A Jack the Ripper Suspect is Found.

The newspapers on December 15th 1888 were reporting that a suspect had been arrested in connection with the Whitechapel Murders.

On 14th December 1888 Joseph Isaacs, aged 30, whose trade was given as "cigar maker" sand who was reportedly of "no fixed abode" appeared before the Police Court in Worship Street charged with having stolen a gold watch valued at 30 shillings from the shop of a watchmaker named Levenson.

According to the Daily News

"...The prisoner, it may be remembered, had been sought for by the police in consequence of a report of his movements on the night of the murder of Mary Janet Kelly in Dorset street, Spitalfields; and it was aid by the police that they wished the fullest inquiry as to the prisoner's movements on the night of November 8..."

As a result Isaacs was held in custody whilst the police made every endeavour to ascertain his movements on the night in question.

But, as with so many other suspects who the police were finding around this time , the case against him was a weak one and he was soon ruled out of any involvement in the murder of Mary kelly.

Detective Sergeant Record, H division, said that so far there was no further charge against the prisoner othe than for the theft of the Gold watch.

Isaacs was offerred the opportunity to go to trail but, instead, opted to plead guilty to the charge and was duly sentenced to three months' hard labour.

Was Jack the Ripper French?

W. T. Stead was an charismatic character who had caused a sensation in the early 1880's with his Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon.

He was also the editor of the Pall Mall Gazette and has been described as "the father of modern journalism."

The Pall Mall Gazette reported extensively on the Jack the Ripper Killings and had run an article that suggested the killer might be a Frenchman.

This brought a letter in response to the allegation which was published on 6th December 1888.

Sir,

I venture to offer you a few remarks upon the singular article which appeared in the Pall Mall Gazette last Saturday upon the Whitechapel murders. Under some circumstances I might comment upon the inferences drawn by your contributor, "One Who Thinks He Knows," from the fact that straight lines, drawn through the point at which the outrages were committed cross one another, but, remembering that I am in a country where Mr. Ignatius Donnelly and his Great Cryptogram are the subjects of serious discussion, I, as a native of a frivolous land, abstain from saying more than that I am myself engaged in preparing a diagram by which I hope to prove that the crimes were really the work of a Unionist who is gradually marking out in the East end of London an exact reproduction of the Union Jack.

Now, Sir, to speak seriously, I do not at all deny that the assassin may be a Frenchman; there are plenty of French assassins in the world, and, though I venture to think that in London English assassins are more plentiful, I am willing to admit the possibility of "Jack the Ripper" being my compatriot. But I say that the arguments by which "One Who Knows" seeks to establish this are utterly baseless and absurd. Frenchmen may be, as he says "the worst linguists in the world," but if he were a better "linguist" himself he would know that bad "linguists" may know their own language, and in this respect, Frenchmen may be compared favourably with any other people. As to his assertion that they constantly make mistakes in gender, it is simply untrue. There are a few substantives, such as "hotel," "ouvrage," &c., which have a feminine sound to the ear, and as to which some utterly uneducated French people fall into the error of applying to them feminine articles or adjectives; such a person might therefore talk of "une hotel juive," or "une ouvrage juive," but no French man, woman, or child would ever mistake a feminine for a masculine substantive, and the idea that they could, under any circumstances, write Juives for Juifs when using the word as a substantive is enough to make a Frenchman hold his sides with laughter. Perhaps "One Who Thinks He Knows" also thinks that the uneducated Frenchman speaks of femmes when he means hommes!

Your contributor refers for proof of his assertions to the "voluminous correspondence of Napoleon III." As I have not had access to this source of information - and, indeed, though tolerably conversant with the literature of my country, now hear for the first time of its existence - I should be much obliged if "One Who Thinks He Knows" would send you for publication a few extracts from this "voluminous correspondence" containing examples of mistakes in gender. He would be a doing a kindness to a poor French professor, who has always held that Napoleon III did much harm to his country, but who has hitherto held him guiltless of having introduced into its literature a new form of grammatical error.

I remain, Sir, your obedient servant,
A FRENCHMAN
December 4.

An Attempted Murder

At around 1am on 3rd December 1888 the area around King's Cross(approximately 5 miles from the area where the Jack the Ripper murders occurred) was abuzz with rumours that another attempt had been made to murder a woman.

A prostitute named Harriet North, who lived at 12 Wood street, Cromer street, just off Gray's Inn road, was approached on Euston road by a young man who had a black moustache.

The two of them talked for a little time and then, presumably having agreed a fee for her services, she went with him along Belgrave street, King's Cross.

A few minutes later she realised that he had stabbed her in the abdomen with a sharp object. She cried out at him "Oh, my God, what have you done?"

The man didn't reply and hurried off. Luckily one of her friends, Sarah Ann Masters, heard her terrified screams and ran to her assistance.

Police constables Hy. Stone and Chas. Palmer had soon arrived on the scene and discovered that she was bleeding profusely from the wound. They rushed her to the Royal Free Hospital, Gray's Inn road, where she was seen by Dr. henry Tonks, one of the house surgeons, who admitted her onto Milne Ward.

According to Harriet North the man was a foreigner with a heavy black moustache.Indeed, this description tallies with that given in the Channel five programme reported and discussed in our Face of Jack the Ripper article.

However, journalists making enquiries at the Royal Free Hospital on the monring of December 3rd, were informed that Harriet North was not in any danger and doubts were being expressed as to whether she had actually been stabbed at all.

According to one newspaper:-

There are some scratches on the were (sic) part of the body but these might have been caused by sharp fingernails, in a struggle. The woman will most likely leave the hospital today. No importance is attached to the matter.

The Press Association reported that:-

The injury discovered on examination is in the nature of an abrasion, and could not have been inflicted by any sharp instrument, such as a knife. So strong is Mr. Tonks's opinion that it is not a case of premeditated assault, that he thinks the man probably was as much alarmed at the appearance of blood as the woman herself, and so made his escape. A woman named Sarah Ann Masters, who lives in the same house as Worth (sic), was with her for a few minutes before the occurrence, Masters having been accosted by the same man. From a statement of Masters it would appear that the woman Worth was herself under the impression that she had been stabbed with a knife, and that in her alarm she called Masters to her assistance. the woman's fears as to the nature of her injury are not, however, borne out by the surgeon in whose temporary charge she has been placed.