Speaker 1: Welcomed Unobscured, a production of I Heart Radio and Aaron Minky.
Speaker 1: We begin the interview series for Unobscured season three with
Speaker 1: Adam Wood, author of Swanson, The Life and Times of
Speaker 1: a Victorian Detective and longtime editor of Riparologist magazine. Adam
Speaker 1: also leads Mango Books, where he publishes new work in
Speaker 1: true crime and police history. Anyone who has researched the
Speaker 1: Whitechapel murders in the past twenty years has benefited from
Speaker 1: Adam's work in the pages of Reparologist magazine. Adam has
Speaker 1: curated and sharpened the questions, speculation, and debates around the
Speaker 1: Whitechapel murders, as well as editing good work by others.
Speaker 1: Adam has also written detailed studies of people like Donald
Speaker 1: Swanson and coroner Win Baxter, who you'll know well from
Speaker 1: this season of Unobscured. But Adam's contribution to understanding Victorian
Speaker 1: Whitechapel goes beyond the pages of books and magazines. He
Speaker 1: has been essential to developing the community of writers and
Speaker 1: thinkers hunting the killer online and in person, and conferences
Speaker 1: and conversations about Whitechapel have relied on Adam for guidance
Speaker 1: and insight for years. Were delighted to have his perspective
Speaker 1: on Unobscured. Researcher Carl Nellis asked Adam to describe how
Speaker 1: he came to write a biography of Donald Swanson and
Speaker 1: met the Swanson family along the way. That's where we'll
Speaker 1: get started. This is the Unobscured Interview series for season three.
Speaker 1: I'm Aaron Manky. I began researching for an article of
Speaker 1: Replogious magazine which, as you said on the editor on
Speaker 1: and it's regarding the Swanson marginalia which our pensonentations made
Speaker 1: by Donald Swanson his retirement, which seemed to identify Jack
Speaker 1: the Ripper. And while I was researching for that article
Speaker 1: was someone asked where if I'd like to be introduced
Speaker 1: to the Swanson family, and of course I jumped at
Speaker 1: the chance. It turned out they didn't live too far
Speaker 1: from me, and they kept a vast amount of papers,
Speaker 1: notebooks and documents belonging to Donald, and most of it
Speaker 1: was information which has never been seen before outside of
Speaker 1: the family. I quickly realized there was a fantastic story
Speaker 1: needing to be told, So when that article was finished,
Speaker 1: I told the family would like to write a book,
Speaker 1: and they couldn't have been more helpful. I made a
Speaker 1: number of times with Donald's great grandson Nevill swansor it
Speaker 1: would hand me a box of material exchange for one
Speaker 1: which I just photographed, and eventually I sorted everything in
Speaker 1: chronological order first and then researched each case or incident
Speaker 1: in Swanson's life to build up the complete picture before
Speaker 1: writing it up. That seven years later got to the
Speaker 1: point where the book was almost in good shape yea.
Speaker 1: And very early on I realized as an opportunity not
Speaker 1: just to tell swanson story, but also to relate the
Speaker 1: evolution of the Met Police throughout that period, so I
Speaker 1: could link it together all the appointments and regular nations
Speaker 1: of the various police commissioners, which has a bearing on
Speaker 1: police activity during the White Shape or murders. So the
Speaker 1: events in the book didn't just happen in isolation. And
Speaker 1: I realized everything has context. One incident leads to another,
Speaker 1: and so one, and in Swanson's career and personal life,
Speaker 1: I wanted to get across that context, so it gives
Speaker 1: us an understanding of why certain events happened in the
Speaker 1: way that they did. Yeah, let's explore a little bit
Speaker 1: more about what he just said, that the book covers
Speaker 1: far more than the Whitechapel murders, and by following Swanson's
Speaker 1: life story we get to see kind of a lot
Speaker 1: about Victorian London, but beyond London too, because of course
Speaker 1: he grows up in Scotland and he has contacts outside
Speaker 1: of London. He investigates cases that have implications and the
Speaker 1: reaches of empire. Um. So maybe would you offer us
Speaker 1: a few thoughts on what's valuable in your opinion about
Speaker 1: studying the Victorian period in that kind of robust way
Speaker 1: following the eyes of particular people, But really, what do
Speaker 1: we get when we step into the Victorian world? What
Speaker 1: does it offer us? Well? I think the mid to
Speaker 1: light Victorian era is extremely important in terms of studying
Speaker 1: place history, particularly because the Metropoluan Force it on even
Speaker 1: formed forty years before Swanson joined in. They're still senting
Speaker 1: officers for Cutler's training in response to the Fenian bombing campaign,
Speaker 1: which is ongoing at the time, and the Detective Department
Speaker 1: was only twenty five years old. And by contrast, when
Speaker 1: Swanson retired, the men had just started using fingerprint evidence.
Speaker 1: So the thirty five years of Swanson's career covering the
Speaker 1: late Victorian period saw an enormous development and forensics and
Speaker 1: methods of detection. We can carry that evolution through to
Speaker 1: more recent times, the introduction of the photo fit, chemical
Speaker 1: composition forensics and of course DNA before we really step
Speaker 1: into exploring the White Chapel case and in East London
Speaker 1: in detail. UM, I'd love to just for our listeners,
Speaker 1: especially to hear a little bit more about the work
Speaker 1: that you've done for reparologists and maybe Mango books as well. UM,
Speaker 1: to give a little sense of what you really bring
Speaker 1: to this study. Well, I've been on the editorial board
Speaker 1: at Reparatist magazine since which is three years after the
Speaker 1: magazine was founded, and I've been the exact de editor
Speaker 1: since two thousand and eight. Our most recent issue is
Speaker 1: number A hundred and sixty seven, So it gives you
Speaker 1: an idea of how much work is in that in
Speaker 1: that volume. And I think it's interesting looking back over
Speaker 1: the articles over the years to see how attitudes to
Speaker 1: the Whitechapel murders case have changed. I've had fads for
Speaker 1: various suspects, the Diary of the Ripper and more recently
Speaker 1: katherinett o'shaw, we're just tested for DNA. So there's been
Speaker 1: a lot of changing attitudes over the years. It's been
Speaker 1: really good for me personally as the editor of the
Speaker 1: magazine because it's helped me to stay neutral in my
Speaker 1: approach to the case. I don't really have a favorite
Speaker 1: suspect as such in the Ripper investigation. But when I
Speaker 1: started work on the Swanson book in twos and twelve,
Speaker 1: as I said earlier, with the amount of offshoots and
Speaker 1: different lines of research, I knew that was going to
Speaker 1: be in there. I thought it was going to be
Speaker 1: unlikely if I went to a mainstream book publisher to
Speaker 1: get the whole story, told if I happen to chop
Speaker 1: out at least half of the research. So I decided
Speaker 1: just to self publish it. Basically, my backgrounds in graphic
Speaker 1: design and printing expertise, so I decided to self publish
Speaker 1: it and just really cover everything that I found in
Speaker 1: the research. And a friend of mine, Neil Bell, who's
Speaker 1: a core from the first book that had published in
Speaker 1: Mango Books, h said, Yeah, that's a great idea. Swampson
Speaker 1: can be completely as you want it. But I've got
Speaker 1: on an idea for a book, which is the Police
Speaker 1: Code nine, which was the guide for the Victorian Police
Speaker 1: that the director the c I D. Howard Vincent, had created.
Speaker 1: We took the versions as a really as an exercise
Speaker 1: to to try out the printer that I identified and
Speaker 1: see if they're you know, the marketing expertise. It went
Speaker 1: very well, and then someone said, I didn't know you're
Speaker 1: a publisher. I've got an idea on the craze, another
Speaker 1: Eastent crime story, and it just went from there. Every
Speaker 1: time I published a book, didn't intend to create Mango
Speaker 1: Books at such. It was more of a personal um project.
Speaker 1: I just get getting more and more sudden sitions and
Speaker 1: I think it's gone very very well. And now there's
Speaker 1: probably about thirty five to forty titles on the Mango
Speaker 1: Books in print and Blue Lamp Books, which is police
Speaker 1: history various topics ranging from Victorian era through to the
Speaker 1: craze in the sixties, and for me personally has been
Speaker 1: obviously quite good setting up the bit, not only the
Speaker 1: business side of things, but I've learned quite a lot
Speaker 1: as well with various cases um learning the publishing industry.
Speaker 1: But I do I do always say that that that
Speaker 1: the creation of Mango Books is probably half the reason
Speaker 1: why the Swanson book took seven years rather than the
Speaker 1: two and a half that I've planned in the first place. Yea, ah, well,
Speaker 1: so many of us are both grateful for your work
Speaker 1: and reparologists and from Mango Books and the kinds of
Speaker 1: things you've produced, and in this case in particular, of course,
Speaker 1: I'm really glad that you made that choice with Swanson,
Speaker 1: because it did mean it can be a little bit
Speaker 1: of a unique project that has, as you say, so
Speaker 1: many offshoots, so many interesting aspects that if it was
Speaker 1: being published elsewhere, might have been kind of shaved off
Speaker 1: without UM. But there's so much interesting detail, and it
Speaker 1: really gives us a sense for the texture of of
Speaker 1: his life and gives us fascinating glimpses into the world
Speaker 1: around him. UM. Let's step into that world. Let's go
Speaker 1: to London's East End in UM and start talking about
Speaker 1: crime in London at that time. UM, there's violent crime
Speaker 1: on record in the neighborhood, uh throughout the eighteen eighties.
Speaker 1: But if we focus only on the White Chapel murders,
Speaker 1: it might give us a slightly distorted picture of what
Speaker 1: life was like there. So how violent was White Chapel
Speaker 1: and surrounds in the eighties? What was the general understanding
Speaker 1: of that violence among the people who lived there, maybe
Speaker 1: the middle as readers of the press, the police, what
Speaker 1: was Can we get a clearer picture of maybe violence
Speaker 1: in White Chapel in eighties? Well, I think the thing
Speaker 1: to remember about the East End at that time was
Speaker 1: it that that was the area where most poverty in
Speaker 1: London was really where the residents suffered, and through that
Speaker 1: and the desperation at those poor people felt the crime
Speaker 1: crime was was bred. And that was also the area
Speaker 1: where the immigrants first landed when they arrived in London.
Speaker 1: So there was simmering tensions among the whole population really,
Speaker 1: But fifty years earlier, the rookeries where the poor and
Speaker 1: the criminal classes congregated were to be found in the
Speaker 1: east in the West End, rather in St Charles area
Speaker 1: and spill Fields and White Chapel in the early teen
Speaker 1: hundreds were by comparison and quite prosperous. When the West
Speaker 1: End was developed, a large number of people were forced
Speaker 1: from the rookeries, and when Oxford Street and Sharp Revenue,
Speaker 1: which are well known West End streets now were developed,
Speaker 1: St Charles area was Demolis. All the five five thousand
Speaker 1: poor residents were relocated to the East End. And when
Speaker 1: you combine that large movement of poor, poverty stricken residents
Speaker 1: into an area, as to say, which had been prosperous,
Speaker 1: but the buildings were getting older and dilapidated. Certainly the
Speaker 1: the the sewage facilities around the East End were getting dated.
Speaker 1: It just become too overcrowded um and obviously, unfortunately poverty
Speaker 1: and overt and overcrowding does bread criminal element. And with
Speaker 1: the mistrust of the growing numbers of Jewish imrigrants settling
Speaker 1: in Whitechapel, the area was a bit of a powder
Speaker 1: keg waiting to explode, and is not surprising in those
Speaker 1: in that situation. The unprovoked attacks on others or domestic
Speaker 1: violence was was quite commonplace and to some degree expected,
Speaker 1: and of course with the press until the Ripper murders,
Speaker 1: it was almost sort of overlooked the East endia. It
Speaker 1: was incredible how close it was to the city which
Speaker 1: obviously at that time London, the UK had a large
Speaker 1: empire run from London, and it was interesting and surprising
Speaker 1: really how close to that center of that empire. East
Speaker 1: End was, but it was almost forgotten about and pushed
Speaker 1: to one side. So the problems that the East Ends
Speaker 1: were having with violence and all the poverty, we were
Speaker 1: ignored by the press until the Ripper came along. So
Speaker 1: in a way it sort of acted as a little
Speaker 1: bit of a sort of social cleanser. But violence less
Speaker 1: so much murder, but more petty violence and domestic violence
Speaker 1: was quite prevalent in the East End that time, m HM.
Speaker 1: And Donald Swanson as a member of the police is
Speaker 1: in that environment, not always in the East End, often
Speaker 1: serving elsewhere in London. But is there something we could
Speaker 1: say to kind of sum up a commonality to the
Speaker 1: majority of crimes investigated by Donald Swanson during that time
Speaker 1: If it wasn't murder after murder after murder, um, what
Speaker 1: kinds of crimes was he investigating and how often was
Speaker 1: he in the East End versus elsewhere in London? Well,
Speaker 1: the street violence was usually dealt with by the uniform
Speaker 1: policeman on the beat, and those officers were who gained
Speaker 1: promotion such as spons would be transferred to a different
Speaker 1: division within the mat So not always once you became
Speaker 1: a sergeant inspector or joined the detectives, you'd move out
Speaker 1: of one division move into another, and so it was
Speaker 1: his sponsor. And he served the first two years of
Speaker 1: his career as a police comsortable in a division which
Speaker 1: is in Westminster where the government and other official buildings
Speaker 1: were situated. So it's unlikely that in those early years
Speaker 1: he saw much in the way of street violence while
Speaker 1: on his beat. He was transferred to Y Division in Highgate,
Speaker 1: which is North London, and the following year promoted to sergeant,
Speaker 1: transferred to Bowen in East London in eighteen seventy one,
Speaker 1: and then from there to Plast those stations also in
Speaker 1: the East End, and finally he's moved to Scotland Jared
Speaker 1: in eighteen seventy six. So he served as hople of
Speaker 1: five years in the East End during the early eighteen seventies,
Speaker 1: and he probably knew the area well, but because he
Speaker 1: served his early days on the beach, where he would
Speaker 1: have seen that sort of violence were really served elsewhere.
