|
A Ripper Notes Article
|
This article originally appeared in Ripper Notes. Ripper Notes is the only American Ripper periodical available on the market, and has quickly grown into one of the more substantial offerings in the genre. For more information, view our Ripper Notes page. Our thanks to the editor of Ripper Notes for permission to reprint this article.
|
 |
Hyam Hyams: Portrait of a Suspect
By Wolf Vanderlinden
Photo provided by Stewart P. Evans
The theory that Jack the Ripper may
have been Jewish is not a new one. The
area in which the murders took place was
heavily populated by Jewish immigrants,
and between the years 1880 and 1886
some twenty thousand Jews from Eastern
Europe(1) swelled the existing numbers and
created friction between Jewish and non-
Jewish residents. Once the Whitechapel
murder series began non-Jewish residents
were quick to point a finger at these newcomers.
Indeed, the first suspect to catch
the public’s attention was described as a
Jew who went by the nickname of “Leather
Apron.” John Pizer, the man arrested
for being Leather Apron, was also Jewish.
In addition, at the height of the murders,
an hysteria-gripped populace was desperately
searching for answers to the murders
by blaming Jewish rituals and customs,
both real and imaginary. Besides, it
was widely thought that no Englishman
could be responsible for such brutal and
barbaric crimes.
These long held suspicions against
the Jewish residents of Spitalfi elds and
Whitechapel found offi cial support in the
Spring of 1910, when Sir Robert Anderson,
ex-Assistant Commissioner of London’s
Metropolitan Police CID and the
man who had been in overall charge of
the Whitechap el murder investigation,
wrote in Blackwood’s Magazine:
One did not have to be a Sherlock
Holmes to discover that the
criminal was a sexual maniac of
a virulent type; that he was living
in the immediate vicinity of
the scenes of the murders; and
that, if he was not living absolutely
alone, his people knew of
his guilt, and refused to give him
up to justice. During my absence
abroad the Police had made a
house-to-house search for him,
investigating the cases of every
man in the district whose circumstances
were such that he could
go and come and get rid of his
blood-stains in secret. And the
con clusion we came to was that
he and his people were low-class
Jews.... And the result proved that
our diagnosis was right on every
point.(2)
In a footnote Anderson added the
important information that “I will only
say that when the individual whom we suspected was caged in an asylum…” This reiterated
a claim Anderson had fi rst made in
print nine years earlier in the magazine
The Nineteenth Century(3) that:
…the inhabitants of the met ropolis
generally were just as secure
during the weeks the fi end
was on the prowl as they were
before the mania seized him, or
after he had been safely caged in
an asylum.
Here, therefore, was the astounding
news that a senior police offi cial claimed
that the identity of Jack the Ripper was
known to the police and that he was a
Jew who lived in the area of the murders
and who subsequently was “caged in an
asylum.” The problem, however, was that
the question of who was being referred to
was still left unanswered.
A clue did surface in 1959 when Daniel
Farson uncovered the “Aberconway
ver sion” of Sir Melville Macnaghten’s
now famous memoranda in which the ex-
Assistant Commissioner of Scotland Yard
CID, writing in 1894, stated:
I enumerate the cases of 3 men
against whom police held very
reasonable suspicion …. No. 2
Kosminski, a Polish Jew, who
lived in the very heart of the
district where the murders were
committed. He had become insane
owing to many years indulgence
in solitary vices. He had
a great hatred of women, with
strong homicidal tendencies. He
was (and I believe still is) detained
in a lunatic asylum about
March 1889. This man strongly
resembled the individual seen by
the P.C. near Mitre Square.
It became a general belief that “Kosminski”
was Anderson’s Jewish suspect.
In the late eighties author Martin Fido
began research to see if he could prove
this by attempting to link anyone named
“Kosminski” with the facts as they were
given by Anderson and Macnaghten.
Fido made an exhaustive search of
London asylum, infi rmary and pauper lunatic
records covering the years 1888 to
1890. He found a Nathan Kaminsky and,
eventually, one Aaron Kosminski who
might have been the same man, but ultimately
rejected him/them as the suspect,
endorsing instead a man named David
(or Aaron Davis) Cohen. He also found
intriguing information about a Jewish lunatic
named Hyam Hyams who recently
has been put forth by theorist Mark King
as a suspect in his own right.(4)
Hyam Hyams was born in Aldgate on
the 8th of February, 1855, to Fanny (née
Levy) and Solomon Hyams, listed as a cigar
maker in the 1871 census.
By the time of the 1881 census Solomon
Hyams was gone from the household
and Hyam, then aged 26 years old,
was living at number 29 Mitre Street,
Ald gate, with his mother, three brothers
– Barney, George and Morris – and two sisters
– Clara and Jane – and Jane’s husband,
John Abrahams. Hyam’s occupation was
listed as “fruiterer.”
Sometime after 1881 Hyam Hyams
married a woman named Rachel, and by
1888, the year of the Ripper murders, the
couple had two children – a son named
William and a new born daughter named
Kate.
