Spring-Heeled Jack

Through the latter half of the 1830's, an urban legend began to take shape on the rooftops and in the foggy alleyways of London…

It was a cold, miserable September in 1837 for the residents of London.

The industrial revolution had led to a rapid increase in the size of England's capital city, as a result of people in villages moving to cities to try to find work, alongside immigrants from all over the world. It was known as the biggest, most spectacular city in Europe that was filled with countless opportunities, as many of the industries’ profits soared with the new machinery that could do the work of several people. However, the machinery meant that employers needed fewer workers, and the demand for jobs was higher than was available. Those that did find work found that the wages were barely enough to sustain themselves and their families, and yet people still flocked to the city to try for a better life. Overcrowding, poor sanitation and extreme poverty were plaguing London.

It was here that the rumour of a ghostly figure really took hold. With clawed hands, spring shoes and the ability to breathe fire, this mysterious being had people in London terrified to leave their homes after dark.

This is the story of Spring-Heeled Jack.

Five miles to the south west of the crowded capital city centre, in the village of Barnes, a rumour was beginning to spread. Villagers were talking about a ghost that had been attacking people around the area throughout September, with women being the more common target.

According to these rumours, the ghost was shaped like a white bull. This ghost soon travelled to a neighbouring town called East Sheen, although the people there claimed it had taken the form of a white bear instead of a bull. The attacks continued, and the appearance of the ghost changed once more as it came closer to the city centre. Witnesses in Hampton, 9 miles away from Barnes, claimed that this mysterious ghost was an unearthly warrior that was wearing polished brass armour, clawed gloves and spring shoes.

Although he wasn’t known by the nickname until 1838, Spring-Heeled Jack continued to terrify people as reports of attacks started to increase.

In late 1837, a carpenter called Jones was attacked by a ghost in armour, on Cut-throat Lane in London. According to rumours, Jones fought back but two more ghosts appeared and the man was severely injured.

As more people began to hear about this creature, fake stories began to spread, including a supposed attack on a vendor and a woman being frightened to death at the thought of meeting him – both were later discredited. According to The Morning Chronicle on December 28th, 1837:

"Some scoundrel, disguised in a bearskin, and wearing spring shoes, has been seen jumping to and fro before foot passengers in the neighbourhood of Lewisham, and has in one or two instances greatly alarmed females."

The newspaper also stated that people were referring to the attacker as 'Steel Jack.'

Despite all these alleged attacks, it wasn’t until the 9th January 1838 that the press became particularly interested in the story. The Lord Mayor of the City of London, Sir John Cowan, announced that he had received an anonymous letter about this supernatural being and the attacks in the area. According to the newspaper The Times, Cowan was unwilling to do anything to stop the attacks due to the fact that the attacks weren’t in his jurisdiction. He concluded that the letter was written by a woman who had lost her senses as a result of the rumours.

Although the Mayor had dismissed the letter, the announcement sparked a wave of articles from several local newspapers, with even the more reputable papers such as The Times reporting alleged sightings as news rather than gossip. The press would have pages dedicated to Spring-Heeled Jack, which only increased the overall paranoia of the residents of London and the outskirts.

According to The Times, in January 1838, servant girls reported that a blacksmith had had his flesh and clothes torn by a ghost with iron claws, and rumours of women having their clothes torn off and having violent fits began to be reported in several newspapers. The Morning Chronicle on the 11th January found that Mayor Cowan had received another anonymous letter, which stated that the culprit had frightened several people in Stockwell, Brixton, Camberwell and Vauxhall – all areas around the capital city – and claimed that some of the victims had died of fright.

By the 20th January, rumours and misinformation continued to be spread by the daily newspapers. According to The Sun, there were no ghosts but instead the attacks were done by a group of children that were connected to important families in the area. The newspaper claimed that £5000 – a huge £500,000 in today’s money – were at stake depending on how successful the group was, and that the objective was to, quote ‘destroy the lives of not less than 30 human beings’. However, no other newspaper reported on this theory, and it is difficult to know where The Sun got this information from, but it shows how the information in the newspapers ranged from troubling to outright bizarre.

The 20th January was also an important date for the mythology of this mysterious being. In The Penny Satirist, a local newspaper, it was the first time the name Spring-Heeled Jack was used by the press in connection with the ghost. Almost immediately, other newspapers began to use this name to describe the attacker, with large headlines mentioning the name to help boost sales.