Speaker 1: Although he had been aware that the Eastern was a
Speaker 1: very violent area, he wouldn't have seen much personally. In Swanson.
Speaker 1: You tell an interesting story of a case and and
Speaker 1: the coverage in the book is brief, and I've gone
Speaker 1: back and looked at the newspapers and and the coverage
Speaker 1: of the papers is brief, but this is seventeen years
Speaker 1: before the Whitechappel murders. In one. Uh, some of our
Speaker 1: main figures that we think about when we think about
Speaker 1: the Whitechappel murders, especially Frederick Aberline, and now with your
Speaker 1: book so healthfully lifting Swanson to the same deserved level
Speaker 1: of attention. Uh. Those two men together infiltrated in the
Speaker 1: illegal playhouse. Can you describe that operation? Well, that's the
Speaker 1: only case I was able to find were Swanson and
Speaker 1: Outline work together. But there must have been more, as
Speaker 1: though we both stationed at Kentish Town Police station for
Speaker 1: the fifteen months that's wantson was on Wy Division, so
Speaker 1: that they must have they must have worked more closely.
Speaker 1: But this one, as you said, found out for yourself, Carlie,
Speaker 1: is the only one in the newspapers, and it's only
Speaker 1: briefly reported on. But it occurred in July one. Swanson
Speaker 1: was a PC and Aberline a sarjump and complaints have
Speaker 1: been made to the police that the infamous fear to
Speaker 1: Presario in Presario, George Sanger was putting on plays without
Speaker 1: a license, and to get around this he placed advertisements
Speaker 1: stating that entry was free. But when nearly four dred
Speaker 1: people turned up on the night, they were told they
Speaker 1: had to buy a program before they had gained admittances.
Speaker 1: Ab Line went along in playing clothes and watched the
Speaker 1: performance and observed what the new newspapers described. Got it
Speaker 1: written here as several drunks, men of a doubtful character
Speaker 1: and women have an immral character causing nuisance to the
Speaker 1: billet to the public in justslymation. What an evening that
Speaker 1: that was like. Sanger eventually appeared before the magistrates and
Speaker 1: was fined just five pound. And I know a little
Speaker 1: bit about saying that he he did go on to continue
Speaker 1: with these with these um illegal playhouse career, should we say,
Speaker 1: And he was quite quite notorious. Swanson was transferred to
Speaker 1: Bow in the East End three months later, on Atline
Speaker 1: to Whitechapel two years later. And as you said, they
Speaker 1: worked on the near ripro investigation to get and there's
Speaker 1: no doubt at that time they would have remembered each
Speaker 1: other and in facting Swanson's personal address book, which I'm
Speaker 1: very lucky to own, he's got Abelene's address in that
Speaker 1: address book, Um, where where he retired to? So the
Speaker 1: detectives obviously remained friendly throughout all those years. M hm.
Speaker 1: So let's spend a little more time focused on Donald Swanson.
Speaker 1: Who he was. Um, he's a Scott from ter So
Speaker 1: you give a compelling portrait of his early life and
Speaker 1: his entry into the London Police. And I've heard you
Speaker 1: say in other parks that when you're reading biographies you're
Speaker 1: often frustrated when all the early life gets skipped over
Speaker 1: in the first page. And that's just onto something that
Speaker 1: happens when the subject is in their fifties or something
Speaker 1: like that. So let's talk a little bit about some
Speaker 1: of that early formation of who Swanson was. Um, can
Speaker 1: you give us a picture of his of his family
Speaker 1: and where he grew up? Well, Swanson, I think perhaps
Speaker 1: uniquely among policemen of that time. You know a lot
Speaker 1: of a lot of comfortables joined the police, were from
Speaker 1: out of London, laborers or farm workers and came looking
Speaker 1: for regular work, which which the police obviously was at
Speaker 1: that time. Um. But Swanson grew was born to a
Speaker 1: brewing family. His father, John Swanson, moved around Cafe Nest,
Speaker 1: which is in the far north of Scotland, even beyond
Speaker 1: the Highlands. If you tell anyone from Thurso where he
Speaker 1: grew up, that we grew up in the Highlands, they
Speaker 1: get quite upset because they count it as the lowlands
Speaker 1: up there. But he's his family moved around from basically
Speaker 1: from distilleriy distillery, very small affairs, even brewing whiskey breen
Speaker 1: beer rather or just still in whiskey m and I
Speaker 1: visited the small farmhouse where where he was born and
Speaker 1: it's just literally a small stone affair on a on
Speaker 1: a bend of a river with sheep grazing around. There's
Speaker 1: there's nothing around for about seven or eight miles. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: Donald's father, John Swanson, had an accident. This is this
Speaker 1: is before Donald was born, but his mother was pregnant
Speaker 1: with him. He had an accident where he got his
Speaker 1: clothing was caught in a bit of shanery in his
Speaker 1: student his arm was dragged in. Eventually had to have
Speaker 1: that removed, and with the elder sons having to left
Speaker 1: home for other types of work, John Swanson couldn't continue
Speaker 1: in that trade anymore and moved to thursoh which was
Speaker 1: the nearest town about seven miles away, and that was
Speaker 1: quite That was quite good for Donald because it was
Speaker 1: he meant he didn't have to work in the distillery,
Speaker 1: didn't become a laborer on the farm. He obviously had
Speaker 1: quite a high degree of intelligence. Um he was. He
Speaker 1: went to the local school in thursoh which at that
Speaker 1: time it wasn't compulsory to send your children to school
Speaker 1: and it was basically had to pay for an education.
Speaker 1: But I think that his parents must have seen something
Speaker 1: in there youngest son, Donald and they paid for him
Speaker 1: to go to school. He spent eleven years into schools
Speaker 1: in thirdsone and proved to be an exceptional pupil, regularly
Speaker 1: winning prizes in educational and annual educational examinations, and eventually,
Speaker 1: by Tommy was sixteen, he became a second master at
Speaker 1: the Miller Institute, which is the school he was in
Speaker 1: assisting the head teacher, and it looked as though he
Speaker 1: had a career marked out in education. But I'm not
Speaker 1: quite sure there's there's there's two possible reasons why he
Speaker 1: gave up that job in the June and moved to London. Either,
Speaker 1: as as often reported, he didn't see much of a
Speaker 1: future in education, but again that that could have been
Speaker 1: a secure trade for for someone like night Donald Um,
Speaker 1: but also his two sisters and had married to firemen
Speaker 1: in and had moved to London. I don't know how
Speaker 1: that came around. I don't know whether the two firemen
Speaker 1: and been to Scotland and met or the girl. The
Speaker 1: two sisters had gone to London met than there, but
Speaker 1: they're both married firemen and had children. Sister Mary, her
Speaker 1: husband Peter, died in early only sixty seven, and again unfortunately,
Speaker 1: she was pregnant and gave birth to Donald's niece, Petro
Speaker 1: sheer Um and Donald went to London quite soon after
Speaker 1: and stayed with the second sister. Now I don't know whether,
Speaker 1: as I said, Donald just gave up turned his back
Speaker 1: on a educational career, or he went to London to
Speaker 1: support the family, which I suspect may have been the case.
Speaker 1: He got a job quite quickly in the offices of
Speaker 1: a city clerk, just as a general clark. Nothing nothing
Speaker 1: too strainuous, but again some degree of intelligence was required.
Speaker 1: But the interesting thing is that that his employer, John Michele,
Speaker 1: would later write that he knew he'd known of Donald
Speaker 1: Swanson for a number of years, and I suspect although
Speaker 1: I haven't found any evidence that John Michaele was related
Speaker 1: in some way to Robert Michael, who was Donald's tutor
Speaker 1: at the school back in thursoh So John Michall, he
Speaker 1: was in his late fifties at this time. He had
Speaker 1: been working in London for quite some time. He was
Speaker 1: from Manchester. I think it Rothery's Scott who had made
Speaker 1: a home in Manchester and he decided to close the
Speaker 1: business and retire move back to Lancashire UM in the
Speaker 1: March of eight and Donald had a choice then, you know,
Speaker 1: did he move back to Third Zone, resume teaching career
Speaker 1: or did he look for work in London? And he
Speaker 1: literally picked up that day's newspaper and looked in the
Speaker 1: Situations can Colum and saw an advert from the Metropolitan
Speaker 1: Police and just literally that day just just wrote in
Speaker 1: a letter of application UM. And that was the start
Speaker 1: of his career. Mhm, m hm. So let's continue stepping
Speaker 1: forward in his career. Maybe talk about a couple of
Speaker 1: significant moments for policing London after the time when Donald
Speaker 1: had joined UM, especially thinking of the turf fraud scandal
Speaker 1: of eighteen seventy seven and the trial of the detectives, um,
Speaker 1: what were the consequences for the reputation of the police
Speaker 1: in London and and the structure of the police force
Speaker 1: even and and what was what was someone Swanson doing
Speaker 1: at the time of the turf fraud scandal on The
Speaker 1: turf fraud was a long running scam in which a
Speaker 1: London game committed a fraud on a rich French widow.
Speaker 1: They pretended to be honest bookmakers and promised to guaranteed
Speaker 1: winnings on horse races. And it went in for some months,
Speaker 1: and the gang slowly encouraged her to send more money
Speaker 1: until he has listened to discover she sent ten thousand
Speaker 1: pound which was the equivalent of more half a million
Speaker 1: pounds to day. You think she would have realized long
Speaker 1: before that point the money you're sending wasn't guaranteeing the
Speaker 1: same amount of income. But Superintendent Frederick Williamson of the
Speaker 1: Detective Department sent his best men to investigate. But for
Speaker 1: some reason, the gang always seemed to be one step
Speaker 1: ahead and avoided arrest. They're eventually captured and sent to prison,
Speaker 1: but one of them then wrote to the government revealing
Speaker 1: the reason they had been so difficult to arrest. Was
Speaker 1: that the detectives had been bribed to warn them when
Speaker 1: the police were getting close. Three detectives from the department
Speaker 1: and one corrupt solicitor were put on China found guilty
Speaker 1: as you say in eighteen seventy seven, and the result
Speaker 1: was that the Detective Department of Scotland Yard was completely
Speaker 1: disbanded and replaced by a new system called the Criminal
Speaker 1: Investigation Department, or the c i D. All of the
Speaker 1: detectives who had served in the old department that had
Speaker 1: not been arrested replaced on free months probation had to
Speaker 1: prove they could be trusted. Luckily, for Donald, he had
Speaker 1: only been appointed to detectives two weeks before the discovery
Speaker 1: of the turf fraud, so he can have been evolved
Speaker 1: in the cover up by the corrupt detectives. One there's
Speaker 1: no evidence he was in any way less than honest.
Speaker 1: Had he joined six months earlier, it might have been
Speaker 1: difficult to resist the large amount of regular money on
Speaker 1: offer in the form of bribes, but as it was.
Speaker 1: As one of the first new officers of the new
Speaker 1: c i D, he was one of the new wave
Speaker 1: of young detectives who helped restore the reputation of the
Speaker 1: department following the scandal. Do we know what his role
Speaker 1: was in reforming that? That's the idea. After the scandal, well,
Speaker 1: there were around that time there were in the detective department.
Speaker 1: Before the fraud was discovered, there were I think just
Speaker 1: just a dozen detectives and they covered the whole of London.
Speaker 1: Um Donald was working I think in class Bow station
Speaker 1: when he took his detective examinations became a sergeant. Of course,
Speaker 1: at that time there was no detective departments within each
Speaker 1: of the divisions, so if you become a detective, he
Speaker 1: basically moved to Scotland Yard. So he became detective sergeant
Speaker 1: and moved and moved there. But Um, the first the
Speaker 1: first sort of two or three weeks, I'm sure he
Speaker 1: was just finding his feet. While the detectives are waiting
Speaker 1: for trial. There was a notorious forger called called himself
Speaker 1: Captain George, which I think is a fantastic name of
Speaker 1: how you wouldn't be suspicious for someone who introduced themselves
Speaker 1: as Captain George, uh and to try and swindle you
Speaker 1: out of your money I think would be quite quite unusual.
Speaker 1: But he eventually was rested recognized by Swanson honor surveillance
Speaker 1: with another detective called Frederick Saw and they followed him
Speaker 1: go into a fence to mostly porn porn or change
Speaker 1: the bonds that he Captain George had stolen, and he
Speaker 1: was he was well wanted all around Europe. Eventually they
Speaker 1: caught him and it was quite an interesting example in
Speaker 1: Swanson's personal memoranda where he writes about the arrest of
Speaker 1: Captain George and when they tried to take him to
Speaker 1: Scotland Yard, they call a passing cab and they wrestle
Speaker 1: him in and he's sat between the two of them
Speaker 1: and the just having a bit of a chat, and
Speaker 1: and suddenly Captain George becomes very violent and tries to
Speaker 1: get this piece of paper out of his pocket which
Speaker 1: has got his confirmation of his address and his name
Speaker 1: and all those details which obviously would have secured his conviction.
