Veiled threat

It is common knowledge Sickert thought he knew who the Ripper was but because his suspect was a highly placed establishment figure and Sickert believed the murders were associated with the brothel-creeping progress of Queen Victoria's son - the Duke of Clarence, who died of syphilis - he dared not take his suspicions directly to the authorities.

There was talk at the time that the manner of the murders indicated the killer had surgical knowledge, which gave weight to Sickert's belief the culprit was Sir William Gull, the Queen's physician and a pal of Clarence.

Sickert's so-called murder paintings, which may or may not represent a murder scene, were, in fact, his method of pointing a finger at his suspect in a manner that would have precluded any action for defamation of character against himself.

Sickert did this in one painting of this period by depicting a picture on the wall of Queen Victoria with a gull flying above her head and, in another work, the man with a prostitute was said to bear a resemblance to Gull.

Sickert's suspicion was further strengthened by his knowledge that one of the Ripper's victims was directly connected to Clarence's circle, hence his assumption that the murders were to supress a Royal scandal.

In justice to Gull, as the result of more official files becoming available, most researchers point the finger at an American suspect whose visits to this country coincided with the murders.

Still, such a yarn should sell many books for Ms Cornwell, whom I understand has bought many of Sickert's paintings, which can only increase greatly in value as a result of such notoriety.

I am intrigued by the letter from Roy Brandon about the artist Walter Sickert and the Ripper murders of 1888.

During the Seventies, the late Stephen Knight wrote a book about Jack The Ripper, in which he proposed the Whitechapel murders were committed by Walter Sickert and Dr William Gull, Queen Victoria's physician, acting together from a cab. He also sought to link the crimes with the Freemasons.

An amateur "Ripperologist" myself, in 1993 I discovered this from an experienced art auctioneer, a friend now sadly dead.

I wrote to Colin Wilson, the well-known writer and criminologist, himself co-author of a Ripper book. I quote part of my own letter:

"For a long time when paintings by Walter Sickert have appeared at art auctions, they have usually been ignored by established dealers and bought, very cheaply, by Freemasons who took them away and burned them.

"Apparently this has been going on for up to 70 years and my friend was first told of it by a defaulting Freemason."

Mr Wilson does not himself believe the Freemasons had anything to do with the crimes. However, he described Sickert as "an extremely nasty and vain man, one of the most complete egoists who ever existed". Obviously a controversial character.

In recent years, I have read several new books on Jack The Ripper, each claiming its own particular candidate(s).

One author quite recently tried to connect him to Brighton, as reported by The Argus at the time.

One book said we may still learn his true identity. Perhaps he was a loner, not even suspected by his close neighbours.

I am sure Jack The Ripper will remain an evergreen mystery.

-Richard Halfpenny, New Road, Rustington