Retrieved Anderson's Ripper passage exists in two printed versions that differ. Blackwood's Magazine (March 1910) says the police concluded the murderer and his people "were low-class Jews". The 1910 book says "certain low-class Polish Jews" and adds a new paragraph: "In saying that he was a Polish Jew I am merely stating a definitely ascertained fact."
- Well supported Retrieved Three senior officials independently said a journalist wrote the 'Jack the Ripper' letter: Anderson (Blackwood's and book, 1910: "the creation of an enterprising London journalist"), Macnaghten (1914: "the stained forefinger of the journalist") and Littlechild (1913 letter: Bulling or his chief Moore of the Central News). None gives proof.
Melville Leslie Macnaghten
Assistant Chief Constable (CID) from 1889
View: The murderer killed himself about 10 November 1888 (Druitt in the memorandum)
- Days of My Years, 1914 quoted (public domain)
- Memorandum, 1894 by reference only
In his words (2)
Historical text, verbatim:the probability is that, after his awful glut on this occasion, his brain gave way altogether and he committed suicide; otherwise the murders would not have ceased. The man, of course, was a sexual maniac, but such madness takes Protean forms, as will be shown later on in other cases. Sexual murders are the most difiicult of all for police to bring home to the perpetrators, for ''motives'' there are none; only a lust for blood, and in many cases a hatred of woman as woman. Not infrequently the maniac possesses a diseased body, and this was probably so in the 62 DAYS OF MY YEARS case of the Whitechapel murderer. Many residents in the East End (and some in the West !) came under suspicion of police, but though several persons were detained, no one was ever charged with these offences.
Historical text, verbatim:I do not think that there was anything of religious mania about the real Simon Pure, nor do I believe that he had ever been detained in an asylum, nor lived in lodgings. I incline to the belief that the individual who held up London in terror resided with his own people ; that he absented himself from home at certain times, and that he committed suicide on or about the loth of November 1888, after he had knocked out a Commissioner of Police and very nearly settled the hash of one of Her Majesty's principal Secretaries of State.
- Well supported Retrieved Macnaghten's 1914 memoir says the murderer's "brain gave way altogether and he committed suicide; otherwise the murders would not have ceased", that he "resided with his own people", had never been in an asylum or lodgings, and "committed suicide on or about the 10th of November 1888" (OCR: 'loth'). The preface says Macnaghten joined "six months after the so-called 'Jack the Ripper' committed suicide". He names no one.
- Well supported Retrieved Macnaghten's 1914 book is not an independent line from his 1894 memorandum. It reuses the memo's reasoning and phrasing (memo: "the murderer's brain gave way altogether after his awful glut in Miller's Court"; 1914: "after his awful glut on this occasion, his brain gave way altogether"). He joined the force only in 1889, so neither is a first-hand account of 1888.
- Disputed Retrieved Macnaghten's dates for his suspect's suicide do not fit Druitt's record. The memo says Druitt "disappeared at the time of the Miller's Court murder". The 1914 book puts the suicide "on or about the 10th of November 1888". Wikipedia (summarising later research) says Druitt was "functioning normally" at work and play "until the end of November 1888"; his body was found on 31 December.
Donald Sutherland Swanson
Chief Inspector, overseeing the investigation in 1888
View: 'Kosminski', as a gloss on Anderson
- Pencil notes in his copy of Anderson's book (the 'marginalia') by reference only
Not quoted here: cited by reference only.
Major (later Lt.-Col. Sir) Henry Smith
Acting Commissioner, City of London Police, 1888
View: No suspect; rejected Anderson's claim
- From Constable to Commissioner, 1910 quoted (public domain)
In his words (3)
Historical text, verbatim:There is no man living who knows as much of those murders as I do ; and before going farther I must admit that, though witliin five minutes of the perpetrator one night, and with a very fair description of him besides, he completely beat me and every pokce officer in London ; and I have no more idea now where he lived than I had twenty years ago.
Historical text, verbatim:Since this chapter was written my attention has been drawn to an article in Blaclasoood's Magazine, of March this year — the sixth of a series by Sir Robert Anderson — entitled “ The Lighter Side of my Official Life.” In this article Sir Robert discourses on the Whitechapel, or Jack the Ripper, murders, and states emphatically that he, the criminal, “ was living in the immediate vicinity of the scenes of the murders, and that, if he was not living absolutely alone, his people knew of his guilt and refused to give him up to justice. The conclusion,” Sir Robert adds, “ we came to was that he and his people were low-class .Jews, for it is a remarkable fact that people of that class in the East End will not give up one of their number to Gentile justice, and the result proved that our diagnosis was right on every point.