Speaker 1: But he tries to shove the paper into his health
Speaker 1: to try eating the evidence, and Swanson's grabbing one arm
Speaker 1: and Shaw's grabbing the other, and they're wrestling, and as
Speaker 1: the cabs rattling along towards Scotland Yard. Um, I think
Speaker 1: Share gets bitten for his trouble and Swampson tries dragging
Speaker 1: the paper out of his mouth, but they do. They
Speaker 1: do get him to court and he is arrested and
Speaker 1: convicted and I think there's someone from Switzerland has come
Speaker 1: over from the Swiss police and they taken away to
Speaker 1: be tried for crimes over there. But that was one
Speaker 1: of probably one of the first cases that Swanson was
Speaker 1: involved with once he became a detective, so again different
Speaker 1: sort of work. Rather than being a police comfortable or
Speaker 1: sergeant where they'll be sent by someone to arrest someone,
Speaker 1: he was the one that was doing the investigation and
Speaker 1: conducting the surveillance. And then a few years later we
Speaker 1: get to another volatile period in London policing that ends
Speaker 1: up again changing the structure and I believe leads to
Speaker 1: the formation of Special branch Um or what eventually become
Speaker 1: Special Branch. Can you describe the Fenian bombing campaign of
Speaker 1: the eighteen eighties and what role Donald Swatson would have
Speaker 1: had as a member of CIETY at the time. Well,
Speaker 1: the Fenian bombing campaign started in eight eighty one and
Speaker 1: it lasted for four years. There was a previous campaign
Speaker 1: in the eighteen sixties and again they were trying to
Speaker 1: establish Irish independence. But in the eighteen sixties heads of
Speaker 1: state and other notable people were attacked in an attempt
Speaker 1: to highlight the campaign. But the eighties they were they
Speaker 1: were a little bit more direct in that they realized
Speaker 1: that if they targeted landmarks around around London and elsewhere
Speaker 1: around the UK, that they didn't still fear in the
Speaker 1: public and achieve an audience with the government. Um. And
Speaker 1: in the age eighties there are nineteen bombs exploded in
Speaker 1: Brittany Leavin in London, and these were places such as
Speaker 1: Scotland Yard itself was attacked. There were there were bombs
Speaker 1: put around the base of Nelson's Column which failed to explode.
Speaker 1: At London Underground saw four explosions. And it's quite interesting
Speaker 1: because obviously in the UK this is something that happened
Speaker 1: quite a lot in the seventies with the I RARA
Speaker 1: similar sort of thing um. But in terms of in
Speaker 1: terms of Swanson's involvement, he had been in the c
Speaker 1: I D for five years and he build a reputation
Speaker 1: as a discreet and shrewd officer, had been well known
Speaker 1: for his arrest of the railway murder. Personally for him
Speaker 1: made returning and eighty one, and he'd been entrusted with
Speaker 1: delicate investigations involved in the aristocracy, and this time he
Speaker 1: was taken under the wing of Superintendent Williamson, who was
Speaker 1: incidentally quiet Um, an ill man. He was greatly regarded
Speaker 1: by all the police officers and the public and the press,
Speaker 1: but he obviously wasn't very well and was perhaps looking
Speaker 1: for a younger detective that he could act as a mentor.
Speaker 1: So and it seems to have been sponsored so that
Speaker 1: the two officers worked together quite on a quite a
Speaker 1: number of investigations and in both the Fenian campaign and
Speaker 1: later with the Bloody Sunday rights in trafug were square.
Speaker 1: They worked together looking at the overall picture of rather
Speaker 1: than individual incidents, and there were piecing together a direction
Speaker 1: for the investigation. And that's exactly what happened later on
Speaker 1: in the River case when sponsor was appointed by the
Speaker 1: Commissioner Shovels warrant to leave the investigation from Scotland Chard. Yeah,
Speaker 1: let's talk about Charles Warren a little bit. Can you
Speaker 1: briefly describe who he was and his career leading up
Speaker 1: to to six and then and then how would you
Speaker 1: describe Warren's relationship to the various players in London policing
Speaker 1: and governance, you know what to find his approach to
Speaker 1: policing as commissioner. Warren had enjoyed a hugely successful military
Speaker 1: career and he was a skilled surveyor and archaeologist. He
Speaker 1: had served in Gibralt, to the Palestine, South Africa, and
Speaker 1: was in Egypt. And how Secretary Huge Shilders wrote to
Speaker 1: him offering the position of Commissioner of the Met. He
Speaker 1: was wanted to take the place of the existing Commissioner's
Speaker 1: Readmund Henderson, who had been popular since his appointment in
Speaker 1: eighteen sixty eight, but in recent years had grown out
Speaker 1: of touch with the growing force and his own men.
Speaker 1: When a riot took place in eight and eighty six
Speaker 1: and the Met bandly bungled its response, Henderson was forced
Speaker 1: to resign. And Shielders had met Warren four years earlier
Speaker 1: and was obviously impressed with his no nonsense attitude. He
Speaker 1: was exactly the man that Childer's thought was needed to
Speaker 1: restore public order in a time of riots and to
Speaker 1: bring them met back into shape. And and when when
Speaker 1: Warren was appointed, immediately brought an increased drill training to
Speaker 1: get the bobbies in the beating better shape. He wrote
Speaker 1: to the government asking for better uniform and boots, because
Speaker 1: he realized from his military pass that the men needed
Speaker 1: to be equipped as best as possible. So Warren increased
Speaker 1: the fitness and the efficiency of the uniformed officer as
Speaker 1: an effectively molding them into a kind of army. He
Speaker 1: left the detect due department to his assistant commissioners and
Speaker 1: his appointment was where received at first. But the problems
Speaker 1: began when Schilders lost his post as Home Secretary following
Speaker 1: a general election and a man named Henry Matthews was appointed.
Speaker 1: Whereas Warren had he joined Shilders backing right from the start,
Speaker 1: the commissioner would be unsure whether he could rely on
Speaker 1: Matthews for support. How many officers in the police command
Speaker 1: structure had done foreign service, like like Warren had. You
Speaker 1: know you said he was in Egypt. How common was
Speaker 1: it for soldiers returning from overseas to take a post
Speaker 1: in one of London's police forces? And and did Warren
Speaker 1: have an influence on that? As you mentioned, he brought
Speaker 1: a different kind of attitude, discipline, drilling equipment um to
Speaker 1: the London police forces. But did he have any change
Speaker 1: in recruitment as well. Well. The senior posting the map
Speaker 1: right from the start were usually filled by the military
Speaker 1: or legal men who had never served in the police.
Speaker 1: The first commissioners actually were Charles Rowan would the Napoleonic
Speaker 1: War wasn't at Waterloo, and Richard Maine, who was a barrister.
Speaker 1: Main's eventual replacement, Edmund Henson, who we just spoke about,
Speaker 1: was lieutenant colonel in the British Army, and all the
Speaker 1: assistant commissioners were also military men because it was generally
Speaker 1: believed that this was required to maintain discipline over the
Speaker 1: rank and file police officers, and so the highest rank
Speaker 1: that someone like Swanson could achieve through promotion was superintendent.
Speaker 1: And this this was not something that Warren or any
Speaker 1: other commission who really had a control over. That was
Speaker 1: a Home Office policy. Um it wasn't for many years
Speaker 1: until into the twentieth century when that started to change.
Speaker 1: So what although Warren gladly accepted the offer as a commissioner,
Speaker 1: it was never something that he intended to continue forever,
Speaker 1: shall we say, He knew it was only basically to
Speaker 1: bring them back into shape, and then he had returned
Speaker 1: to his military career, which obviously he did later. Was
Speaker 1: was that also true for the for constables and kind
Speaker 1: of the barbies on the beat? Where were they being
Speaker 1: recruited from? You mentioned earlier farmers and that any thing,
Speaker 1: But it was there a more general way to describe
Speaker 1: the backgrounds of those officers. Yeah, Well, the constables that
Speaker 1: were invited or or would apply to join the police
Speaker 1: where they'd always start at the bottom and generally they'd
Speaker 1: have three months training after they after they joined up, UM,
Speaker 1: they'd have to be physically examined and then they'd have
Speaker 1: a very rudimentary educational test. And the reason for that
Speaker 1: really was that the the should we say, the more
Speaker 1: physical applicants who were laborers or um farm workers, people
Speaker 1: that used to working outdoors would become exceptional bobbies on
Speaker 1: the beat because they were used to the rigors of
Speaker 1: the physical demands. You know, they'd be walking up eight
Speaker 1: or nine hours a day, um, NonStop around around the streets.
Speaker 1: Whereas people that would apply like Swans and little Child
Speaker 1: other officers who obviously had had a degree of education
Speaker 1: or showed some signs of UM intelligence when they at
Speaker 1: this rudimentary test, they were usually placed into a division
Speaker 1: which was Westminster. UM, not in Scotland Jards right away,
Speaker 1: although Scotland Yard was on a division itself. There are
Speaker 1: other police stations in a division. And yeah, and Swanson
Speaker 1: was serving at King Street. And this was really what
Speaker 1: they'd call the pool or the reserve of officers, so
Speaker 1: that when extra help was needed that have this sort
Speaker 1: of intelligent core, if you like, of um of police constables.
Speaker 1: And you'd find that in those early years the constables
Speaker 1: that had been more of a physical background would remain
Speaker 1: on on division really throughout their careers. They may get
Speaker 1: promoted to sergeant, but they would serve their years in
Speaker 1: the same streets, whereas the more intelligent officers, educated officers
Speaker 1: would be moved around that they'd become the detectives and
Speaker 1: work their way up in that way, eventually making their
Speaker 1: way to Scotland Yard in the main mm hm hm.
Speaker 1: And you mentioned that there was but things got more
Speaker 1: difficult for Charles Warren at the top as Commissioner when
Speaker 1: Shoulders leaves the Home Office and Matthews comes in. UM.
Speaker 1: And then as we'll go forward, I'm I'm sure we'll
Speaker 1: talk a little bit more about about some of that
Speaker 1: conflict between Warren and as Commissioner and Matthews as Home Secretary.
Speaker 1: Do we know about how Swanson, as a member of
Speaker 1: the c I D would have been involved or maybe
Speaker 1: stayed uninvolved from the kind of politics and arm wrestling
Speaker 1: that would have happened in the leadership. Well, it's very
Speaker 1: difficult to say, because those sort of opinions don't appear
Speaker 1: anywhere in Swanson's personal recollections. I was a little bit disappointed,
Speaker 1: although not surprised, to be honest, when Nevil Swapson was
Speaker 1: giving me these number of boxes with all the notepads
Speaker 1: and private documentation. I was hoping that I would find
Speaker 1: like a secret diary that not necessarily talked about that
Speaker 1: he's work on the Ripper or anything like that, but
Speaker 1: would real some of his more of his personal feelings
Speaker 1: about some of the officers he worked with. Um there's
Speaker 1: nothing at all about about Warren Anderson or anyone else
Speaker 1: with the colleagues, which I'm sure we talk about a
Speaker 1: little or later. So, although I suspect that um swamps
Speaker 1: Swampson would have recognized that that Warren was working on
Speaker 1: hard on behalf of his men to get you know,
Speaker 1: the better equipment the better pension plans, that sort of thing.
Speaker 1: There's no there's no incidences anywhere to say how Swapson
Speaker 1: failed about that. I suspect he just supported his boss,
Speaker 1: who he recognized, as I said, was doing his best
Speaker 1: for his employees, which are obviously the officers. Were there
Speaker 1: other things you did find, maybe not comments about his colleagues,
Speaker 1: but other aspects of his personal documents or the reminiscences
Speaker 1: of his family that give you a picture of his
Speaker 1: kind of personality and opinions about other things. Well, again
Speaker 1: not necessarily in terms of opinions, but certainly an insight
Speaker 1: into into his character. I mean, and he's professional on
Speaker 1: the face of it. On his professional side, he was
Speaker 1: just very firm, but fair and methodical in his work
Speaker 1: and everyday manner. He seems to be a modest guy
Speaker 1: who didn't seek out the limelight. Um and in fact,
Speaker 1: to be honest, it would be horrified to learn there
Speaker 1: would have been a book written about him. But there's
Speaker 1: there's one ledger which I think he was writing his
Speaker 1: cases in the mid to late eighteen seventies and up
Speaker 1: until perhaps two when he really sort of took on
Speaker 1: some delicate cases where he is a little bit more
Speaker 1: for fright in his thoughts on the work there and
Speaker 1: there's there's one case in the book which I talk
Speaker 1: about where um, a lady should we say, of a
Speaker 1: of a of a uncertain background, had almost became the
Speaker 1: Duchess of Somerset from through marriage um and and it's
Speaker 1: just like an amazing story and that it was just
Speaker 1: started off as a fraud where there's pages stolen from
Speaker 1: her baptism register in a west end church um and
Speaker 1: and the Duke of Somersets solicitors look at it and
Speaker 1: they realized that the dates have been altered. And when
Speaker 1: Swanson is called in by the actually by the vicar
Speaker 1: of that church wondering why the pages have been stolen,
Speaker 1: doesn't take long for just wants them to work out
Speaker 1: that these pages have been stolen as any sort of
Speaker 1: memento or anything like that. So he speaks to the solicitors,
Speaker 1: who finds out this sort of forged document there um
Speaker 1: and then really starts looking into this lady m h
Speaker 1: M Mrs Moore. Her married name was Lillian Stanhope was
Speaker 1: was her maiden name. And it turns out that she's
Speaker 1: literally lived a completely bizarre life from a show going
Speaker 1: live of Paul who worked as a notorious prostitute. Um
Speaker 1: big amost marriages, litigimate children, all sorts of things going
Speaker 1: on the background there. H And as I said Swanson,
Speaker 1: it was he was almost beside himself in this ledge.
Speaker 1: As you right, he writes the case up um and
Speaker 1: then he looked, he looks at the right at the end. Um.
Speaker 1: She was about to be arrested, but she she persuaded
Speaker 1: a doctor to say the woy, she's pregnant, so you
Speaker 1: can't do anything until the baby has been born. And
Speaker 1: it took ten months before they realized that it was
Speaker 1: another another fraud UM on that. But in the meantime,
Speaker 1: the Duchess of Somerset u use her influence to stop
Speaker 1: any any arrest or or any conviction of Lillian Saint.
Speaker 1: More So, Swanson recognizes what's gone on, and he does
Speaker 1: writing's again you gotta remember these are personal comments. He didn't.
