Jack The Ripper Forums  - Ripperology For The 21st Century  

Go Back   Jack The Ripper Forums - Ripperology For The 21st Century > Motives and Reasons > 11. Political and/or Ideological

11. Political and/or Ideological “For the JDL leader Meir Kahane and his many fervent followers, any and all measures to further Jewish survival and welfare - including terror, dispossession, and murder - are entirely justified.” - Mark Weber

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 30th, 2007, 10:28 PM   #1
admin tim
Registered user
 
admin tim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 8,052
Default Jack the Radical

http://www.fee.org/publications/the-...e.asp?aid=3245
admin tim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2008, 03:17 PM   #2
Joe Chetcuti
Former Member
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On August 13, 1888 the Special Commission Act was passed. As a result, three judges were appointed to inquire into the truthfulness of the accusations that were printed against the leader of the Irish Home Rule Party, Charles Stewart Parnell.

"The passing of this measure was strongly opposed by the Liberal Party in the House of Commons."

You'll find that quote in this web link:

http://www.chaptersofdublin.com/books/General/phoenixmurders.htm

You'll probably find similar remarks which support that quote throughout published literature. Even though the London Times forgeries were supposed to have been the focus of this Judiciary panel, in actuality it was Parnell who was put under the gun. Wolf Vanderlinden once wrote, "The case was ostensibly against the Times, but it would be Parnell and his followers who would be on trial."

What I would like to know is did all of the members of the House of Commons get a chance to vote on this bill? In early August 1888, did London and Dublin newspapers engage in an ink campaign for the purpose of either supporting or defeating the passage of this proposed Act?

I'm curious to find out what the political atmosphere was like at the time of the August 8th George Yard investigation. I'm talking about the murder investigation that was conducted by an outspoken anti-Irish Home Rule member of the House of Commons named Hughes-Hallett.

If there are any folks out there who can throw some answers my way, feel free to post right here.
  Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2008, 04:53 PM   #3
Natalie Severn
Former Member
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Joe,
I have been meaning to rejoin the discussion on Parnell for some time but have been really busy lately getting together an exhibition of paintings.
All I know at the present time is that the Salisbury Government set up the Special Commission and that the bill to establish it was set up in July 1888.I know nothing about how it got through other than that the Salisbury Government set it up. Its main purpose was allegedly to examine the claims made by The Times Newspaper"s allegations about Parnell but as the Salisbury government knew that such an inquiry would be bound to take in the nature of the Land League,the circumstances in which it operated and the involvement within it of the parliamentary party [particularly they hoped ,the involvement of Parnell],it was clearly hoped that they would be able to turn the subject into a major indictment of the Irish parliamentary party,led by Parnell,and of the Liberal party-which still kept a close alliance with the Land League.
However,due to a brilliant cross examination by Sir Charles Russell [and much digging into the doings of Robert Anderson and co by Michael Davitt, Piggott was exposed as the likely forger of the Times letters.Pigott later confessed his role to the MP Henry Labouchere and explained how he had forged Parnell"s signature etc.So in fact it was The Times and Pigott who were humiliated,Pigott committed suicide a few days after his confession, and when Parnell reappeared in the House of Commons on 1st March 1889,everyone on the Opposition benches, Irish Nationalists and LIberals,led by Gladstone himself,rose to their feet to cheer him!However it wasnt the end of the story.
I will have some time over Christmas to look into all this further but at present its not possible due to other commitments.
Cheers
Norma
  Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2008, 06:23 PM   #4
Howard Brown
Proprietor-Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Eagleville, Pa.
Posts: 75,451
Default

Thanks very much to Nats & Joe for chiming in here..... undoubtedly two of the most well versed Ripperologists on the so-called "Irish Question" around.
__________________
To Join JTR Forums, Contact :
Howard@jtrforums.com
Howard Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2008, 06:33 PM   #5
Natalie Severn
Former Member
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I have just read the article,"Jack the Radical",and noted the authors insistence that the British have never gone for a disturbance to their way of life in a revolutionary way.I wonder then, what the writer makes of the English Revolution that began in 1642?
Parliament was totally overhauled, bitter battles were fought throughout England between the monarchy and aristocracy and the roundheads [Cromwell ] , and the English king, Charles 1st ,was beheaded in public.It wasnt exactly a peaceful affair all this was it?



Hi Howard, will try to give more time to the subject Joe is tackling over the xmas break--
Best
Norma
  Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2008, 10:07 PM   #6
Joe Chetcuti
Former Member
 
Posts: n/a
Default Good stuff, Nats.

Your point about how Salisbury's government set up the Special Commission is well taken. Take a look at this:


Who's Who of British Members of Parliament
Volume II 1886-1918 (Page 184)

Hughes-Hallett, Col. Francis Charles..."A firm but independent supporter of Lord Salisbury's government."


I am interested in knowing if Hughes-Hallett voted on the passage of the Special Commission Act. It was an Act that caused the Irish leader Parnell to get put through the wringer.

The August 11, 1888 NY Times reported that the bill had already passed through the House of Commons. I wonder what the exact date was when this bill passed through the House of Commons. And how close was this date to the August 8th George Yard investigation that Hughes-Hallett had conducted?

