Jack the Ripper (16 page)

Tim Riordan discovered a story about how a Pennsylvania police department received similar disrespect. This was in regards to Tumblety's antics in Philadelphia during the summer of 1863. The doctor had an innocent man arrested, and jailed, for allegedly stealing a gold medal from his medical office. The Philadelphia Police Chief blew his top at Tumblety, after it was learned the whole thing was a hoax. The doctor skipped town when perjury charges were brought against him.
6

An unpleasant aspect of this study into Tumblety's life was reviewing the times he embarrassed the poor for his own esteem. A couple of reports showed he had developed a habit of randomly tossing money on the ground, as if he were feeding the pigeons. From ‘Recollections of a Police Magistrate' in the
Canadian Magazine
:

Looking at his hand full of [mixed coins] he said loudly, so that all the people in the shop might hear him, ‘How did I ever get that trash in my pocket?' [Tumblety] picked the gold out in one hand and walked to the door and threw the handful of silver out the door, across the sidewalk on to the roadway, where there was a scramble for it.

From the
Brooklyn Standard Union
:

The boys used to follow (Tumblety) for the money he scattered here and there… 

A demonstration of his superficial benevolence to the poor occurred in Buffalo in 1859. The doctor announced he would distribute barrels of flour to the needy at a popular gathering site downtown. A local journalist from the
Buffalo Morning Express
witnessed the event:

The crowd collected was very immense, and very little discretion was used in regard to the actual necessities of the poor. The whole thing, as our readers already know, was an advertising dodge, and reflects no credit on the originator.

It looked like Tumblety's distribution of flour fell under the old saying, ‘There is no greater treason, then to do the right thing for the wrong reason.' His gestures of aiding the poor came across as artificial. By the same token, his self-serving behaviour transcended class levels. When the doctor began his career in Rochester, he obtained the signatures of prominent citizens in the community. At first glance, it seemed he was seeking respectable names to endorse his personal character. Soon afterwards the signers found themselves tricked. Tumblety took the signatures to Canada and claimed they were endorsements of his ability as a medical physician. He knew no boundaries when it came to taking advantage of others, regardless of their position in society.

So far, we have looked at the man's behaviour toward religion, pious names, physically inflicted people, newspaper ads, young male adults, the military, the police, the poor, and the prominent. All we have seen is a relentless manipulator with no scruples. For whatever reasons, some found this man to have been an entertaining showman. It can't be denied there were editors at the time, who enjoyed spoofing him in their columns (Thomas D'Arcy McGee was one, for instance). Roger Palmer explained it well when he publicly wrote, ‘The 19th century press wrote him up as a buffoon because they had no other way of processing him.' Even today, there are people who admire Tumblety. They like reading about a man who boldly challenged authority and spoke up for himself. But, there are also those who loathe him for all the anguish he caused to others. You do not need to have a strong medical background, to figure out there was something seriously wrong about the man. To help pinpoint the disorder, we can turn to an item entitled ‘Profile of the Sociopath'. Some notes and traits have been have taken from the work and are listed here:

Pathological Lying:

[Sociopaths have] no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. They can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities.

Grandiose Sense of Self

Glibness and Superficial Charm

Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt

A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at the core. Sociopaths do not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities.

Incapacity for Love

Manipulative and Conning:

They never recognise the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviour as permissible. They appear to be charming yet are domineering. They may humiliate their victims.

Need for Stimulation

Shallow Emotions:

When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.

Promiscuous Sexual Behaviour / Infidelity

Callousness / Lack of Empathy:

Unable to empathise with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.

Parasitic Lifestyle:

They tend to move around a lot.

Poor Behavioural Controls / Impulsive Nature

Irresponsibility / Unreliability

Not concerned about wrecking others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. They do not accept blame themselves, but blame others, even for acts they obviously committed.

Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility:

They change their image as needed to avoid prosecution. They change their life story readily.

The notes presented here were not in any particular order, but they related well to the bullet points in the ‘Profile of the Sociopath'. More information can be found in Caroline Konrad's study into the subject. Under the heading ‘The Malignant Personality', she listed five features found in mentally ill people of this nature.

1. They are habitual liars.

2. They are egotistical to the point of narcissism. They really believe they are set apart from the rest of humanity by some special grace.

3. They scapegoat; they are incapable of either having the insight or willingness to accept responsibility for anything they do.

4. They are remorselessly vindictive when thwarted or exposed.

5. Genuine religious, moral, or other values play no part in their lives. They have no empathy for others and are capable of violence. Under older psychological terminology, they fall into the category of psychopath or sociopath, but unlike the typical psychopath, their behaviour is masked by a superficial social façade.

‘Profile of the Sociopath' was influenced by the work of Professor Robert D. Hare of the University of British Columbia. Tumblety fell prey to those descriptions and can be identified with many if not all of them. His malignancy can also be detected in Caroline Konrad's evaluation.

Some of the most cowardly and horrendous acts of exploitation were the senseless murders of Whitechapel prostitutes, in the year 1888. From the list of suspects, only one name was drawn out and commented on by a former Scotland Yard Chief Inspector. The name was Tumblety, and ever since those words from John Littlechild have been made known, Ripperologists have debated over whether or not this manipulative doctor committed these unforgettable murders.