Speaker 1: I'm sure he'd been horrified to know that anyone would
Speaker 1: read these. He's saying, it's a disgraceful um blocking of justice. Um,
Speaker 1: this this woman is complete so and so UM. But
Speaker 1: that that's prutty, you know, that's the only sort of
Speaker 1: instances where he's got any opinion that's not just you know,
Speaker 1: the policeman in him, just writing things down in a
Speaker 1: matter of fact way. M hm. Past studies of the
Speaker 1: White Chapel murders that focus on the police have explored
Speaker 1: the roles of of Charles Warren, of course, the commissioner
Speaker 1: Frederick Aberlein, who had that career in White Chapel and
Speaker 1: h Division and then is brought back because he's so
Speaker 1: familiar with it to do with the investigation. Uh, you know,
Speaker 1: it's covered Anderson. Um. Why has Donald Swanson's role often
Speaker 1: been overlooked in previous work about the White Chapel murders. Well,
Speaker 1: I think until the Swanson marginalia was discovered in the eighties,
Speaker 1: Swanson's involvement the investigation was virtually unknown. Obviously, he's he's
Speaker 1: if you look at the police files that were opened
Speaker 1: in the nineteen seventies to the to the public um
Speaker 1: and then and then it was controlled. He just appears
Speaker 1: as an officer who has written some reports. Um, as
Speaker 1: many other officers have written reports. You don't really realize
Speaker 1: how much of a central figure he was. But the
Speaker 1: marginalia was discovered alongside in the in the family archives,
Speaker 1: alongside a memorandum written by Charles Warren which appoints sponsor
Speaker 1: to lead the investigation from Scotland Yard. And before these
Speaker 1: discoveries of policeman, attracting most attention were those who the
Speaker 1: newspapers reporters of could access, as you say, such as
Speaker 1: White Chapel detectives are blind and read um. The newspaper
Speaker 1: reporters would obviously be going around Whitechapel and there'd no
Speaker 1: from H Division who would be working on the case. Um.
Speaker 1: And I think combine that, combined with a blanket ban
Speaker 1: on not speaking to reports from Scotland Yard, Swanson's name
Speaker 1: hardly appears in any newspapers from and as result, the
Speaker 1: older books on the Ripper don't sometimes even mention him
Speaker 1: at all. And it's not really until the discovery of
Speaker 1: the marginalian the memorandum that his role has been recognized
Speaker 1: and reevaluated and his position here the investigation is now understood.
Speaker 1: James Monroe hands over the c I D to Robert Anderson.
Speaker 1: Who were these two men and what were the circumstances
Speaker 1: of that transfer of the row in c I D.
Speaker 1: James Monroe had expected to be appointed Director of the
Speaker 1: c i D un the departure of Charles Howard Vincent Um,
Speaker 1: but the position was changed to become Assistant Commissioner rather
Speaker 1: than Director of the c i D. Monroe had to
Speaker 1: report to the Commissioner Edward Henderson. Is that the director
Speaker 1: at the Home Office, as vincent had dumb a. Monroe
Speaker 1: then thought he would replace Henderson as Commissioner when he
Speaker 1: was when he resigned in eighty six, I need to
Speaker 1: see Charles Warren appointed. And as a result there was
Speaker 1: constant friction between the two for the a team moths
Speaker 1: they worked together. Robert Anderson had been employed at Scotland
Speaker 1: Charge for several years an advisor on Phenia matters, and
Speaker 1: he was a friend and he became a friend of Monroe,
Speaker 1: and the two work together on the Phenian bombing campaign
Speaker 1: in the early eighties. By the summer of Monroe had
Speaker 1: enough of his own battles with Home Secretary Henry Matthews
Speaker 1: as well as Charles Warren, resigned and Anderson replaced him
Speaker 1: as Assistant Commissioner, primarily because Matthews knew he was one
Speaker 1: of the few officers who would work with Warren. So
Speaker 1: there are a few aspects of this case that brought
Speaker 1: the police in for criticism, maybe more than a few,
Speaker 1: but uh, one of the aspects that that drew particular
Speaker 1: fire for. You know, reading the newspapers of the time,
Speaker 1: you see harsh criticism for um absentee leadership. And one
Speaker 1: of those officers that we've just been talking about, Robert Anderson. Ah,
Speaker 1: he was absent from office on the day that Marian
Speaker 1: Nichols was killed, and he continues a monthly and sick
Speaker 1: leave the day after any chapman is killed. Um, can
Speaker 1: you describe the c i D without him? With him
Speaker 1: not present, how would the office have functioned? Well, it's
Speaker 1: quite quite a good alibi for Anderson there. He maybe
Speaker 1: he should be put forward as a suspect. Actually, Um,
Speaker 1: and Anderson, as you said he was, He was absent
Speaker 1: for quite probably the core of the early investigation really.
Speaker 1: But it's interesting in his memoirs he makes it sound
Speaker 1: as if the c i D couldn't cope without him
Speaker 1: and the department was demoralized by Monroe's departure, But in reality,
Speaker 1: the c i D was in was in pretty good shape.
Speaker 1: The senior officers such as Swanson, Naberline, and little Child
Speaker 1: had all worked their way up the ranks, and we
Speaker 1: vastly experienced, and they certainly were professional enough to continue
Speaker 1: their work despite the departure of their boss and the
Speaker 1: absence of Anderson. Uh. Certainly when it when it comes
Speaker 1: to October, they managed to organize and carry out a
Speaker 1: detailed house to house in search in March Apple while
Speaker 1: Anderson was away. So I think that it was more
Speaker 1: of an issue for the press. It was. It was
Speaker 1: an opportunity for them to bash the police for not
Speaker 1: catching the killer. Um what was Anderson doing? He was
Speaker 1: away Warren and in the early days was also on
Speaker 1: the holiday, so there was no leadership at the top,
Speaker 1: but certainly the officers on the ground who were doing
Speaker 1: the work and at Scotland jards such as Swanson, we're
Speaker 1: working flat out, you know, and you can look at
Speaker 1: the reports in the official police files to see you know,
Speaker 1: certainly work was going ahead there. And when Anderson came back,
Speaker 1: obviously he resumed control or took control of the c
Speaker 1: I D for probably for the first time, um, and
Speaker 1: and then almost made it known that you know, now
Speaker 1: I'm back in charge, everything is going to be okay. Um.
Speaker 1: But you know, I think that the the main problem
Speaker 1: for and with Anderson been away, was was for the press,
Speaker 1: and they probably quite delighted, to be honest, that he
Speaker 1: wasn't there. It gave them a reason to give the
Speaker 1: police a bit of a bit of a bashing. M hm.
Speaker 1: When when Donald Swanson was put in charge of the
Speaker 1: White Chappel murders on September, how did he then proceed
Speaker 1: with the investigation. What do we know about his involvement
Speaker 1: with the police efforts over the next month? What did
Speaker 1: that look like? I think when when Warren wrote that
Speaker 1: memorandum appointing Swanson to the overall overall charge at Scotland Yard,
Speaker 1: he made he made a comment saying that I found
Speaker 1: a most important letter was sent to Division yesterday without
Speaker 1: he's seeing it. This is quite an air and should
Speaker 1: not happen again. And all the papers in Central Office
Speaker 1: on the subject of the murder must be kept in
Speaker 1: his room. And immediately from that, and in fact back
Speaker 1: dating some of the reports, every every import and telegram
Speaker 1: on the investigation was submit to Swanson at Scotland Yard.
Speaker 1: So you can imagine that he's spent a good few
Speaker 1: weeks reading and digesting all the reports that had been
Speaker 1: generated um before his appointment and right back to m
Speaker 1: Smith and Martha Tabram before the murder of Polly Nichols,
Speaker 1: all the reports that had come from H Division in
Speaker 1: Whitechapel and J Division of bethanal Green who had been
Speaker 1: involved in the Marria Nichols investigation. And it was only
Speaker 1: really once he'd done this he could identify potential links
Speaker 1: and lines of investigation and a good indication of how
Speaker 1: much worked there was force once and on. That was
Speaker 1: was in the report which we speak of later, and
Speaker 1: I'm sure where he writes that by the mid October
Speaker 1: it's almost a thousand dockets existed in addition to the
Speaker 1: newspaper the numerous police and newspaper reports, and they all
Speaker 1: have to be read and digested by Swanson. So I
Speaker 1: think it was probably to start with a massive and
Speaker 1: ongoing of a massive project for him two red and
Speaker 1: understand and assimilate everything that was going on um up
Speaker 1: to that time, because you know, there probably there probably
Speaker 1: was a good three or four weeks of reporting before
Speaker 1: he was appointed on the fifteen September. M HM. Can
Speaker 1: you describe what a day in the life would have
Speaker 1: looked like for him? You know, is he going from
Speaker 1: his home to Scotland Yards, staying there all day and
Speaker 1: then going home again. And what would he do when
Speaker 1: he was there in the office with those mounds of paper.
Speaker 1: What what did a day in his life looked like
Speaker 1: when he takes on the investigation. Well, at this time
Speaker 1: Swanson and his family were living in South London. Um
Speaker 1: I would imagine knowing that route, it would have been
Speaker 1: probably a cab ride in each day and each evening.
Speaker 1: But we were quite fortunate because in eighty nine there
Speaker 1: was a Department committee investigating the police work into the
Speaker 1: riper investigation and looking at the likes of expenses and
Speaker 1: pensions and that sort of thing, and Swanson was one
Speaker 1: of the officers that was called to give evidence. And
Speaker 1: he does actually describe his working day in between September.
Speaker 1: It's quite quite a heavy workload, he's he said, I
Speaker 1: had to be at the office at half past eight
Speaker 1: in the morning. Then I had to read for all
Speaker 1: the papers that had come in, which took me into
Speaker 1: eleven PM and sometimes between one and two in the morning.
Speaker 1: Then I had to go to whitechap and see the officers,
Speaker 1: generally getting home between two and three am. So you know,
Speaker 1: you can you imagine that there's there's something like about
Speaker 1: fourteen hours minimum of just literally just reading the reports
Speaker 1: and statements which are coming each day. And that's an
Speaker 1: enormou that's an enormous amount of work two, you know,
Speaker 1: for one officer to do. And then once he's done that,
Speaker 1: as he said, he had to go to Whitechapel and
Speaker 1: see those h Division officers. And after Cabinetos was killed
Speaker 1: and the city police came in liaising with those officers
Speaker 1: as well, they obviously make their they obviously make their
Speaker 1: plans and a grass reports for the next day when
Speaker 1: it looked as though it would be the same, all same,
Speaker 1: all over again. So very intense period for those uh,
Speaker 1: those two or three months there for him. Can you
Speaker 1: describe the Dear Boss letter? What effect would that letter
Speaker 1: have on the investigation when it arrived in the press
Speaker 1: office and would Swanson have also been involved in sorting
Speaker 1: letters like this as they came in. Yeah, well that
Speaker 1: the Dear Boss letter was received by the Central News
Speaker 1: Agency on the twenty September and it was almost certainly
Speaker 1: written by journalist if Tom Bullying of the Central News
Speaker 1: Agency itself or American Harry dam who who was a
Speaker 1: reporter for the Star Star Wars a new paper but
Speaker 1: probably the first tabloid newspaper, but it was enjoying an
Speaker 1: enormous early sales because it were it recognized that the
Speaker 1: Ripper investigation, or all the murders themselves were um generating huge,
Speaker 1: huge sale as they were going out of their way
Speaker 1: to um offer sensationalist headlines and reporting style. So it's
Speaker 1: quite likely that the Dear Boss letter which first gave
Speaker 1: the name Jack the Ripper, was written by a journalist
Speaker 1: because obviously can imagine it would draw enormous readership, and
Speaker 1: in fact Robert Anderson would write in his memoirs, who's
Speaker 1: tempted to disclose the identity of the journalist? And Swanson
Speaker 1: himself said who was known to all heads of c
Speaker 1: I D. But although they came to realize the letter
Speaker 1: as a hoax in the absence of any other clues
Speaker 1: of facts, when he was published in the national press
Speaker 1: to see if the handwriting would be recognized, with the
Speaker 1: inevitable result that hundreds of copycat letters were sent to
Speaker 1: them Met and also the City of Police, all of
Speaker 1: which had to be followed up and discounted, wasting valuable
Speaker 1: police time and certainly Swanson. I'm sure these were that
Speaker 1: it doesn't categorically state it. I'm sure these letters were
Speaker 1: sent to Swanson, a Scotland jarred along with all the
Speaker 1: other documents, and so each day he'd have to go
Speaker 1: through these hoax letters, which I'm sure they must have
Speaker 1: known at the time. But looking at pertinent points, is
Speaker 1: there a name, use of address? Is there something that
Speaker 1: we can send a comfortable too to investigate? I mean,
Speaker 1: that was probably one of the biggest mistakes that the
Speaker 1: police made in the investigation, was publishing that letter, because
Speaker 1: it just ended up wasting so many police hours and
Speaker 1: directing um work that could should have been done on
Speaker 1: a more direct basis. Mhm. You mentioned earlier that even
Speaker 1: with Anderson gone, the c i D Was able to
Speaker 1: put together a major police mobilization in White Chapel in October.
Speaker 1: Would you describe that operation for us. This took place
Speaker 1: on the third of October, couple of days after the
Speaker 1: double event murder of Listoide and Cafronetto's um and I
Speaker 1: do wonder whether the plan had been mooted before that.
Speaker 1: Are they certainly to put it into place in the
Speaker 1: furt of October and Whitechapple was flooded with police in
Speaker 1: plain clothes and a house to house search was carried out.
Speaker 1: And to give an idea of the scala that operation,
Speaker 1: the police issued some eighty tho leaflets that the households
Speaker 1: and lodging houses in the area appealing for information, and
Speaker 1: in addition to the residents of the area, more than
Speaker 1: two thousand people who were staying at the common lodging
Speaker 1: houses were questioned. An assistant commissioner of Robert Andison would
Speaker 1: later write that during my absence abroad, the police made
Speaker 1: the house to house search for the killer, investigating the
Speaker 1: case of every man in the district whose circumstances were
Speaker 1: such they could go and come and get rid of
Speaker 1: his blood stains. In secret. Conclusion we came to was
Speaker 1: that he and his people were certain low class Polish duties.