In the Aug 11th NY Times article, it was reported that on the previous day, Lord Salisbury had addressed the House of Lords in the hopes that they too would pass this bill.
  Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2008, 07:27 PM   #7
Natalie Severn
Former Member
 
Posts: n/a
Default

As far as I can tell Joe, Lord Salisbury barged it through after a lot of political arm twisting.It was on August 13th that it became as Act of Parliament. I suspect that the Salisbury Government had a big enough majority in the House for it to get through, since Gladstone"s liberal Government had not long fallen.So Hughes Hallett was ahead by 5 days in Georges Yard!
Cheers
  Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2008, 01:21 PM   #8
Joe Chetcuti
Former Member
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yes Natalie you're correct. Hughes-Hallett conducted an Aug 8th East End murder investigation five days before the Special Commission Act was enacted by Parliament. But my focus is on the fact that the House of Commons had already approved this bill before Aug 10th. But I just don't know the exact date in which the bill passed through the House of Commons. I've contacted the House of Commons information desk, and I asked them if they have a record of when the exact date of this approving vote occurred in their House. I also asked them if Hughes-Hallett is listed somewhere in their records as having casted a vote on this bill. It usually takes them a few weeks to get back to me.

After the bill passed in the House of Commons, Lord Salisbury took the bill to the House of Lords. On Friday Aug 10th, he pitched the bill to this upper House of Parliament. On Monday Aug 13th, everything had been accomplished and the bill was enacted. The Aug 13th passage of the Special Commission Act ticked off the Radicals, the Irish, and the Irish-Americans. The Act seemed to dignify the forgeries that Piggott had crafted against their Irish leader Parnell.

I'm trying to determine if Colonel Hughes-Hallett voted on this bill when it was presented in the House of Commons. And I'd like to know if the vote in this House occurred before or after the Colonel's Aug 8th George Yard investigation. All I know so far is that the bill was approved in the House of Commons before August 10th. I hope this Government information desk comes through for us. They've helped me out with Hughes-Hallett matters in the past.
  Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2008, 05:36 PM   #9
Howard Brown
Proprietor-Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Eagleville, Pa.
Posts: 75,451
Default

Joe:

They've helped you out before because you are such a smarty...this is good stuff,partner.
__________________
To Join JTR Forums, Contact :
Howard@jtrforums.com
Howard Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2008, 06:32 PM   #10
Joe Chetcuti
Former Member
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thanks Howard

If Hughes-Hallett did actually vote on this bill, I would say he probably voted in favor of its passage. You may think, "Hughes-Hallett was a firm supporter of Lord Salisbury and he was a Tory to the backbone. Of course he would have voted in favor of the passage of this anti-Parnellite bill."

But there was more to it than that.

Yes, from 1885 through most of 1887, it was a no-brainer that Hughes-Hallett would cast a vote in favor of the Conservatives. But by 1888 things had changed for him. The Colonel was in terrible need of money. His crooked financial agent was busting him, and the Colonel's marriage was crumbling. He was publicly disgraced because of a scandal, and he stated that he would gladly give up his Parliament seat. He was shunned by many of his fellow MPs, and he was publicly hissed. From what I've learned about this man, I'd say that you could have probably bought his vote in 1888 if the price was right.

Here is an e-mail message that I received from Spiro over a year ago. It fits well with this topic:


Hi Joe,

On the 14th of June 1888, which appears to be a critical time in your research, Louis Jennings (who was a journalist and politician) wrote a letter to Lord Randolph Churchill. In his letter, Jennings listed the twenty Conservatives who recently voted with the Radicals and with the Irish. Colonel Hughes-Hallett was one of the Torys named. The Colonel was known to cross the floor in Parliamentary voting during 1888.

(Nice work, Spiro.)


Did Hughes-Hallett cross up Lord Salisbury and vote against the passage of the Special Commission Act? Did he once again cross party lines in the summer of 1888 and vote in favor of the Radicals and the Irish? If he did, then he probably received a good healthy financial kickback for it, and the Colonel sure needed the money.

But my answer to all of this is no. I don't think the Colonel voted in favor of Parnell in regards to the Special Commissions Act. I think he supported Lord Salisbury on this matter and voted in favor of the passage of the anti-Parnellite bill. The Colonel usually opposed those who strived for Irish Home Rule.

But prior to this House of Commons vote, was Hughes-Hallett approached once again by the Radicals and the Irish? Did they make an offer that the Colonel rejected? I would really like to know if Hughes-Hallett turned down the Irish. And I'd like to confirm whether or not the Colonel voted on this anti-Parnellite bill before he commenced his Aug 8th George Yard murder investigation.

It may be a good idea to check the Ripper suspects list and search for a man who was known to have been under suspicion for his involvement with the advanced branch Parnell's Irish Nationalist Party. A Ripper suspect who publicly wrote that his innocence in the Whitechapel murders should be likened to Parnell's innocence.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mike Covell : Newspapers From Hull Vol. I & II Howard Brown Ripper Non-fiction 24 March 20th, 2014 01:42 PM
Jack The Ripper : Dialectic Of Enlightenment Howard Brown The Community's Collective Wisdom 7 September 16th, 2012 04:39 PM
Jack the Ripper Year in Review 2010 Mike Covell Editorials 0 December 6th, 2010 06:11 AM
The Steinfeld Collection Howard Brown True Crime URL's 0 July 25th, 2009 07:01 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10 Beta 2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright @ Howard & Nina Brown 2015-2022