At about 6:00 a.m. on the morning
of the 29th of December, 1888, Hyams
was taken in charge by a member of
the Metropolitan Police in Leman Street,
Whitechapel, and sent to the White chapel
Workhouse Infirmary. His condition
was diagnosed as delirium tremens (a disordered
state of mind usually accompanied
by hallucinations and terrifying delusions
brought on by severe alcoholism).
His address was given as 217 Jubilee Street,
Mile End.
Hyams was discharged after thirteen
days on the 11th of January, 1889, but was
readmitted to the Whitechapel Workhouse
Infi rmary some three months later
on the 15th of April, 1889. He was admitted
from 4 Bell Court Lane and listed as
being married, 34 years of age, and with
an occupation listed as a “General dealer.”
He was also listed as having a “weak
mind.” He was transferred that same day
to the Colney Hatch Lunatic Asylum and
arrived “under restraint and in a noisy condition.”
At Colney Hatch he was described
as “violent and dangerous (especially to wife).
Injured mother’s head with chopper when attacking
his wife. Epileptic and irritable after
fi ts. Addicted to drink.”
On the 30th of August, 1889, after
four and a half months, Hyams was discharged
from Colney Hatch as being “recovered”
but only ten days later, on the 9th
of September, he was admitted to the City
of London Lunatic Asylum at Stone, Kent,
as an “insane person” after attacking and
stabbing his wife. Interestingly, he was
described as being the “terror of the City of
London Police.”
According to the case notes Hyams’
wife had stated that she had suffered four
mis carriages because of her husband’s
in creasingly deranged behaviour (he believed
that she was unfaithful to him) and
that for the past nine years he had suffered
from periodic epileptic attacks and
was becoming progressively more violent.
He was said to practise self-abuse (masturbation)
and was previously addicted to
drink. However, it was also noted that “at
times he was kind, civil and industrious, and
most attentive to his personal appearance
and grooming.”
Four months later, on the 4th of January,
1890, Hyam Hyams was transferred
back to the Colney Hatch Asylum(5) as patient
#10757. His case notes record “very
frequent epileptic fi ts and then very violent
and fi lthy. Otherwise quiet, but bitter against
wife.” Apparently these fi ts were cyclical
and Hyams would be well for about a
month then “on/off for a fortnight.” He was
described as a “crafty and dangerous maniac”
who “destroys his bedding and paints his
walls with fi lth, shouts the most obscene language
and practices self-abuse.”
His delusions concerning his wife’s
infi delity continued, and he suspected
that the Medical Officers at the asylum
were having affairs with her. He would
sing and cry and “hope that God would take
him.” At one point he asked for a knife
so that he could kill himself, but when
he was able to get his hands on a piece
of sharp steel he used it instead to attack
one of the medical personel by cutting
his neck, although not seriously.
Throughout his confinement Hyams
was described variously as being “violent,
threatening, noisy and destructive” and was
said to have attacked other patients and medical staff.
Hyams appeared twice in the 1891
census. He was listed as being an inmate
of the Colney Hatch Asylum (as H.H, 35,
cigar-maker, insane) and as also living at
40 New Street, Gravel Lane, Aldgate (as
Hyam Hyams, 37, cabinet maker). As Hyams
never again left Colney Hatch after
his confi nement in January, 1890, it is
likely that this was a bit of wishful thinking
on the part of his wife, who probably
dreamed that one day her husband might
be returned to her cured.
Hyam Hyams died in Colney Hatch
Lunatic Asylum on the 22nd of March,
1913. Epilepsy and cardio-vascular de gen -
era tion were listed as the causes.
It is easy to understand why Hyam
Hyams might be considered a suspect in
the Whitechapel murders. First of all, he
was a lunatic who became progressively
more violent as his mental state collapsed.
He attacked more than one person with a
knife. He was first institutionalized some
seven weeks after the Mary Kelly murder;
after which the murders stopped. He
was raised in Mitre Street, just off Mitre
Square where Catharine Eddowes was
murdered. Also Mark King states that Eddowes’
body was found immediately outside
the back window of number 8 Mitre
Street, a business run by a Mr. Taylor in
1888 but which in 1861 had been operated
as a cigar manufacturing business by
Hyam Hyams’ uncle, Lewis Levy.
According to the 1881 census and the
1884 London Business Directory another
of Hyams’ uncles, John Levy, was living at
and running a cigar manufacturing business
from 254 Whitechapel Road. It was
right next door to this address, on the
step of number 253, that Thomas Coram
found a long knife wrapped in a bloodstained
handkerchief the day after the
murders of Stride and Eddowes.
Moreover, when Hyam Hyams was
fi rst admitted to the Whitechapel Workhouse
Infi rmary in December of 1888 he
gave his address as 217 Jubilee Street, Mile
End. Right next door, at 218 Jubilee Street,
was a leather shop owned by a Mr. Marsh.