Historical text, verbatim:he accuses them of being accessories to these crimes before and after their committal. Surely Sir Robert cannot believe that while the Jews, as he asserts, were entering into this conspiracy to defeat the ends of justice, there was no one among them with sufficient knowledge of the criminal law to warn them of the risks they were running. [...] There is nothing “ light ” here ; a heavier indictment could not be framed against a class whose conduct contrasts most favourably with that of the Gentile population of the Metropolis. [...] are liable to penal servitude for life; and thus the Jews in the East End, against whom Sir Robert Anderson made his reckless accusation, come under that category.
- Well supported Retrieved Henry Smith's attack on Anderson was written against the Blackwood's article, not the book. He names "Blackwood's Magazine, of March this year", and his quotation reads "low-class Jews", the magazine wording, without the book's "Polish".
- Well supported Retrieved Smith rejected Anderson's claim: Anderson "accuses them of being accessories"; "a heavier indictment could not be framed against a class whose conduct contrasts most favourably with that of the Gentile population"; and in a footnote he calls it a "reckless accusation", noting that accessories after the fact were liable to penal servitude for life.
- Well supported Retrieved Smith named no suspect. He wrote that he was "within five minutes of the perpetrator one night" but "he completely beat me", and thought the Goulston Street writing was "probably" written "to divert suspicion from the Gentiles and throw it upon the Jews", calling its erasure "unwarrantable".
Inspector Frederick George Abberline (CID, Scotland Yard)
Inspector, co-ordinating detectives on the ground, 1888
View: Kłosowski (George Chapman), as reported
- Interview, Pall Mall Gazette, 1903 (reported, not a memoir) quoted (public domain)
In his words (2)
Historical text, verbatim:"You can state most emphatically," said Mr. Abberline, "that Scotland Yard is really no wiser on the subject than it was fifteen years ago.
Historical text, verbatim:The fact that he studied medicine and surgery in Russia before he came here is well established, and it is curious to note that the first series of murders was the work of an expert surgeon, while the recent poisoning cases were proved to be done by a man with more than an elementary knowledge of medicine.
- Well supported Retrieved Abberline's 1903 favourite was Kłosowski (George Chapman), not a Polish Jew in an asylum or a drowned man. He pointed to Kłosowski's medical study ("the first series of murders was the work of an expert surgeon") and his lodging in George Yard, while saying the Yard was "no wiser". This conflicts with Anderson's, Macnaghten's and Littlechild's suspects.
- Well supported Retrieved Abberline believed George Hutchinson's description of a man seen with Kelly. Anderson said the only person who had a good view of the murderer was Jewish ("a fellow-Jew"), which excludes Hutchinson.
John George Littlechild
Head of the Special Branch, 1888
View: Tumblety; Anderson only 'thought he knew'
- Letter to G. R. Sims, 23 September 1913 by reference only
Not quoted here: cited by reference only.
Detective Inspector Edmund Reid (H Division)
Head of H Division CID, 1888
View: A local drunk; no surgical skill
- Letters, 1903, and interview, 1912 (via Wikipedia's summary) by reference only
Not quoted here: cited by reference only.
Walter Dew
Detective Constable, H Division, 1888
View: Counted Emma Smith as the first victim
- I Caught Crippen, 1938 by reference only
Not quoted here: cited by reference only.
Where they contradict each other, and who depends on whom
- Well supported Retrieved Senior officials contradicted each other on whether the murderer was known. Anderson: the crimes are not "undiscovered murders" and "the result proved that our diagnosis was right on every point". Abberline (1903): "Scotland Yard is really no wiser on the subject than it was fifteen years ago." Henry Smith (1910): "I have no more idea now where he lived than I had twenty years ago." Macnaghten: "No one ever saw the Whitechapel murderer" (1894) and "no one was ever charged" (1914), while believing the man killed himself.
- Well supported Retrieved Macnaghten's and Anderson's accounts are incompatible. Macnaghten (memo 1894): "No one ever saw the Whitechapel murderer"; he preferred a suspect who drowned himself (1914: "committed suicide"). Anderson (1910): an eyewitness "unhesitatingly identified the suspect", a living Polish Jew, "caged in an asylum" (magazine). Anderson was Macnaghten's superior, yet the memo records no identification.
- Well supported Retrieved Abberline believed George Hutchinson's description of a man seen with Kelly. Anderson said the only person who had a good view of the murderer was Jewish ("a fellow-Jew"), which excludes Hutchinson.
- Well supported Retrieved How the officials' claims depend on each other: (1) Swanson's notes depend on Anderson's 1910 book. (2) Smith's rebuttal depends on the March 1910 Blackwood's text. (3) Macnaghten 1914 restates Macnaghten 1894. (4) Littlechild (1913) comments on Anderson. The independent positions are Anderson (Polish Jew, identified), Macnaghten (suicide, Druitt), Abberline (Kłosowski), Littlechild (Tumblety), Reid (local drunk) and Smith (no idea).