Auction Catalogue

6 December 2023

Starting at 10:00 AM

.

Orders, Decorations, Medals and Militaria

Live Online Auction

Download Images

Lot

№ 647

.

6 December 2023

Hammer Price:
£4,800

The historically interesting Metropolitan Police group of three awarded to Police Constable W. Pennett, ‘H’ (Whitechapel) Division, who discovered the ‘Pinchin Street Torso’ on 10 September 1889, the last of the ‘Thames Torso Murders’ that took place in London between the period 1887 and 1889, at the same time as the Whitechapel Murders were being committed by ‘Jack the Ripper’

Jubilee 1887, 1 clasp, 1897, Metropolitan Police (P.C. W. Pennett. H. Divn.); Coronation 1902, Metropolitan Police, bronze (P.C. W. Pennett. H. Div.); Coronation 1911, Metropolitan Police (P.C., W. Pennett.) good very fine and better (3) £600-£800

William Pennett was at St. Dunstan’s, London, on 9 June 1852 and joined the Metropolitan Police at Great Scotland Yard on 14 April 1884. He served the whole of his period with the Police with ‘H’ (Whitechapel) Division, and retired to pension on 2 June 1913, after 29 years and 49 days’ service. He was subsequently employed at the Royal Mint.

The Pinchin Street Torso
At 5:15 a.m., on 10 September 1889, Pennett was on beat duty in Whitechapel when he discovered the torso of a woman, lacking head and legs, under a railway arch in Pinchin Street. The district was on high alert at the time, coinciding as it did with the Whitechapel Murders, and the following day the Commissioner of Police in the Metropolis, James Monro, forwarded a seven-page report to the Home Office regarding the discovery:
‘This street is close to Berner Street which was the scene of one of the previous Whitechapel murders [that of Elizabeth Stride]. It is not a very narrow street, but is lonely at night, and is patrolled every half hour by a constable on beat. The arch where the body was found abuts on the pavement. The constable discovered the body some what after 20 minutes past five on the morning of Tuesday [10th September 1889]... He is positive that when he passed the spot about five the body was not there... It may therefore be assumed that the body was placed where it was found some time between 5 & 5.30 am... Although the body was placed in the arch on Tuesday morning, the murder - (and although there is not yet before me proof of the cause of death, I assume that there has been a murder) was not committed there nor then. There was almost no blood in the arch, and the state of the body itself showed that death took place about 36 hours or more previously. This, then enables me to say that the woman was made away with probably on Sunday night, the 8th September. This was the date on which one of the previous Whitechapel murders [that of Annie Chapman] was committed ...’


Inevitably, there was speculation that this was another victim of ‘Jack the Ripper’ However, Munro’s report continues:
‘... If this a fresh outrage by the Whitechapel murderer known by the horribly familiar nickname of Jack the Ripper... this murder committed in the murderers house would be a new departure from the system hitherto pursued by this ruffian. I am however inclined to believe that this case was not the work of the “Ripper” ... Whereas, in the previous cases, the bodies had been mutilated, in this latest case there was no mutilation other than dismemberment, and there is no removal of any portion of the organs of generation or intestines... With the previous murders there were distinct traces of furious mania, the murderer having plenty of time at his disposal slashed and cut the body in all directions, evidently under the influence of frenzy... However, in this case the crime probably took place in the lodging of the murderer, and there is no sign of frenzied mutilation of the body, but of deliberate and skillful dismemberment with a view to removal... These are all very striking departures from the practice of the Whitechapel murderer, and if the body had been found elsewhere that in Whitechapel the supposition that death had been caused by the Ripper would probably not have been entertained..."
In conclusion, Monro stated that, " I am inclined to the belief that, taking one thing with another, this is not the work of the Whitechapel murderer..."