The Jack the Ripper Location Photographs: Dutfield's Yard and the Whitby Collection (15 page)

Most people in the photograph look curious or bemused, but the Jewish-looking couple standing in front of the opened gates are both smiling at the photographer. The placing of the pair and the children in the middle (certainly the young boy) make it possible that they were the original individuals who were about to be photographed and that other people in the area, fascinated by a rich American tourist with a camera (perhaps akin to a film crew appearing in your street today), all crowded round to see what was happening and the photographer had arranged them in such a way that they could all appear in the photograph. It is a great shame that, given the copious explanatory notes presented later in the album, the photographer only titled this image as ‘Scene of famous Whitechapel Murders London’. Indeed, it is not until she hit mainland Europe that she started giving any account at all.

So, who could these people be? It is fortunate that this photograph was taken less than a year before the 1901 Census in the UK. The Census details for 40 and 40a Berner Street (thus covering Dutfield’s Yard, as the next entry is for 42 Berner Street) are nicely detailed and there are several possible identifications for the people in the middle of the photograph. All of them are Russian Jews.

Chris Scott’s work on the Census reveals eight households, of which one was a family without a male head and another was a couple without children. The named couples are Benjamin and Sarah Goldberg, Morris and Sarey Sherman, Samuel and Annie Simon, J. and M. Goldstein, Morris and Annie Ringold (without children), Nathan and Rebecca Freedman and Marks and Mary Klone.

The text under the Dutfield’s Yard photograph, from the album

From the list, the Shermans, Goldsteins and Freedmans all had a boy that could be the child in the middle of the picture (Raphel Sherman, five in 1900, so unlikely; Jack Goldstein, seven in 1900 and a possibility; and Barnett Freedman, nine in 1900 and also a possibility). The Shermans lived in 40 Berner Street and not Dutfield’s Yard. The Goldsteins would have been fifty-three and forty-nine at the time of the photograph, and in the image the woman appears to be in her thirties and the man perhaps about forty (though it can be very difficult to tell).

Nathan Freedman would have been thirty-four in 1900, and his wife Rebecca twenty-nine. Freedman was a plumber and he had three children; Joseph (fourteen in 1900 and listed in 1901 as a blacksmith), Barnett and Polly who was aged seven at the time – probably a little too old for the little girl in the centre, if she is indeed related to the other people.

The Goldsteins, however, whilst seeming older than the smiling pair by the gates, do have children that would fit this boy and girl. J. Goldstein is just listed as a ‘traveller’ in the 1901 Census and, besides Jack and four older children (three of them adults), there was also a daughter named Fanny who would have been five in 1900.

One further issue is that the boy may not be related to the smiling couple at all, and could be the child of the man in the shadows, who is looking in the boy’s direction. Of all the children listed as living in the yard in 1901, Jack Goldstein or Barnett Freedman are by far the best candidates.

As for the little girl, she (if resident) may be Leah Simon (six in 1900), Fanny Goldstein, or – less likely – Polly Freedman.

Of course, the Jewish-looking woman may be married to the man behind her in the shadows and not connected to the man in the apron in any way. It is only intuition that suggests any person in this photograph is connected to any other. The only thing that can be said with certainty is that the two men at the very back both worked for the cabinet makers and the three women in front of them almost certainly lived in Dutfield’s Yard.

If the smiling couple are married, yet not the parents of the two children, they could be Morris and Sarey Sherman, or Morris and Annie Ringold (Morris a boot-heeler and the couple aged twenty-nine and twenty-eight in 1900). Of these, the Shermans had six children so the Ringolds are more likely.

Further clues as to the man’s identity may lie in his apron. Samuel Simon was a thirty-nine-year-old greengrocer in 1900. If the little girl is Leah Simon, then it is very likely that the man in the apron is Samuel. The Simons lived at 40 Berner Street itself, not in Dutfield’s Yard. This would mean, however, that the little boy is not his son. It is perfectly possible that the smiling couple, the two children, and the man in the shadows consist of members of the Simon and Freedman families.

These appear to be the only people that may be tentatively identified. There is no obvious connection between any of the other people in the photograph, some of whom may not have lived at that address anyway. The two girls on the far left do not instantly look Jewish and may have just come out of the Board School directly behind where the photographer was standing (indeed, being close to midday, this could explain the two boys in the photograph as well).

Tom Wescott came up with an alternative theory. He felt the man in the apron by the gate could be Joseph Chaim Cohen-Lask, who rented the premises at the turn of the twentieth century and taught a Jewish ‘Cheder’ at the house. Cohen-Lask was an accomplished writer and his daughter later wrote an account of his life. Her name was Rachel Beth-Zion Lask Abrahams and, until research suggests otherwise, if Tom’s idea is correct then it is even possible that she is the little girl in the middle.

The murder spot after the removal of a modern flowerbed, April 2009
(Courtesy Tony Brewer)

The site of Dutfield’s Yard in the Harry Gosling School, 2009
(Courtesy Robert Clack)

Whether or not you believe Elizabeth Stride to have been a victim of Jack the Ripper, she nevertheless remains one of the so-called ‘canonical five’ generally regarded as being a Ripper victim. The Dutfield’s Yard photograph was a major discovery on several levels. Firstly, and most importantly, it is the only photograph of the location known to exist. Secondly, it was the last remaining location of a Ripper murder that had not previously been seen photographically, being limited beforehand to sketches and drawings in period newspapers. Lastly, though her identity remains elusive, our photographer may be classed – at present – as the world’s first known Ripper tourist. The tens of thousands of people who join guided tours each year to view the locations of the atrocities all follow in her wake, and she had no idea.

Delegates at the biannual Ripper Conference recreate the Dutfield’s Yard photograph on the exact spot, 25 October 2009
(Courtesy Gareth Williams)