Jack The Ripper - Mark Whitehead [27]
However, following Openshaw’s supposed verdict, Lusk’s group took the parcel to Inspector Abberline. The Met sent it to the City branch where it was examined by Dr Gordon Brown. Brown’s report has not survived and so all information about the kidney comes from surviving police reports. From these we learn that the kidney came from a human adult and that it was not charged with fluid (indicating that it had not been handed over to a hospital or medical school). The renal artery is about three inches long. Eddowes’ corpse retained two inches and the kidney had one inch attached. The right kidney was, Brown’s statement confirms, in the advanced stages of Bright’s disease and the kidney that Lusk received was in a similar condition. Most notably, of the surgeons that Brown consulted with, Mr Sutton of London Hospital (an authority on the kidney and its diseases) swore on his career that the extracted kidney had been preserved in spirits within hours of its removal, thus making it explicit that it had been removed at the scene. Organs destined for dissection would have been preserved in formaldehyde. Bodies of those dying from violence would not be taken immediately to the dissecting room but would await an inquest, held the next day at the earliest. Wynne Baxter would add a note of conjecture by stating that spirits of wine were the standard preservative for dissecting rooms.
Of the letter, a Miss Emily Marsh of 218, Jubilee Street, Mile End Road came forward to state that on 15 October she was in her father’s shop when a tall man dressed in clerical garb entered. Pointing to the vigilance committee reward poster in the window, he asked for Mr Lusk’s address. Miss Marsh showed him a newspaper that gave the address as Alderney Road, near Globe Road, Mile End. She read it out at the man’s insistence and he wrote it down. When he left, she asked the shop boy to follow him. They described the man as around forty-five years old, 6 feet tall and slimly built. He wore a soft felt black hat, a stand-up collar and a long black single-breasted overcoat with a Prussian or clerical collar turned up. His complexion was sallow and he had a dark beard and moustache. He spoke with an Irish accent.
It’s likely that this was the man who posted the kidney, for the address on the parcel was exactly what he’d copied down, with no street number, and some of the words (‘Sor’ ‘Mishter’) suggest an Irish accent. But whether this was the Ripper is another matter entirely.
The Lusk letter has been accepted as authentic by many theorists but, like so many positive things attached to the case, it remains inconclusive. In 1974, Thomas Mann (sic), a qualified document examiner, examined the letter. From the writing style and the types of errors in the letter Mann declared the writer to be semi-literate, rather than an educated person disguising their writing characteristics. Despite such expert testimony, we can still only assume that the letter to Lusk was written by the Ripper. The evidence appears weighted in its favour but it is by no means conclusive.
The Met’s investigation following Elizabeth Stride’s death was exhaustive. Along with the distribution of the Ripper’s two missives to the newspapers, 80,000 leaflets were deliv-ered to households and lodging houses in the area, appealing for anyone with information to come forth.The police presence continued to be bolstered by men from other divisions. The police detained at least eighty suspects and were watching the movements of a further 300, all follow-ups to information received. House-to-house enquiries were made and in many cases the premises were searched. Donald Swanson reported to the Home Office on 19 October 1888 that over 2000 lodgers were examined during this period. Sailors were checked by the Thames Police. All Asiatics were checked after a suggestion