In October of 1888 Mr. Marsh’s daughter,
Emily, was minding the shop when a
tall, strange man, dressed in a long black
coat with either a Prussian or clerical collar,
entered and asked for the address of
George Lusk, the head of the Whitechapel
Vigilance Committee. The man’s actions
aroused the girl’s suspicions to the
extent that when he left she sent the
shop boy after him to follow him. Later
on, a man loosely fi tting the description
of the stranger was seen by Lusk watching
his house. This was followed by Lusk
receiving the so-called “Lusk kidney” in
the mail.
Of greater interest is the theory that
eyewitness Joseph Hyam Levy might have
known Hyam Hyams and his family. Levy,
who along with Harry Harris and Joseph
Lawende, saw a man and woman, probably
Catharine Eddowes and the Ripper,
standing next to the entrance to Church
Passage, which led into Mitre Square, only
minutes before Eddowes’ murder. Levy
stated in his inquest testimony that he remarked
to Harris “I don’t like going home
by myself when I see these sort of characters
about. I’m off.”(6) Theorists have wondered
what it was about this couple that frightened
Levy. Moreover, a newspaper report(7)
suggested that Levy “knows something, but
that he is afraid to be called on the inquest.”
These cryptic statements, along with the
information that in 1877 Levy had sponsored
a Martin Kosminski’s application
for British naturalization, has led some
to theorise that perhaps Levy had recognized
the man standing with Eddowes
and was afraid to come forward with this
information. This identifi cation is usually
connected with the
suspect Kosminski, but
King makes the case that
Levy must have known
Hyam Hyams and perhaps
recognized him as
the Ripper.
It is impossible to say
whether Joseph Hyam
Levy actually knew Hyam
Hyams or not. King
points out that the 1891
census lists Hyams’ mother,
Fanny Hyams, as having
moved into number
24 Mitre Street. This residence
had been owned
by Henry Lyons, the uncle
of Amelia Lewis, Joseph Hyam Levy’s
wife, and Amelia had once lived there
years before. Also Hyams’ uncle, Samuel,
was living right next door to the Lewis
family, according to the 1861 census. It is
diffi cult to prove, however, whether Levy
would have been aware of these tenuous
connections that seem, for the most
part, to have occurred more than twenty
years earlier. However, as both the Hyams
and Lewis families seem to have had
a long connection with Mitre Street, it is
always possible that Levy did know them
through his wife and her family, however
there is no concrete proof either way.
More importantly, there is no proof that
Joseph Hyam Levy actually recognized
the man he saw next to Church Passage
the night of Eddowes’ murder.
The same goes for much of the rest
of King’s theory. It must be taken as just
an interesting coincidence that Catharine
Eddowes’ body was found near the back
of a shop that had once, many years earlier,
been owned by Hyam Hyams’ uncle.
The knife found in Whitechapel Road
was never connected to the Ripper murders,
and Dr. Bagster
Phillips, who examined
it, felt that it was not
the knife used in at least
the Stride murder. Hyam
Hyams also did not fi t
the description of the
man who aroused Emily
Marsh’s suspicions in Jubilee
Street. The stranger
was about forty fi ve
years of age, six feet tall
and spoke with an Irish
accent. Hyams was thirty
three years of age at the
time, described as being
5 feet 7 inches tall and
probably spoke with an
East End London accent.
Finally, Hyam Hyams was not Sir
Robert Anderson’s Jewish suspect and, so
far, there is no existing evidence that he
was ever suspected by the police of having
been Jack the Ripper.
Much of the case against Hyam Hyams
can be dismissed or downplayed. On
the other hand, Hyams’ mental condition
– with violent attacks on family members
and health personnel, and time spent in
various lunatic asylums as this condition
worsened – cannot. He is exactly the type
of individual who should be investigated
more closely when searching for possible
suspects in the Whitechapel murders.
If the killer was not actually Hyam
Hyams, it was most probably someone
like him.
NOTES:
1) Friedland, Martin, The Trials of Israel
Lipski, Macmillan London Ltd.,
1984.
2) Blackwood’s Magazine, March 1910.
3) February, 1901.
4) See King, Mark, “Hyam Hyams,”
Ripperologist #35, June 2001.
5) Exactly one month after Hyam Hyams
returned to the Colney Hatch
Asylum Aaron Kosminski was admitted.
Kosmin ski was an inmate
with Hyams until the former was
transferred to Leavesden Asylum
for Imbeciles in April, 1894.
6) The Daily News, 12 October, 1888.
7) See the Evening News, 9 October,
1888.
SOURCES:
BOOKS:
Begg, Paul; Fido, Martin; Skinner, Keith, The
Jack the Ripper A-Z, third paperback edition,
Headline, 1996.
Fido, Martin, The Crimes, Detection & Death
of Jack the Ripper, George Weidenfeld &
Nicol son Ltd., 1987.
Morley, C.J., Jack the Ripper 150 Suspects,
self published, 2004.
MAGAZINE ARTICLES:
King, Mark, “Hyam Hyams,” Ripperologist
#35, June 2001.
Nelson, Scott, “The Polish Jew Suspect - Jewish
Witness Connection: Some Further Speculations,”
Ripperologist #53, May 2004.