Speaker 1: For it is a remarkable fact that people of that
Speaker 1: class in the East End will not give up one
Speaker 1: of their number to gentile justice. So I think that
Speaker 1: the they must have had a bit of an understanding
Speaker 1: what they were looking for. Um. I think it stretches
Speaker 1: the imagination that they would send um but not only
Speaker 1: watch Apple police, but they drafted in officers from other
Speaker 1: divisions to assist this UM, and they questioned every every household,
Speaker 1: every resident, searched the rooms as as I said, they
Speaker 1: questioned all the lodgers they might. I find it's a
Speaker 1: bit unusual that they would have just done that, not
Speaker 1: knowing what to expect. They probably had a little bit
Speaker 1: of an under an idea or a hope perhaps what
Speaker 1: they might uncover. And it seems a calling to Anderson
Speaker 1: UM that that that did that did come to pass.
Speaker 1: The eighties offered this police force that's doing all this
Speaker 1: work trying to come up with evidence UM. Little by
Speaker 1: way of the forensic techniques the detective use today. You
Speaker 1: mentioned at the beginning of our conversation, what were some
Speaker 1: of the the cutting edge techniques that were that were
Speaker 1: new at the time that were considered in the course
Speaker 1: of collecting and analyzing evidence. White Chapel. I think this
Speaker 1: is this is probably one of the major problems that
Speaker 1: the police had. There were virtually no forensics. They couldn't
Speaker 1: tell the difference between human and animal blood let alone
Speaker 1: a blood type. UM. Obviously, the the idea of of
Speaker 1: finger printing had been discovered, but it hadn't been a
Speaker 1: wasn't adopted to the police. For not another fifteen years
Speaker 1: after the White Chapel murders. So at this time there
Speaker 1: was there was virtually no um evidence that could be
Speaker 1: gleaned from clues um that sort of thing. I think
Speaker 1: the only clue, real clue that the police found in
Speaker 1: the whole investigation was the portion of Cafineto's apron which
Speaker 1: was found beneath the writing the war writing in Ghaalson Street. Um,
Speaker 1: and that was found to match. That was a torn
Speaker 1: off piece of open that's found to match the pie
Speaker 1: she was wearing. And although that had blood stains and
Speaker 1: fegle matter on, there was there was no way that
Speaker 1: they could test those stains against anything else if that
Speaker 1: they might have found UM elsewhere in their search. So
Speaker 1: the police were almost reliant on informers, identification parades, which
Speaker 1: I'm sure we talked about later on, and that sort
Speaker 1: of thing, or almost sort of catching catching someone red
Speaker 1: red handed. Um. It was. It was, you know, incredibly
Speaker 1: tricky to find some money in this respect. Um. Swanson
Speaker 1: and his in his career up to this point had
Speaker 1: conducted a couple of not quite not strictly legal, um
Speaker 1: almost entrapment things where he had put put together a
Speaker 1: scenario where a suspect would be confronted with with either
Speaker 1: a witness or a victim of a crime um such
Speaker 1: as a robbery, and then they'd identify him that way.
Speaker 1: So there wasn't much they could do in terms of
Speaker 1: forensic techniques. It was very sort of rude, rude, dementry,
Speaker 1: and they were reliant on can Pessians identifications that sort
Speaker 1: of thing. Mhm. What did the press and White Chapel
Speaker 1: locals think about this police mobilization that flooded their their neighborhoods,
Speaker 1: their streets, their homes with officers. I think it's quite
Speaker 1: interesting that, you know, you could imagine that some of
Speaker 1: the public, certainly the Jewish immigrant population, would have been
Speaker 1: mistrusting of the police. You know, there was certainly locally
Speaker 1: there was a there was that sort of feeling typical
Speaker 1: British Empire feeling. But couldn't have been an Englishman, it
Speaker 1: must have been must have been an immigrant who's done
Speaker 1: these horrible crimes. So you can understand that the Jewish
Speaker 1: population would have been perhaps wary of the police, not
Speaker 1: wanting to help, But in reality they were very supportive
Speaker 1: and incorporated with the police, such to the agree that
Speaker 1: that Charles Warren later wrote an open letter in The
Speaker 1: Times thanking the residents of Whitechapel for the good will
Speaker 1: shown to the officers who obviously had to carry a delicate,
Speaker 1: very delicate duty, but had to do the work um.
Speaker 1: But that the public themselves were understanding of that they
Speaker 1: need to do this work and seemed to be a
Speaker 1: very very helpful in assisting the officers. And regarding the press,
Speaker 1: you know, as as I said with the Star a
Speaker 1: moment ago, you know, they were looking for an angle
Speaker 1: that would selling newspaper um. And I think whenever they
Speaker 1: saw the police or the police appeared to be doing nothing,
Speaker 1: they'd be lambasted in the press and certain they didn't
Speaker 1: have a clue, and when something had come along that
Speaker 1: there might be a lead or some obvious activity by
Speaker 1: the police and they could report that because the readers,
Speaker 1: obviously we'd be looking for the catch off our latest
Speaker 1: of the of the police investigation and hunt for the killer.
Speaker 1: So the press, the press were actually supportive of the
Speaker 1: house to house search as well, whether that was their
Speaker 1: person opinion of whether as I said, it was more
Speaker 1: a case to get get some juicy headlines and sell
Speaker 1: more copies. I think that's probably the case. You mentioned
Speaker 1: that if Swanson was known at all in the early
Speaker 1: years after the murders, it might have been from a
Speaker 1: few reports that he wrote. Would you describe the report
Speaker 1: that's once in filed with the Home Office on October? Yeah, Well,
Speaker 1: shortly after the house to house search, the Home Office
Speaker 1: demanded a report or an update on the ongoing investigation,
Speaker 1: and Assistant Commissioner Robert Anderson was annoyed at the timing
Speaker 1: of it of this request. Um. You know, he felt
Speaker 1: he felt there was more important matters for Swanson and
Speaker 1: the opice officers to be attending to. But nevertheless, the
Speaker 1: report that Swanson wrote, dated the nineteenth of October, was
Speaker 1: obviously a prize the Home Office at the time, but
Speaker 1: but for US researchers, it's invaluable because it gives the
Speaker 1: clearest picture of the police investigation into the murders at
Speaker 1: that point, and Swanson details each of the murders going
Speaker 1: right back to Elizabeth Stride, Martharet Tabram, Um, Mary and
Speaker 1: Nichols and Annie Chapman, and as well as the police
Speaker 1: investigation at that point. Um and gave details of the
Speaker 1: house to house search we just heard about. Um. And
Speaker 1: Swanson writes the more than three hundred people were investigated
Speaker 1: as well as seventy six, which is and slaughter men
Speaker 1: and all the sailors who are on at that point
Speaker 1: on board ships in the Thames or or at the
Speaker 1: various East End docs MHM. And he also mentions that
Speaker 1: a number of people were detained. Um something like a
Speaker 1: d I think, um, how many of those eighty who
Speaker 1: were detained were questioned thoroughly and how involved would Swanson
Speaker 1: have been in something like interrogations and those evidence gathering
Speaker 1: conversations or was that done by other officers. Well, I
Speaker 1: think all eighty of these people that were detained would
Speaker 1: have been questioned to some degree. You know, some were
Speaker 1: easily dismissed, another's needed to be interrogated more closely. Um.
Speaker 1: In details of the suspects would have been held in
Speaker 1: the official suspect file a Scotland Yard, but that's been
Speaker 1: missing since the early nineteen seventies. Before the the Met
Speaker 1: Police file on the Whitechapel murders was open to the researchers,
Speaker 1: So we have no idea who conducted the actual interviews
Speaker 1: in the main but Swanson was based at Scotland Yard
Speaker 1: and He wrote in that nineteenth of October report that
Speaker 1: the statements were taken at various stations around London, and
Speaker 1: the vast majority of suspects obviously were local Whitechapel men,
Speaker 1: so it's likely that interviews were conducted by actually Innity
Speaker 1: detectives and apalne On circumbent there. It was only when
Speaker 1: James Sadler Thomas James Sadler was arrested for the murder
Speaker 1: of Francis Coles in doing over certain that Swanson himself
Speaker 1: conducted an interview with a suspect. So there's there's a
Speaker 1: chance he may have been involved with some of those
Speaker 1: eighty or more interrogations, but the likelihood is that they
Speaker 1: were conducted by local officers at the years pations where
Speaker 1: they were held. UM. Another document that is significant in
Speaker 1: the White Chapel case is the one that Charles Warren
Speaker 1: gets published in Murray's magazine in November the police of
Speaker 1: the Metropolis. Um, what was the substance of that article,
Speaker 1: how was it received, what was the what was the
Speaker 1: fallout after that hit the public readership? Well, it's it's
Speaker 1: interesting because Warren's article in itself was homeless enough. It's
Speaker 1: just just been about police administration, didn't didn't give any
Speaker 1: uh secrets away or anything that, um may be deemed
Speaker 1: to make it a a horrific publication and it was
Speaker 1: quite actually was well received by newspaper reviewers and commentators
Speaker 1: at the time. Unsurprisingly, Warren ran foul of Home Secretary
Speaker 1: Henry Matthews yet again, who wrote to remind Warren that
Speaker 1: it'd broken a rule that prohibited civil servants from publicly
Speaker 1: discussing matters relating to their documents, and for Warren this
Speaker 1: is the final straw. He wrote on the eighth of
Speaker 1: November to Warren to Matthews rather resigning his post, and
Speaker 1: said that if we had known there was a there
Speaker 1: was a a policy that he couldn't write, couldn't write
Speaker 1: anything about his his job, then he wouldn't have taken
Speaker 1: the position in the first place. Um. But I'm pretty
Speaker 1: sure it was just a case of matt and Matthews
Speaker 1: having another chance to need or Warren and incident niem warrant.
Speaker 1: Warren resigned on the eighth of November, which was coincidentally
Speaker 1: Mary Kelly's last day. She was murdered in the early
Speaker 1: hours of the ninth of November, and when news of
Speaker 1: Warren's resignation broke on the day of the inquest into
Speaker 1: Mellie Kelly's murder. The two have been been linked, and
Speaker 1: to some they still are linked. Warren resigned um because
Speaker 1: of Kelly Kelly's murder um and in fact, just two
Speaker 1: weeks later Warren's replacement was announced. It was his old
Speaker 1: his old nemesis, James Monroe uh an interest in me.
Speaker 1: They respected newspaper that Saint James Gazette commented on Matthew's
Speaker 1: use of the legislation, saying advantage was taken off. This
Speaker 1: is an incident to lead Sir Charles into what looks
Speaker 1: rather like a trap. So I think that's probably exactly
Speaker 1: what happened there. Mhm hm. At the end of October,
Speaker 1: so just before we get to that point, Robert Anderson
Speaker 1: had asked Dr Thomas Bond to examine the medical evidence
Speaker 1: of the murders. To that point, um, why was doctor
Speaker 1: Bond of trusted observer and what did he conclude in
Speaker 1: the report that came out a few days after Warren's resignation.
Speaker 1: Each met Police division had one doctor who was appointed
Speaker 1: not only to look after the welfare of their police
Speaker 1: officers in that division, but also assisted when medical opinion
Speaker 1: was needed in cases of murder or suspicious death, and
Speaker 1: the division was surgeon in White Chapels Dr George Baxter Phillips,
Speaker 1: who appeared at various inquests giving medical evidence, and Dr
Speaker 1: Thomas Bond was a divisional surgeon attached to a division
Speaker 1: of Scotland Chard and so in such he was not
Speaker 1: directly involved in the White Shable cases, as he's been
Speaker 1: involved in so many howe profile cases since being appointed
Speaker 1: in eighteen sixty seven. Um Anderson asked Bond on the
Speaker 1: October to examine the inquest reports on the four victims
Speaker 1: from Mary Anne Nichols to Kafreinetto's, but before he could
Speaker 1: do so, Mary Kelly was murdered and Bond was able
Speaker 1: to conduct a post mortem himself, adding it to the
Speaker 1: inquest reports on the earlier victims, and in his report,
Speaker 1: dated the tenth of November one concluded that all five
Speaker 1: had been killed by the same hand, the fruit cut
Speaker 1: from left to right in the first attack while the
Speaker 1: women were lying down. The mutilations were carried out after death,
Speaker 1: and he believed a murderer did not have an anatomical knowledge,
Speaker 1: not even to the degree of the butcher. He said
Speaker 1: the knife was that commit carried out the mutilations, was
Speaker 1: at least six in years long, with a sharp point,
Speaker 1: such as a butcher's or surgeon's knife. Mhm. There's an
Speaker 1: interesting bit of background two to this because at the
Speaker 1: beginning of the year, at the beginning of there's some
Speaker 1: friction between Warren and Bond. Can you talk about Charles
Speaker 1: Warren's effort to push Bond out of police service at
Speaker 1: the beginning of the year. I think as this is
Speaker 1: a very interesting little little backstory that perfectly illustrates when
Speaker 1: I was talking about right at the start about context.
Speaker 1: Because when I was doing the research for the book,
Speaker 1: I i I was looking for some information about divisional surgeons. Um,
Speaker 1: there's salaries, how long they've been appointed, that sort of thing.