If ever the day should come when new evidence enables us to declare Francis Tumblety innocent of the Whitechapel atrocities, certain Ripperologists will experience a feeling of satisfaction. The most content Ripper historians might very well end up being those who rely on modern day criminal profiling techniques. Many use this popular system as a beacon in their search for Jack the Ripper. No light shines upon Tumblety when the profiling methods of today are superimposed on the East End of London, in 1888. As Roger Palmer once said, ‘Tumblety runs 100 per cent counter to everything we are taught. Everything the Resslers are yelling from the roof-tops.'
7
Simply stated, after utilising offender profiling techniques, no student of this method will draw a conclusion about how a fifty-eight-year-old homosexual male killed and mutilated a handful of female prostitutes. Due mainly to his age and sexual preference, Tumblety does not come close to being linked with the current image designed for the Whitechapel fiend.

Conversely speaking, if evidence should arise resulting in a moral certainty to Tumblety's guilt in the Whitechapel Murders, then other Ripperologists would be satisfied; such as, those who respected the words of Inspector Walter Andrews, in December 1888, when he stated the Whitechapel murderer could be found among the current list of suspects. Tumblety was the best-known Ripper suspect in North America when Andrews came to Canada and shared his impressions.

Those who believed Inspector Andrews were not drawn in by the yellow journalism of the
New York Herald
. The pro-Irish newspaper wrote of how Andrews had come from England to engage in an illegal political enterprise. Some researchers simply did not buy into this. Instead, they sensed Andrews had voyaged across the Atlantic to gather information on the antecedents of Francis Tumblety; a task which was in accord with the Inspector's official duty of taking charge of the Whitechapel Murders investigation. This was a duty he shared with Inspectors Abberline and Moore.

As for the author, it is his belief that Tumblety was suspected as a Whitechapel murderer at a very early stage in the drama – as early as 7 August 1888, when the first East-End victim fell in George Yard. The suspicions against him did not arise from the police or the citizens of London. Instead, they came from a Royal Artillery Colonel who saw right through the phoney act his suspect engaged in. The officer took part in a military investigation of the George Yard murder, and revealed some of its details to the American press. The Colonel claimed his suspect was a phoney medical man and spiritually polluted. The correlation between Tumblety and the English Colonel, Sir Francis Charles Hughes-Hallett, is lengthy and requires its own chapter.

It is as true today as it was in 1888: those who understand Tumblety the best, are the ones who take him seriously. He was a Ripper suspect who was gripped by a lifelong malignant personality disorder. He was a manipulator of religion and a harmful exploiter of the vulnerable; a disturbed man who skilfully hit his targets without empathy.

  
1.
  National Archives, War Dept. records, File ‘B', Doc. 261, JAO

  
2.
  Nobody has located any official record of McClellan having issued that order, yet it is true Tumblety had a history of peddling questionable medical pamphlets. He mainly sold them in Rochester and Canada during the 1850s. The literature was of a sexual nature.

  
3.
  
Rochester Union
(5 April 1881)

  
4.
  Document 1769, Turner-Baker Papers, Record Group 94, Records of the Adjutant General's Office, NARA

  
5.
  
Brooklyn Citizen (23
November 1888). Discovered by Roger Palmer

  
6.
  Riordan, T.,
Prince of Quacks
:
The Notorious Life of Dr. Francis Tumblety, Charlatan and Jack the Ripper Suspect
(McFarland, 2009), pp.96–7

  
7.
  Robert Ressler coined the term serial killer in the 1970s. While working for the FBI, he was credited for establishing the methods of offender profiling.

Riordan, T.,
Prince of Quacks
:
The Notorious Life of Dr. Francis Tumblety, Charlatan and Jack the Ripper Suspect
(McFarland, 2009)

Tumblety, Dr F.,
A Sketch of the Life of the Gifted and World-Famed Physician
(Brooklyn: Eagle Printing Company, 1889)

Tumblety, Dr F.,
A Sketch of the Life of the Gifted and World-Famed Physician,
second edition (1893)

Evans, S.P. & Gainey, P.,
Jack the Ripper: The First American Serial Killer
(Kadansha, 1998)

‘Recollections of a Police Magistrate' in
Canadian Magazine
, Vol. 54 (Nov 1919–Apr 1920). Discovered by Stephen Ryder.

Brooklyn Citizen
(Courtesy of Roger Palmer)

Brooklyn Standard Union
(Courtesy of Roger Palmer)

Bucks County Gazette

Buffalo Morning Express
(Courtesy of Tim Riordan)

Daily Inter Ocean
(Chicago)

Evening Star
(Washington)

Morning Freeman

The New York World

Rochester Union

San Francisco Chronicle

www.casebook.org

www.jtrforums.com

www.mcafee.cc

Appreciation goes to Roger Palmer for sharing the illustration of Francis Tumblety. Special thanks goes to John Spanek for assisting in the technical aspects of this report.

Jack the Ripper was only the trade name, as he himself (or, more likely, someone ghostwriting his infernal letters) would have had it; but, from the very first, the day-to-day identity of the Whitechapel murderer was tantalisingly unknowable, occluded by the East End’s trademark peasouper, or otherwise lost to sight in the Minoan maze of its bloody streets. The sensational
sangfroid
of the culprit thrilled and appalled – the killer wandered the streets unsuspected by the police, committed homicides of astonishing audacity, and fled again, all unseen. His work was an anonymous, effortless reflection on the horror of chance, anticipating the mad juxtapositions of the dreamworld, shortly to be mapped by Freud, and the accidental, abstract semantics of Dada and Surrealism. When the scare died down, all that remained of the Ripper was his cognomen, a Saussurean
signifiant
detached from its
signifié
, the chief symbol of his popular terror. Behind the soubriquet, however, he seemed to have abandoned his mission as invisibly as he had taken it up.