Jane Alsop was an 18-year-old woman that came from a wealthy family. Some reports state that she lived with her parents, whereas others say that it was only her father. What is known, however, is that she had two sisters – Mary Alsop and Susan Harrison – as well as a brother.

On the 19th of February 1838, at around 8:45pm, Jane heard a loud knocking at the door and went to answer it. There was a man standing outside who claimed to be a police officer. When Jane asked what was wrong, he replied, “For heaven sake, bring me a light, for we have caught Spring-Heeled Jack here in the lane!” She went back into the house to grab a candle for the officer, which she handed over. As soon as he grabbed the candle, he threw off his cloak and put the candle to his chest, revealing a monstrous appearance. The stranger spat a blue and white flame from his mouth, and his eyes were described as resembling red balls of fire.

Despite her fear, Jane noted that he wore a large helmet and clothing that appeared to be a white oilskin. The attacker grabbed the back of her neck before tearing her gown with metallic claws. She screamed and tried to run away, but the man grabbed her once more and tore at her neck and arms with his claws.

Jane was rescued by one of her sisters, and the attacker fled. Due to the violent attack, Jane suffered multiple cuts and injuries, including on her neck, shoulders and arms. When a police officer arrived, Jane described the incident in detail, with her story being confirmed by other members of the household. Her sister, Susan, stated that her sister’s dress “was nearly torn off her, both her combs dragged out of her head, as well as a quantity of her hair torn away”. Mr Alsop also said that he believed that there was more than one person connected to the crime, due to the fact that the attacker never returned for his cloak and therefore someone else must have been with him to pick it up.

As a result of the attack, there was a huge amount of publicity, and with it came people offering financial rewards. Mr Alsop offered 10 guineas (approximately £1000 in today’s money) and Sir Edward Codrington, a member of parliament, offered a further £5 (around £525). This was also the first time the police really took an attack allegedly committed by Spring-Heeled Jack seriously.

There were two investigations into the Jane Alsop attack. One investigation was done by two members of the Stepney-based police, Superintendent Young and Inspector Guard. The second investigation was Detective James Lea, who was employed by the Lambeth Street police office and was reportedly considered the best detective in London at the time. Lea reported his findings to the magistrate judge on the 22nd February, stating that he believed that the attacker had been in the neighbourhood for close to a month before the attack and had been almost caught at least once. Lea went on to say, quote: ‘a person, answering precisely his size and figure, had been frequently observed walking about the lanes and lonely places, enveloped in a large Spanish cloak, and sometimes in the habit of carrying a small lantern about him’.

All three of the investigators agreed that Jane Alsop had certainly been attacked, but that the shock and fear had caused her to mistakenly describe his appearance. They concluded that it was nothing more than a ‘drunken frolic’ that had nothing to do with Spring-Heeled Jack and that the white oilskin and helmet was merely a white shooting coat and a cap with a peak at the front. These conclusions - that it was a human male instead of a supernatural devil-like creature - did nothing to stop the widespread fear around the capital, and reported sightings and rumours of people having violent fits continued.

However, on March 4th 1838, The Examiner newspaper reported that two men had been questioned for several hours at the Lambeth Street police station. According to the newspaper, on the 28th February, the officers made their case to three magistrate judges and a large crowd of people. The two men were called Payne – no reported first name – who was a local bricklayer and Thomas Millbank, a local carpenter. The police officers had found several witnesses who had been in Bearbinder Lane, where the Alsops lived, at the time of the assault, and they were called to give evidence, alongside Jane Alsop and her family.

The testimony of James Smith, a coach wheelwright, was seen as particularly important. According to Smith, he had been walking down Bearbinder Lane when he heard screams coming from the Alsop residence. He ran to see what had happened when he saw Payne and Millbank walking away from the house. Millbank was wearing a white hat and shooting jacket, which Detective Lea believed was the white oilskin that Jane Alsop had described. Furthermore, Smith claimed that he saw the two men later on in the evening. They noticed him, and Millbank grabbed the wheel that Smith was holding while saying “what have you to say Spring Jack?”