Speaker 1: So there's a far at the National Archives which is
Speaker 1: titled Divisional Searchers Divisional Surgeons. I thought that sounds perfect
Speaker 1: for what I'm looking for for for the book, and
Speaker 1: when I ready, it was this series of correspondence between
Speaker 1: Warren and Bond and the chief surgeon at Scotland Yard,
Speaker 1: Alexander mckella UM. And it's it's completely bizarre and and
Speaker 1: it just gives this complete background makes perfect sense for
Speaker 1: why um Anderson asked On to the character as report,
Speaker 1: which didn't seem to make any sense before. But the
Speaker 1: story was that, as always with Warren, he was looking
Speaker 1: to make changes to the met to make it more
Speaker 1: efficient and as the majority of the detectives lived away
Speaker 1: from Scotland Yard in l Division, which was south of
Speaker 1: the Thames, where the new recruits were also based, as
Speaker 1: they did their training in early he moved their care
Speaker 1: to the divisional surgeons there, Dr George Farr. When On
Speaker 1: discovered this, he complained, but he obviously had had no
Speaker 1: choice Um and he resigned as a medical officer. Attached
Speaker 1: the Detective Department and the Commissioner's office on the fourth
Speaker 1: of October, and took the opportunity to confirm it preferred
Speaker 1: to be engaged on cases, but medico legal expertise who
Speaker 1: was needed, and this is what prompted Anderson to give
Speaker 1: Bond to prepare his report. Would you describe a previous
Speaker 1: case or two that were settled for the police by
Speaker 1: examinations and reports from Dr Band in the years before
Speaker 1: you mentioned he's attached to Scotland Yard and he's been
Speaker 1: such a helpful surgeon for them in the past. What
Speaker 1: were some of the cases that cemented his reputation in
Speaker 1: the years before that? Well, the one which springs to
Speaker 1: mind for obvious reasons for for me is in eight
Speaker 1: one where he was called down to Brighton from Scotland
Speaker 1: jar which is probably the furthest he could get out
Speaker 1: of his jurisdiction. He was called down to Brant to
Speaker 1: examine the body of a man found on the tracks
Speaker 1: in a railway arch and it was not initially clear
Speaker 1: with the cause of death was that he had been
Speaker 1: hit by a train or falling from a carriage, but
Speaker 1: bomb established at the man Mr Frederick Gold had been
Speaker 1: attacked on board the train and from from the carriage
Speaker 1: as it passed through the tunnel. Ironically, it was Donald
Speaker 1: Swanson who arrested the killer person, Floyd Mapleton. So that
Speaker 1: was an example where um not not to say that
Speaker 1: the local doctors or the local medical officials in the
Speaker 1: Sussex Um jurisdiction where that where the body was found. Interestingly,
Speaker 1: in that case Um when Baxter was the carrener core
Speaker 1: at the time at the Sussex and he conducted the
Speaker 1: inquest into victim and eventual murderer. But that's not to
Speaker 1: say that those local doctors wouldn't have come to the
Speaker 1: same conclusion. But but there was a chance that you know,
Speaker 1: they may they may have concluded that it was m
Speaker 1: misadventure or or accidental deaf hit by the train and
Speaker 1: that would have been the end of that and la
Speaker 1: Froid Mapleton would have completely avoided being arrested and executed
Speaker 1: as he did. But um Bond, Bond was the Scotland
Speaker 1: yard specially who found the cause of death, the various
Speaker 1: wounds on the body that could only been caused by
Speaker 1: an attack um within the carriage. So yeah, that that
Speaker 1: was That was one case which it was quite interesting
Speaker 1: because as a Bond worked with Swanson and win Back Star.
Speaker 1: This was seven years before the Ripper investigation. So what
Speaker 1: was the significance when Bond writes that report you described earlier,
Speaker 1: the sharp knife that cuts on the throat um, pulling
Speaker 1: together all that medical evidence and and processing it for
Speaker 1: Robert Anderson, What was the significance of that report following
Speaker 1: its release? Well, Bond suggested to the murderer was probably
Speaker 1: a middle aged man, quite an inoffensive looking and respectively dressed.
Speaker 1: He said he had extendic eccentric tendencies and probably lived
Speaker 1: among people who knew of his character and had suspicions,
Speaker 1: but who would probably be willing to communicate these suspicions
Speaker 1: to the police. And then the mutilations indicated that the
Speaker 1: killer was driven bisexual impulse. And this this report is
Speaker 1: generally accepted as the first attempt at a profile of
Speaker 1: a serial killer. But it's interesting that if he hadn't
Speaker 1: been for Charles Warren's insistence earlier the year that wand
Speaker 1: relinquished his workload uh As Scotlan Yard, he might not
Speaker 1: have been asked to rewrite that report in the first place.
Speaker 1: So it's it's an interesting report in an important report
Speaker 1: in terms of it gave the police, perhaps for the
Speaker 1: first time, an idea of the sword of man they
Speaker 1: should be looking for, rather than the simple conclusion that
Speaker 1: yet it was someone with a knife who had um
Speaker 1: some medical knowledge, which when Dr Bagster Phillips was given
Speaker 1: his inquest testimony in the earlier cases didn't give. He
Speaker 1: gave no further clues as to the type of man
Speaker 1: the killer was or any idea of his personality. So
Speaker 1: it was really important for in terms of not only
Speaker 1: in terms of criminal history, but also in terms of
Speaker 1: the investigation, that the police finally had an idea of
Speaker 1: the man they were looking for. And I think when
Speaker 1: we get further down in the discussion, we'll be talking
Speaker 1: about Anderson's suspects and description of what happened to him,
Speaker 1: we can see that that probably came from this, This
Speaker 1: description by bonders to the sort of man at the
Speaker 1: killer was mm hmm. Do you think it was more
Speaker 1: helpful to have Baxter Phillips's reticence or to have bonds
Speaker 1: speculative conclusions? Um? Do you mean do you mean for
Speaker 1: for us as researchers or for the police at the time. Well,
Speaker 1: I'm thinking more of the police and the time. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, is it better to have a cleans later
Speaker 1: to have, you know, something specular and like what Bond
Speaker 1: puts forward. I think that that this at this point,
Speaker 1: it's probably a case of how the investigation had proceeded,
Speaker 1: because if if Bond had for instances been looking at
Speaker 1: the reports, if he'd have been the one which had
Speaker 1: conducted the post mortem and for the first inquest and
Speaker 1: given this information, Um, I don't know if the police
Speaker 1: would have accepted it as readily as they did later
Speaker 1: on backs to Phillips, certainly we've been reticent, as you say,
Speaker 1: we've describing the injuries at the at the inquest that
Speaker 1: that certainly wasn't the case. You know, he gave that
Speaker 1: information freely to the to the police, and he was
Speaker 1: trying to keep it out of the out of the newspapers, really.
Speaker 1: But I don't know whether in those early days if
Speaker 1: bags to Phillips would have even formed an opinion as
Speaker 1: to the type of killer. I don't know whether he
Speaker 1: had that sort of approach that that bonded um. I
Speaker 1: think initially the police were sort of quite happy with
Speaker 1: what bags To Phillips had had told them, and this,
Speaker 1: you know, this is this, this is the sort of
Speaker 1: this is the sort of mutilations that have taken place
Speaker 1: or been inflicted. The police probably fought in those early
Speaker 1: days that they were going to quiet quite easily catch
Speaker 1: the killer. And it's interesting that the terminology of of
Speaker 1: that Warren gave in that memo pointing Swanson, he's referring
Speaker 1: to the murder of any Chapman. And he doesn't say
Speaker 1: I'm appointing Swanson for the duration of these series of murders.
Speaker 1: He points Swanson for that one particular murder, and to
Speaker 1: take obviously in cittu the previous cases, and Swanson really
Speaker 1: carried on in that position as the the murders of
Speaker 1: Lis Stride and Katharinetto's and Mary Kelly happened, and subsequently
Speaker 1: later years Alice McKenzie, Francis Coles. Swanson stayed in that position.
Speaker 1: But I don't believe that Warren or any of the
Speaker 1: other police expected there may be more. Um they probably,
Speaker 1: you know, we we we can solve this with the
Speaker 1: tools that we have medical information from backs to Phillips,
Speaker 1: but certainly by the end of October and they had
Speaker 1: no further information apart from what they may have uncovered
Speaker 1: at the house to house at the start of the month.
Speaker 1: I think they were they were very grateful for Bond
Speaker 1: given them this sort of information. Of course, it may
Speaker 1: have turned out to be completely away of them, way
Speaker 1: off the mark, and not for helpful at all, but
Speaker 1: I think they were looking for help, any helpful guidance
Speaker 1: they could have received at that point. So let's step
Speaker 1: a little further forward in time, considering other people who
Speaker 1: attempted to put together the massive evidence and come to
Speaker 1: some kind of official conclusion about it. Um, let's go
Speaker 1: to melvill Micknaton. Who was Melvilla mcnatin and what role
Speaker 1: did he have in the investigation or looking at the
Speaker 1: looking at the results of the investigation. Well, mc noordan
Speaker 1: was was a friend of Names Monroe, who ran his
Speaker 1: family's tea plantation in India, and they had met when
Speaker 1: Monroe was a district judge there. He first attempted to
Speaker 1: get McNaughton into the met when Superintendent Frederick Williamson was ill,
Speaker 1: but Warren blocked blocked that move and this was the
Speaker 1: reason why Monroe resigned as assistant Commissioner Robert Anderson put
Speaker 1: in put in his place. Things changed, of course, when
Speaker 1: Warren resigned at the end of Monroe became commissioner. Mcnorton
Speaker 1: was appointed Assistant Chief Constable support in Williamson in June
Speaker 1: and replaced him in December ninety when Williamson died. So
Speaker 1: they had the three friends together there, Anderson, Monroe and
Speaker 1: mc norton. Um But although he wasn't around at the
Speaker 1: time of the reper investigation of McNaughton, was quite actively
Speaker 1: involved in inquiries into subsequent murders in White Chapel such
Speaker 1: as Alice McKenzie and Francis Coles. UM and in his
Speaker 1: auto biography, which is completely exaggerated, he's rolling everything to
Speaker 1: be honest, UM, but he puts himself in the center
Speaker 1: of things quite quite heavily there. But he he I
Speaker 1: think it seems to be that he was frustrated on
Speaker 1: the outside UM in eight wanting to be part of
Speaker 1: the investigation. But UM certainly certainly took to and big
Speaker 1: involvemently things after his appointment. But he's probably better known
Speaker 1: in the case for his eight nine four memorandum in
Speaker 1: which he names the free suspects M. Yeah. And it's
Speaker 1: since for for investigators and historians and and those of
Speaker 1: us who are looking back at the case. His member
Speaker 1: and his memorandum has at times been an influential document
Speaker 1: for understanding uh, as you say, the police perspective, UM,
Speaker 1: how was it received when it was first written, and
Speaker 1: how much significance did it have, especially before those police
Speaker 1: files were open in the seventies. Um mcnorton wrote his
Speaker 1: memorandum as a result of some newspaper we've sporting an exclusive.
Speaker 1: A man named Thomas cut Bush was Jack the ripper
Speaker 1: that found him in a lunatic asylum UM. And the
Speaker 1: memorandum actually was never published, but it was it was
Speaker 1: probably prepared for internal use should there have been inquiries
Speaker 1: a result of the Sun's claims. So there's no record
Speaker 1: of the memorandum until it was discovered by author Robin
Speaker 1: O'Dell in the mid nineties sixties, misfiled in a in
Speaker 1: a box at the Public Record Office. So that that's
Speaker 1: the official version, UM. But there's so that's dated February.
Speaker 1: But there's there's a version which we call the Aberconway version.
Speaker 1: It seems to be a draft written by mcnorton Morley
Speaker 1: is preparing this official report, and that that was retained
Speaker 1: in the family, the McNaughton family, and made its way
Speaker 1: down to his daughter Christo Bell aber Conway, and I
Speaker 1: think it was a late eighteen nineteen fifties. Rather the
Speaker 1: British television presenter and Ripper or for Daniel Farr soon
Speaker 1: was doing some research for television program and his friends said, well,
Speaker 1: would you like to meet my my mother who has
Speaker 1: um the document written by her father, Melvin mc norton,
Speaker 1: which names free free of the chapter Ripper suspects. You
Speaker 1: can you mention Daniel Fasson was delighted to have the
Speaker 1: opportunity to read this, and this is where three names
Speaker 1: first came along. But um, Lady Abbert Conway gave fast
Speaker 1: and permission to mention the discovery of this abercamay versions
Speaker 1: along the condition that he didn't reveal any of the
Speaker 1: names because she felt that there may still be relatives
Speaker 1: or descendants of those three men that was still alive.
Speaker 1: And and maybe you know, take take offense, but it
Speaker 1: turned up the three names were drew It, who fastened
Speaker 1: put forward as the number one suspect um Um. Yeah,
Speaker 1: because Minski, which is interesting because that obviously parts the
Speaker 1: name that Swanson Kate came up with. And Michael Ostrog
Speaker 1: who subsequent researchers have found that was a petty criminal,
Speaker 1: not violent at all, although McNaughton described him as such
Speaker 1: in the memorandum and we're sort of managed to discount him. Um.
Speaker 1: But what I find interesting about the mc norton report
Speaker 1: is that he names the same five victims as the
Speaker 1: genuine Ripper Ripper victims as Thomas bonded his report. Um.
Speaker 1: And this is where we get the so called canonical
Speaker 1: five victims from Marianne Nichols through to Mary Kelly and
Speaker 1: the victims before these five and after as a genuine
Speaker 1: regarded as probably not by the ripper. But that's certainly
Speaker 1: changed in certainly in the case of Martha Tabram. But
Speaker 1: what's interesting about that is that I discovered during my
Speaker 1: research for the book that Bonds report was missing. When UM,
Speaker 1: a Swiss doctor wrote to the met asking for a report,
Speaker 1: they couldn't be found at this time. And this sort
Speaker 1: of coincides within the within two months of when McNaughton
Speaker 1: writer's report. So I just have a what, I just
Speaker 1: have a feeling that perhaps mcnaton lifted that file from
Speaker 1: the report um, from the official files to write his
Speaker 1: report and then put it back and put it back
Speaker 1: at a later date. UM. So yes, So that really
Speaker 1: was was in. That was probably the first document that
Speaker 1: names a suspect before the official Suspects file was accessed
Speaker 1: in the early nineteen seventies. Mhm M. Would you describe
Speaker 1: for us the arc of Donald Swanson's career in the
Speaker 1: years after. In earlier that year, Swanson had been appointing
Speaker 1: Chief Inspector on a temporary basis, and that's almost a
Speaker 1: probationary peer. It but it meant he was one of
Speaker 1: the top six detectives at Scotland Yard. He was made
Speaker 1: Chief Inspector permanent later at the beginning of eighteen nine.
Speaker 1: And you've promoted a superintendent of the c i D
Speaker 1: at Scotland Yard affect There's the highest position he could
Speaker 1: he could attain um and it's effectively the top detective
Speaker 1: in the country. His reporting directly to the Assistant Commissioner
Speaker 1: Anderson and then his replacement, Edward Henry, who was the
Speaker 1: man that poke fingerprinting into the met Swanson retired fifty
Speaker 1: five and I do think that if the rules have
Speaker 1: been different at that time, he might have achieved further
Speaker 1: promotions to Assistant Commissioner and possibly commissioner itself. Mhm m.
Speaker 1: Thinking about another major case that Swinson was involved in,
Speaker 1: would you describe the arrest and trial of Leander Jamieson
Speaker 1: and the role that Donald Swason played in those proceedings.
Speaker 1: The Jameson Raid, as it was known, was was very
Speaker 1: high profile diplomatic issue. Swanson was was very proud of
Speaker 1: his he's role in that bringing Jameson and the raiders
Speaker 1: to justice. I've described that in a moment that I
Speaker 1: know that Donald's grandson Jim always made special point that
Speaker 1: this was an international diplomatic situation that his grandfather had
Speaker 1: been involved in UM bringing bringing to a conclusion, But
Speaker 1: basically it was. It was later part of his career,
Speaker 1: but it was a good example of cooperation between multiple
Speaker 1: police forces and overseas extradition. Basically in Diamond Magnet and
Speaker 1: British nationalists Acessil. Rhodes, who had been basically annexing large
Speaker 1: areas of South Africa UM had his eye on on
Speaker 1: the South African Republic, which is a large independent country
Speaker 1: UM formerly known as a Transfile and it was governed
Speaker 1: by the President Paul Krueger. Large quantities of gold have
Speaker 1: been discovered in which thousands, which caused thousands of many
Speaker 1: British immigrants called Outlanders, who were tolerated by Kruger thanks
Speaker 1: to the taxes they had to pay on any goal
Speaker 1: that they uncovered. But Rhodes was envious and wanted this land,
Speaker 1: and he devised the plan whereby arms and money would
Speaker 1: be provided to the outlanders in order to provoke an
Speaker 1: armed uprising by these settlers, with the result of the
Speaker 1: overthrowing of the South African Republic government and an armed
Speaker 1: force of around seven hundred men under control of Dr
Speaker 1: Leander Jameson was to be placed on the Transfile border,
Speaker 1: ready to assist and support this insurrection. But things went
Speaker 1: badly wrong because Jameson badly ignored ignored orders to retreat
Speaker 1: and the result was that more than four hundred of
Speaker 1: his men were captured. President Kruger arranged for the prisoners
Speaker 1: to be transported to Britain and the rank and file
Speaker 1: men were packed onto the steamer called the Harlett Castle
Speaker 1: and then we met at Madeira by Scotland Odds Inspector
Speaker 1: Frank Frost, who was the officer that Swanson acted as
Speaker 1: a mentor too, in the same way that Williamson had
Speaker 1: done to him. Frank Frost would eventually become superintendent. Actually
Speaker 1: after Swanson um Frost, Frost met the ship at Madeira
Speaker 1: and took the details and more than two hundred men
Speaker 1: before the boat resumed its voyage to Plymouth. And waiting
Speaker 1: for them there was Chief Inspector Swanson who took a
Speaker 1: roll call of all the men and bordered the train
Speaker 1: with Frost and the troops. And when they arrived at
Speaker 1: London they were met by officers of the local elect
Speaker 1: f Division new Mont to Donward journey. Jameson himself and
Speaker 1: the fellow officers arrived in London three days later, and
Speaker 1: they were met there by Swanson who took them into
Speaker 1: his custody, and they knocked at Waterloo Pierre and then
Speaker 1: taken to Bow Street Magistrates Court, where they brought up
Speaker 1: by Swanson and charged with engaging an unlawful military expedition
Speaker 1: against her first South African Republic. The thirteen prisoners were
Speaker 1: eventually tried a month later and found guilty, Jameson receiving
Speaker 1: the month's imprisonment and the others short slightly shorter sentences.
Speaker 1: The ramifications of the failed road were potentially disastrous because
Speaker 1: tensions between the British and the Dutch, who owned the
Speaker 1: transfile similar for several years, culminated in the Second Boer War,
Speaker 1: and this animosity was exploited by Carls of Vilholmers second,
Speaker 1: who wrote to the President Krueger offering support. When the
Speaker 1: contents of this telegram was reported in British newspapers, the
Speaker 1: action was one of outrage in relations between Germany and
Speaker 1: Britain deteriorated, although Vilhelmer's second later wrote to his grandmother
Speaker 1: Queen Victoria, denying that his words were meant to stir
Speaker 1: real feeling against the country. The incident was a big
Speaker 1: enough friction between the two countries, which culminated in the
Speaker 1: First World War. So you mentioned earlier that we also
Speaker 1: have the Swanson marginalia to discuss. Um. Can you describe
Speaker 1: what this was and how it fits in with a
Speaker 1: pattern of Donald Swanson, How Donald Swantson read material and
Speaker 1: and expressed his starts, and then maybe how that marginalia
Speaker 1: itself became public. Donald Swanson died in four and all
Speaker 1: the papers and documents and possessions passed to his widow Julia.
Speaker 1: It's quite interesting that it became clear when I was
Speaker 1: looking through the um so I having documentation there wasn't
Speaker 1: an official bequest in a will or anything of any
Speaker 1: named items. The possessions literally just passed to the next
Speaker 1: of Ken and Julia. Julia in turn passed away UM
Speaker 1: and the couple's daughters Ada and Alice inherited the possessions
Speaker 1: and took them out of London to a cottage where
Speaker 1: they lived together for the next forty years. Um In
Speaker 1: this um pile of documents was a small library of
Speaker 1: crime books that Donald had had collected UM and it
Speaker 1: was it was this this this part of books that
Speaker 1: Donald's grandson, Jim Swanson, who was the nephew of the
Speaker 1: Voda analysts, UM, he basically inherited those books when Alice
Speaker 1: died in so this this is more than fifty years
Speaker 1: after Donald died. UM Jim cleared out of the house
Speaker 1: for it to be sold and moved into his own home.
Speaker 1: And when he was looking through the books, because I
Speaker 1: had an interest in in his grandfather's criminal career or
Speaker 1: police career, I should say from the found a number
Speaker 1: of annotations in in several books. Actually, people tend to
Speaker 1: think that the Swantson Marginalia was the only incidents of
Speaker 1: Donald Swantson write any thought, his thoughts or corrections. And
Speaker 1: some people have said, well, that's a bit strange. Why
Speaker 1: would you specifically only comment on that particular case. But
Speaker 1: it's not, it's not. It's not the case. There were
Speaker 1: several um examples of we'll call Swanson marginalia UM. But
Speaker 1: it was in M. Robert Anderson's autobiography The Light Aside
Speaker 1: of My Official Life, in which he talks about Jack
Speaker 1: the Ripper, Polish juice suspect Um that has some quite
Speaker 1: revealing annotations, and because Jim was so proud of his
Speaker 1: grandfather's work. He was He was twelve when Donald died,
Speaker 1: so he knew him quite well and and always said
Speaker 1: that right up till he's death at the age of
Speaker 1: seventy six, Donald retained your these mental faculties. He's mind
Speaker 1: was a shop as a rapier. The one thing he
Speaker 1: did have was was a hand tremor um, which you
Speaker 1: know obviously he's like a thing which happens to quite
Speaker 1: a lot of people as they getting into this into
Speaker 1: their older age. But Jim decided he wanted to try
Speaker 1: and get some recognition for his grandfather's career, and a
Speaker 1: few months after discovering the margin earlier, he wrote to
Speaker 1: the Sunday newspaper The News of the World, offering the
Speaker 1: information in the margin alia. And then his papers sent
Speaker 1: their chief crime reporter, Charles Sandel, to interview Jim m
Speaker 1: and we we did find um research and then keep
Speaker 1: Skinner found a draft of this of this unused article,
Speaker 1: as it turned out by Sandel, in the files of
Speaker 1: the Crime Museum at Scotland Yard. So although there was
Speaker 1: a there was an article written, it didn't appear, and
Speaker 1: again we don't we don't really know why, but we
Speaker 1: we can surmise that it was a time where the
Speaker 1: Yorkshire Ripper trial was happening, so that that obviously ran
Speaker 1: in in the British press quite heavily. It was leading
Speaker 1: to the marriage of Prince Charles and Lady Diana, that
Speaker 1: took up a lot of column inches. So looking at
Speaker 1: the unused report story by Sandel, it just appears he
Speaker 1: couldn't find enough on the suspect to make it work
Speaker 1: into a story. So it wasn't really until the centenary
Speaker 1: of the Ripper murders were approaching. But in October night
Speaker 1: eight seven, Jim contacted a different news both of their
Speaker 1: Daily Telegraph and the story was finally published and it
Speaker 1: revealed the sense of the marginalia two Ripper researchers and
Speaker 1: the world more widely. Would you describe the marginali and
Speaker 1: a little more detail and how it influenced thinking about
Speaker 1: the reper murder sense since the centenary? What was the
Speaker 1: process for determining maybe that the marginalia was was genuine
Speaker 1: and how seriously it should be taken? Um I can
Speaker 1: ask that in one sentence, but I'm going to give
Speaker 1: you the background into the marginalias. It consists of, as
Speaker 1: I said, a number of penncilanizations that Donald has written
Speaker 1: alongside the printed word in Anderson's book, and specifically on
Speaker 1: on a couple of pages where Anderson writes about Um
Speaker 1: Jack the Ripper, the Whitechappel murders, and Um the prime
Speaker 1: suspect we called him, Anderson writes, I'll merely add here
Speaker 1: that the only person who ever had a good good
Speaker 1: view of the murderer unhesitatingly identified the subspec at the
Speaker 1: instant he was confronted with him that refused to give
Speaker 1: evidence against him, and Swanson's written underneath in a purple pencil.
Speaker 1: And the reason I'm turning to the color of the
Speaker 1: pencil is important because it's helpful in the later testing
Speaker 1: of the marginalia. Swanson wrote because the suspect was also
Speaker 1: a Jew, and also because his evidence would convict the
Speaker 1: suspect and witness would be the means of the murder
Speaker 1: of being hanged, which he did not wish to be
Speaker 1: left on his mind. D. S. S. And then some
Speaker 1: later day, using a different gray pencil, Swanson's underlined Anderson's
Speaker 1: comment identified the suspect. He was confronted with him and
Speaker 1: his own comment also a jew and added in the
Speaker 1: left hand margin. And after this identification, which suspect knew,
Speaker 1: no other murder of this kind took place in London.
Speaker 1: And elaborating on the end paper UM Swanson, Swanson wrote,
Speaker 1: continue from page hundred thirty eight. After the subspect had
Speaker 1: been identified at the Seaside home where had been sent
Speaker 1: by us with difficulty in order to subject subject him
Speaker 1: to identification he knew was identified on the suspect's returned
Speaker 1: to his brother's house in Whitechapel. He was watched by
Speaker 1: police City c I D by day and night. In
Speaker 1: a very short time, the suspect with his hands tied
Speaker 1: beyond his back. He was sent to Stephney Workhouse and
Speaker 1: then to Colney Hatch and he died shortly afterwards. Because
Speaker 1: Minsky was the suspect d s S. So I'm mentioning
Speaker 1: that he's initialed these points because again that was an
Speaker 1: important aspect in UM, proving that the genuineness of the
Speaker 1: the marginalia. But since these these comments were first made
Speaker 1: public in the Telegraph, UM researchers have been trying to
Speaker 1: get to the bottom of Swampson's claims, which is where
Speaker 1: was the seaside home, who was the witness in the identification,
Speaker 1: and of course who was kause Minski. But because the
Speaker 1: definity answers to these questions have yet to be found UM,
Speaker 1: some people have claimed that the Marginalia might not be genuine,
Speaker 1: and in two thousand and six, when the Swanson family
Speaker 1: loaned the book to Scotland Yard's Crime Museum, it was
Speaker 1: sent to the METS Forensic Science Service for examination and
Speaker 1: using a leegend known to be written by Swanson put
Speaker 1: in black ink rather than pencil. Dr Christopher Davies of
Speaker 1: the Forensicy Department concluded there strong evidence that the Marginalia
Speaker 1: had been written by Donald Swanson, stating that he might
Speaker 1: be able to reevaluate his opinion if he were to
Speaker 1: compare against more contemporary writings by Swanson in pencil. So
Speaker 1: when when I began my research is back in two
Speaker 1: thousands and twelve and access to the family archive. I
Speaker 1: discovered letters written by Swanson into the last years of
Speaker 1: his life UM and his personal address book, and they
Speaker 1: all displayed evidence of the shaking hand commented on by
Speaker 1: Dr Davies, and Swanson actually writes he's got a hand
Speaker 1: tremor so he can't continue writing one particular letter to
Speaker 1: it to her grandson. UM I managed to contact Dr
Speaker 1: Davis and asked if you'd be willing to take another
Speaker 1: look at the MARGINALI lookates his new samples, and I
Speaker 1: was very pleased that he agreed to do so, and
Speaker 1: as a result, the conclusion was upgraded to very strong
Speaker 1: evidence the MARGINALI had been written by Swanson. Um And
Speaker 1: off the record, Dr Davies said, this is the closest
Speaker 1: we'd ever get in official report to an absolute certainty.