Smith stated that he asked the man to leave his wheel alone before quickly heading into the nearest pub, the Morgan’s Arms, but Millbank and Payne followed him in and went upstairs. Smith asked the landlord who the man in the shooting jacket was and was told that the man was called Thomas Millbank. When questioned about James Smith’s testimony, both Payne and Millbank denied attacking Jane Alsop and having the conversation with Smith, although Millbank admitted that he’d been so drunk that evening that he had no memories of that night. When asked, Jane Alsop and her sisters were adamant that the attacker was not drunk.

After hearing the evidence, the magistrate judges concluded that Millbank seemed likely but that further investigation was needed. The results of this new investigation were heard less than a week later, on the 2nd of March. However, the testimony did nothing but confuse matters further. According to a new witness, a shoemaker called Richardson - who had been in Bearbinder Lane at the time of the attack and had seen Millbank and Payne - had also seen who he thought were the two real suspects: a boy and a young man wearing a large cloak.

According to Richardson, the young man said something about Spring-Heeled Jack being in the lane, which he apparently said in a joking manner. This was considered suspicious by the police because they claimed that only Jane Alsop knew that the attacker had identified himself as Spring-Heeled Jack, despite the fact that this had also been reported in newspapers.

Another witness identified Fox as walking down the lane with a young boy. Fox agreed that he had walked down Bearbinder Lane on the 19th February but was adamant that he was not wearing a cloak at the time. As a result of the conflicting evidence, the chief magistrate, Mr Hardwick, concluded that he now believed that Millbank was innocent.

More investigations were requested, but it was never reported in the newspapers if anything else of note was found. The mysterious young man in the large cloak was never conclusively identified, and despite the brutal attack, no one ever stood trial for the attack on Jane Alsop.

Despite the increased publicity and police presence, Spring-Heeled Jack continued with his attacks.

Less than a week after the assault on Jane Alsop, on the 25th of February, Jack allegedly knocked on the door of 2 Turner Street, not far away from Bearbinder Lane. Mr Ashworth was the owner of the house, and his servant answered the door. Like with Jane, the man pulled away a large cloak and revealed what was described as ‘a most hideous appearance’. The servant screamed, and Jack ran away. The servant did note that there was an embroidered coat of arms with a W on the cloak, but it is unclear if the police did anything with this information.

Just days later, on the 28th, 18-year-old Lucy Scales was attacked. Lucy was the daughter of a butcher and had two siblings, a brother and a sister. According to her testimony, her and her sister left their brother’s house on Narrow Street to return to their home on the nearby Week’s Place. To reach their residence, they walked down an alleyway and saw a person standing in the passageway wearing a large cloak. As Lucy got closer to the stranger, he spurted a bright flame in her face that temporarily blinded her. She immediately dropped to the ground and had a violent seizure, which reportedly lasted several hours. Lucy stated that she’d originally assumed that the stranger was a woman because it appeared as though they were wearing a bonnet, but up close she realised that it was a tall and thin man. Her brother had heard his sisters’ screams, but by the time he found them, Lucy was already on the ground and the attacker had run away.

This information was presented in front of the magistrates. Lucy Scales explained that her sister would be able to describe the attacker in a more detailed way, but strangely her sister had been unavailable when the police officer had called and so her brother provided the account in her place. According to Mr Scales, Lucy’s sister had also described the attacker as tall and thin and that he had a ‘gentlemanly appearance’. He was carrying a small lamp with him, and had cast aside his cloak when Lucy had approached him. She also saw blue flames appear from his mouth and had been blinded by the light, but she covered her eyes and ran towards her sister. By the time she’d reached Lucy, the attacker had fled without saying a word.

Unlike with Jane Alsop, there was very little interest from the newspapers to report the case. According to Karl Bell, in his 2012 book The Legend of Spring-Heeled Jack, this was likely because Lucy Scales’ background was considerably poorer than Jane Alsop’s, and therefore her story would have been considered less reliable and less interesting to the press.

Despite the lack of public outrage, the attack was still investigated by Detective James Lea, and he visited the alleyway where the attack took place. He commented that it was the ideal spot to be able to observe anyone that was approaching. Detective Lea reportedly also watched an experiment at the London Hospital that helped to show that the blue flames weren’t proof of a supernatural being but rather a man able to create fire. As a result of the experiment, they concluded that Jack was able to create fireballs by:

"...blowing through a tube in which spirits of wine, sulphur and another ingredient were deposited and ignited."