Speaker 1: But as far as he was concerned that the Marginalia
Speaker 1: was written by Swanson. And then when it comes to
Speaker 1: the substance of those comments themselves, both well, both by
Speaker 1: Anderson and the pages of the book and Swanson on
Speaker 1: the margins um they're discussing a suspect, and and Swanson
Speaker 1: names him because Minsky and I suppose the question is detectives.
Speaker 1: You know, Anderson and Swanson sharing a suspect, does it
Speaker 1: require that we follow their conclusions? Do we go do
Speaker 1: we in our own minds go from? Because mins this
Speaker 1: the suspect of Chrisminsky the murderer. How much weight do
Speaker 1: you personally give to Swanson and and Anderson's identification of
Speaker 1: a suspect. I think it's um, it's it's very difficult
Speaker 1: to evaluate um Swanson Andson based on what he's what
Speaker 1: he's probably the the more recent acceptance of the marginalia
Speaker 1: because the only Kasminski that fight that has been found
Speaker 1: in all this time that seems to fit Swanson's comments,
Speaker 1: but not all of them. He's Aaron Kasminski found by
Speaker 1: Martin Fido. Um, we're back in actually, but he Aaron
Speaker 1: Kasminsky didn't die soon after being in cost writed in
Speaker 1: Colony Hatcher, Swanson writes, and he wasn't arrested. Anderson seems
Speaker 1: to be quite clear that the suspect was identified soon
Speaker 1: after the murder of Mary Kelly. Um Swanson doesn't correct
Speaker 1: Anderson's comment that Mary Kelly was the last White Chapel
Speaker 1: lost true Whitechappel murder. So people today said, I think, well,
Speaker 1: kause Minski definitely was Aaron Kosminski. But how can we
Speaker 1: fit a square shaped Aaron Cosmnski into a triangle shaped
Speaker 1: Swanson marginalia. It doesn't work. So Swanson and Anderson, we
Speaker 1: weren't that they weren't that strong in their convictions, that
Speaker 1: because Minsky was the killer, maybe it's just another suspect um.
Speaker 1: So he tends to be dismissed based on that. But
Speaker 1: Anderson himself seems very confident that his Polish Jew was
Speaker 1: the murderer, although he doesn't name because Minsky. He says,
Speaker 1: I'm almost tempted to disclose your identity of the murderer.
Speaker 1: So as far as he was concerned them, the Polish
Speaker 1: Jew who was identified by the witness who refused to
Speaker 1: give evidence was Jack the ripper. Swanson is more restrained
Speaker 1: and refers to him as the suspect in the marginalia.
Speaker 1: And yet he does say that the witness refused to
Speaker 1: testify because he didn't want his evidence to be the
Speaker 1: cause of the murderer being hanged. So you know, there's
Speaker 1: a case that it could be claimed that the ultra
Speaker 1: professional policeman Swanson was using the correct terminology of the
Speaker 1: policeman who is a suspect until charge and convicted when
Speaker 1: he become a murderer. That's one liner thinking, But I
Speaker 1: think we need to consider Swanson's habit of correcting printed statements.
Speaker 1: In other examples of marginalia because you know, these notes
Speaker 1: were written for his own personal use. They were never
Speaker 1: intended to be what are seen by the public or
Speaker 1: for certainly not for publication. And I feel if he
Speaker 1: disagreed with Anderson um any of Anderson's written comments he
Speaker 1: would have made, he'd have made a comment, as he
Speaker 1: does with with other suggestions in other books. He doesn't
Speaker 1: challenge Anderson's claim that the last trooper of the victim
Speaker 1: was Kelly. He doesn't or no. That the killer was
Speaker 1: a Polish Jew was a definitely ascertained fact, and it
Speaker 1: just leads me to believe that Swanson probably also believed
Speaker 1: because Minsky to beach at the ripper rather than just
Speaker 1: another suspect. After all, he was the one officer who
Speaker 1: saw every scrap of evidence and report, and you have
Speaker 1: to assume that he knew more than anybody m MHM.
Speaker 1: In in the final chapter of your book, Swanson, you
Speaker 1: write the Donald Swanson epitomized the evolving Victorian detective, representing
Speaker 1: that era in the force's history. Would you offer a
Speaker 1: few a few comments along those lines for our listeners.
Speaker 1: How was it that Swanson was really the epitome of
Speaker 1: a detective in that time. As I mentioned at the
Speaker 1: beginning of the conversation, the thirty five year period in
Speaker 1: which Swanson served was nearly of great advances in in
Speaker 1: the methods of detection and forensics, and his story from
Speaker 1: the humble Bobby on the beat to return a superintendent
Speaker 1: of the c i d A Scotland Yard, it neatly
Speaker 1: mirrors the evolution of policing from a time when they
Speaker 1: were using initially the most rudimentary equipment such as rattles
Speaker 1: and Cutlassy is not even having whistles at that point
Speaker 1: to the earlier twentieth century when he retired and the
Speaker 1: forced adopted fingerprint evidence and forensic detection was changed forever.
Speaker 1: M you've mentioned that your next project is going to
Speaker 1: be on the coroner who was so significant in the
Speaker 1: inquests and investigating this case throughout, Win Baxter. UM. Would
Speaker 1: you have a few minutes to talk with us about
Speaker 1: Win Baxter, who he was, and what you're learning about
Speaker 1: him as you research him more. Well, I think, as
Speaker 1: you said Carla at the beginning of the conversation, UM,
Speaker 1: you'd found my UM article. It was probably just magazine
Speaker 1: on back, so that was written back in two thousand
Speaker 1: and five. I think, which is quite scary to think
Speaker 1: about that that really was a sort of precursor perhaps
Speaker 1: to my research model on the Swanson book, because now,
Speaker 1: again you know, people before that article appeared, perhaps all
Speaker 1: Baxter has just always a fussy coroner. He's a busy
Speaker 1: body who has like to get his name in the
Speaker 1: papers and and things like that. And I thought, well, again,
Speaker 1: there's got to be more in this guy's background. Gives
Speaker 1: some context to the way he conducted the inquest. What
Speaker 1: did he do in his professional life because the coroner's
Speaker 1: obviously they although they received money for each inquest they
Speaker 1: conducted that, that wasn't their full time job. They were
Speaker 1: they were doctors, or they were um solicitors back barris
Speaker 1: as that sort of thing um. And Baxter was was
Speaker 1: a solicitor first in Lewis Down near Brighton in Sussex,
Speaker 1: where he first became a coroner. I think he was
Speaker 1: probably in the early in his early twenties, so he
Speaker 1: was quite young when he took on that position. And
Speaker 1: as a quite a nice story that I dug out
Speaker 1: for the for the book on Swanson, where the former
Speaker 1: coroner had had served at the Sussex for a number
Speaker 1: of years. But he was forced to give up the
Speaker 1: role in disgrace because he had been embezzling funds from
Speaker 1: from some some widow, some rich widow who being trusted
Speaker 1: him with several thousand pounds. And again that that that's
Speaker 1: a nice story which gives a little bit of understanding
Speaker 1: how Baxter came to the job. But um, when I
Speaker 1: was researching for that two thousands of five articles, Uh,
Speaker 1: there's there's enormous amount of information locally and Lewis about
Speaker 1: the Backster family. Heat One of his uncles, George Backster,
Speaker 1: was very famous artist, color color print maker, one probably
Speaker 1: one of the first artists who had color prints made
Speaker 1: of his work. His father Wind Backs as far grandfather
Speaker 1: John was very famous in Sussex and around the whole area.
Speaker 1: They had the first um mobile library lending out books.
Speaker 1: They became a publish in the area and in facts,
Speaker 1: Baxter's down in Lewis is still one of the largest
Speaker 1: employers in the area. They owned several of the until
Speaker 1: recent years of the Sussex newspaper. So there's there's quite
Speaker 1: a lot. There's quite a lot in wind Baxter's background
Speaker 1: that you know, you think, well, he obviously understood from
Speaker 1: an early age with his grand fathers owning of the
Speaker 1: newspapers and the printing press and that sort of thing
Speaker 1: that let's let's rose the profile of the family name.
Speaker 1: He probably did like getting his name in the in
Speaker 1: the press. But UM, recognizing he had a few coroners
Speaker 1: positions in London after he had moved to the city
Speaker 1: in his in hislicitor's practice, Um, he was a deputy
Speaker 1: coroner of the City of London. Um coronership and another
Speaker 1: I think the South Middlesex may have got that wrong,
Speaker 1: the South Middlesex jurisdiction. But the going right back to
Speaker 1: an early question about what was the East End like
Speaker 1: and being poor and the poverty line and lots of
Speaker 1: disease and things. There obviously were lots of inquests needed
Speaker 1: in that area. So that was for a coroner that
Speaker 1: coronership area jurisdiction of the East Middlesex, which covered White
Speaker 1: chap in the East End, was was you know, um,
Speaker 1: something that they all aspired to because there were so
Speaker 1: many inquests into natural deaths, um violent deaths that there
Speaker 1: was quite a lot of money to be made looking
Speaker 1: at it from from a purely economic view. UM. So
Speaker 1: back to pulled out all the all the stops really
Speaker 1: when he went when he went up for the candidacy
Speaker 1: um in ad and six when it when it came along,
Speaker 1: he put lots of adverts in the newspaper, sort of
Speaker 1: trying to get attracting the votes and that sort of thing. Um. Interestingly,
Speaker 1: when when the first vote was cast it seemed he
Speaker 1: had been beaten into second place by Roderick McDonald, who
Speaker 1: who later conducted the inquest into Mary Kelly's death. But
Speaker 1: backstas Um supporters who were there at the count made
Speaker 1: such a noise and cause such a problem that the
Speaker 1: count couldn't be conducted, so they had to redo the
Speaker 1: vote load of date and of course backs to one
Speaker 1: quite consider read by on that occasion. So he's a
Speaker 1: very interesting character um. And in terms of the Ripper
Speaker 1: Inquest that he presided over, I don't think that he
Speaker 1: was fussy or or overstated. I think he or flashy,
Speaker 1: as he's been described in some books. I think he
Speaker 1: was more of a conscientious um. He wouldn't officer, he
Speaker 1: wouldn't take any nonsense. He didn't let a witness off
Speaker 1: lightly if they didn't give the evidence they had been
Speaker 1: called to give. So I think he was just looking
Speaker 1: to get the biggert the most full story, you know,
Speaker 1: as as each case deserved really um. And he stayed
Speaker 1: in in that position until he actually died in he
Speaker 1: had a he had an attack in the in the
Speaker 1: after an inquest in he'd been in position for about
Speaker 1: twenty four years and conducted over ten inquests, it was
Speaker 1: estimated at that time. And this goes right from before
Speaker 1: the Ripper time up to First World War spies, the
Speaker 1: elephant man Joseph Merrick died in Whitechapel right up through
Speaker 1: two Hounds each murders. Churchill was palty give evidence on
Speaker 1: the inquest. So there's an enormous scope not just in
Speaker 1: Baxter's personal life, but the context and the content of
Speaker 1: the inquest. It wass aided over again a bit like
Speaker 1: Swanson with the UH the evolution of the met. I
Speaker 1: think there's a big slice of history covered by wind
Speaker 1: backs to be in the coroner for these Middle Sex,
Speaker 1: which I think we'll make for a fascinating story anyway,
Speaker 1: Well we will. I'm eager for that book. I'm looking
Speaker 1: forward to to reading that. Um. Well, Adam, thank you
Speaker 1: again so much for joining used and and sharing your work. Uh,
Speaker 1: this is brilliant, and I hope we'll send many listeners
Speaker 1: to your book and your future book. I'm really excited
Speaker 1: for that. I'm glad you were able to share with
Speaker 1: us that you're working on that project. Baxter is such
Speaker 1: an interesting figure and to really have a detailed exploration
Speaker 1: of his life would be would be brilliant, So I
Speaker 1: totally agree and probably never get the chance to get
Speaker 1: around to it. But beyond that, I was also thinking
Speaker 1: about a biography of Dr Bond would be an interesting
Speaker 1: one week, and with such other such a long career,
Speaker 1: but there's always there's never enough time to do all
Speaker 1: this sort of research and writing. That's it for this
Speaker 1: week's episode of Unobscured. Stick around after this short sponsor
Speaker 1: break for a preview of what's in store for next week.
Speaker 1: One of his great answers in the book is one
Speaker 1: day lining up to place her bet and behind her
Speaker 1: incomes a top with a top hat, a rich guy
Speaker 1: for some reasons in the area, and stands behind her
Speaker 1: to place his bet. And some of the local lads
Speaker 1: who are in there think this is an opportune to
Speaker 1: here for a bit of mischief, so they reached around
Speaker 1: said tough and they pinch aunt is bossom. Now she
Speaker 1: does not ask any questions at this point, by the way,
Speaker 1: she just wheels round leading with her fist and knocks
Speaker 1: the bloke out with one punch. So one good right
Speaker 1: hook and this port off top half doubtless flying across
Speaker 1: the blades floor is spark out on the floor, So
Speaker 1: that tells you how violent. You know, how dangerous life
Speaker 1: was for women. They had to be prepared to come
Speaker 1: out fighting and no questions asked. Unobscured was created by
Speaker 1: me Aaron Manky and produced by Matt Frederick, Alex Williams,
Speaker 1: and Josh Thane in partnership with I Heart Radio. Research
Speaker 1: and writing for this season is all the work of
Speaker 1: my right hand man Carl Nellis and the brilliant Chad
Speaker 1: Lawson composed the brand new soundtrack. Learn more about our
Speaker 1: contributing historians, source material and links to our other shows
Speaker 1: over at History on a skewed dot com, and until
Speaker 1: next time, thanks for listening. Unobscured is a production of
Speaker 1: I Heart Radio and Aaron Menkey. For more podcasts for
Speaker 1: my heart Radio, visit I heart Radio, app, Apple Podcasts,
Speaker 1: or wherever you listen to your favorite shows, h