Other investigators also questioned people that worked in theatre, including the proprietor of the Pavilion Theatre, Mr Farrell. Mr Farrell spoke as a witness at Lambeth Street police station and stated:

"...that the dropping of certain strong acids on a sponge charged with spirits of wine would produce such appearances as those described, and that the colour of the flame emitted would depend on the peculiar quality or description of acid."

The police were confident that they’d been able to prove how the flames were created. Due to the attacks on Jane and Lucy having both involved blue flames, Chief Magistrate Hardwick concluded that they were attacked by the same man. They just didn’t know who the attacker was.

In addition to having no real leads, the police had another issue on their hands: copycats.

According to the Morning Herald, on the 2nd March, a man entered the White Lion pub on Vere Street, told the landlady that he was Spring-Heeled Jack, and attempted to hit her with a club. Thankfully he missed and was quickly apprehended.

In another incident in March, Charles Grenville was charged with frightening a number of women and children. Described as being tall and thin, he donned a blue mask with bright lips and pretended to attack strangers. When caught, Grenville stated that it had merely been a bit of fun. Luckily for him, the judge agreed and the case was dismissed and he was let off with a warning to not do it again.

A third copycat attack happened in March, at 8pm on the 31st. Mrs Amsinck, who was described in the papers as ‘a most respectable married lady’, was walking with a friend when she was grabbed by a ghostly figure wearing a white sheet and a monstrous mask with a long beard attached. However, both women recognised the voice as the footman of a nearby house, James Painter. When they fought back, Painter fled but the women caught up to him. He was later fined £4.

Due to the copycats and false information, it was difficult to know which, if any, attacks were perpetrated by Spring-Heeled Jack. It appeared as though he had travelled away from the capital by April 1838, however, as The Times reported that a gardener in Sussex – around 70 miles from London – had been attacked by a ghostly bear. The bear had chased the man before eventually scaling a wall and disappearing. The Brighton Gazette reported on this incident as well, directly naming the perpetrator as Spring-Heeled Jack. The Leeds Mercury newspaper also reported that Spring-Heeled Jack was seen on the 19th May in Whitby on the north east coast of England, over 250 miles away from London. Like in Sussex, he was seen in a ghostly, bestial form.

After 1838, public interest in the mysterious figure seemed to wane, and newspapers were also losing interest. Spring-Heeled Jack was seen in various places around the country over the years, but these were often passed around through word of mouth and very rarely reported in the press.

In September 1845, such rumours of seeing Jack in Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, led to a brutal assault due to mistaken identity. According to reports, 50-year-old Thomas Purdy, who was suffering from pleurisy (plur-uh-see) (a condition where the membrane in the lungs becomes inflamed), stumbled out of his home in a delirious state and frightened a passing neighbour. A man by the name of Henry Noble heard the neighbour’s screams and ran to assist, and he claimed that he assumed that it was Spring-Heeled Jack trying to attack her. Noble violently attacked Purdy, and the man later died. Luckily for Noble, the coroner concluded that Purdy died of natural causes and therefore was not charged with murder.

Another death has been attributed to Jack, only this one was a murder. According to the legend, on the 12th November 1845 in London, a young prostitute called Maria Davis was attacked by Jack and thrown off a bridge where she drowned in the mud. However, this murder was never reported in any newspapers at the time, and modern researchers have never found any evidence of this occurring, such as coroner reports or police records. Experts on the history of Spring-Heeled Jack, such as Mike Dash, have concluded that it is likely that this attack was nothing more than a myth.

The rumours surrounding Jack continued well into the 1870s, including one where a ghostly figure was scaring soldiers at a British Army camp in Aldershot, Hampshire in 1877. The local newspaper Sheldrake’s Aldershot & Sandhurst Military Gazette covered the incident on March 17th. According to the report, a sentry on night duty saw a figure come towards him. When asked who they were, the figure did not answer and instead moved around the sentry box at an unnatural speed. The sentry shot at the figure with his rifle, but it had no effect and the figure ran away. A similar incident occurred with another sentry on duty, who also fired at the figure but apparently missed. According to the newspaper, the men around the camp had already concluded that this mysterious figure was Spring-Heeled Jack.

A month after the incident, it was reported that Spring-Heeled Jack had returned and had been:

"...kind enough to inform a gentleman the other night that his object is to frighten the British army."

Furthermore, The Times in April reported that Jack had slapped a sentry on the face several times before running away, wrestled with another sentry, and narrowly escaped apprehension when a group tried to hunt him down. Jack disappeared from the camp at the end of April 1877 but appeared briefly again over the summer, where he continued to frighten sentries and avoid capture. After that, there was no evidence or reports that he ever returned to Aldershot.

Jack’s last ever appearance was in Liverpool in 1904. According to reports, Spring-Heeled Jack leapt from building to building in front of hundreds of onlookers before disappearing. Despite this being accepted as Jack’s last ever appearance, another explanation for the event in Liverpool was discovered over 60 years later. Mrs Pierpoint, who had been a child in 1904, said that it wasn’t Spring-Heeled Jack but:

"... a local man slightly off balance mentally… He had a form of religious mania and he would climb on to rooftops of houses crying out: 'My wife is the Devil!' They usually fetched police or a fire-engine ladder to get him down. As the police closed in on him, he would leap from one house roof to the next. That’s what gave rise to the 'Spring-Heeled Jack' rumours."

Whether it was Spring-Heeled Jack or his name was simply attached to this figure due to local folklore, the mysterious being was never seen again.

There have been a few theories about who Spring-Heeled Jack could be over the years. A popular theory at the time was that he really was a ghost or devilish figure, and a more modern theory is that he was an alien creature that came to earth to terrorise people. Other theorists prefer a more human explanation: that Spring-Heeled Jack was a man, or made up of different men over the years, that used theatrics or science to frighten and hurt people.

The Marquis of Waterford, Henry Beresford, has been considered a suspect since the 1830s. He was infamous around London for his vandalism, his misogyny and using violence for his own amusement. It was also noted that he loved pranks and would do anything for bet. This behaviour led to him getting the nickname ‘The Mad Marquis’. Although he was a popular suspect, there was no hard evidence to suggest that he was Spring-Heeled Jack. There was the embroidered coat of arms with a W on the cloak seen by the servant during the Ashworth incident, and he lived in London at the time of the attacks, but Henry Beresford was never charged. Furthermore, he left London to live in Ireland in 1842, so if he was Spring-Heeled Jack then he couldn’t have been the only one.

30 years after the pranks at the Aldershot army camp, it was revealed by Colonel Alfred Welby that the people in the camp had their suspicions about who the prankster was. They believed that it was Lieutenant Henry Allfrey of the 60th Rifles, who was described as ‘a very big and powerful man but extraordinarily active’. However, Allfrey never confessed to being Spring-Heeled Jack, and he was never charged with any crime.

The legend of Spring-Heeled Jack has changed considerably over the years. From changing forms from a bear to a man, to changing his way of acting from tearing at people’s clothes to frightening soldiers. It is impossible to know what really happened and what were just rumours that snowballed into people accepting them as true and what were outright fabrications. What is known, however, is that Jack captivated the imaginations of countless people across multiple generations, with people passing down his stories to their children and them passing it down further. He was used as a bogeyman to frighten children into being good. And although Spring-Heeled Jack is no longer a household name, his story is still being told in books and online to this day, with people still interested in the mystery.

It is very unlikely that the identity of Spring-Heeled Jack will ever be definitively proven. Too much time has passed, and the line between fact and fiction in this case has been blurred.

Because of this, the legend of Spring-Heeled Jack remains unresolved.

Episode Information

Episode Information

Written and researched by Gabriella Bromley

Hosted and produced by Micheal Whelan

Published on October 13th, 2019

Producers: Maggyjames, Ben Krokum, Roberta Janson, Matthew Brock, Quil Carter, Peggy Belarde, Evan White, Laura Hannan, Katherine Vatalaro, Damion Moore, Amy Hampton Miller, Scott Meesey, Steven Wilson, Scott Patzold, Marie Vanglund, Lori Rodriguez, Emily McMehen, Jessica Yount, Aimee McGregor, Lauren Harris, Danny Williams, Cody Ketterling, Brian Rollins, Sue Kirk, Sara Moscaritolo, and Thomas Ahearn

Music Credits

Original music created by Micheal Whelan through Amper Music

Other music created and composed by Ailsa Traves