1. "Spreading the word"
Posted by harry on Jan-6th-03 at 6:35 AM

One of the things I always found interesting was how quick word of the Borden murders got to the public.  Although there is some disagreement from testimony from 11:30 to 12:00 as to the size of the crowd, by 12 there was a substantial crowd of people at the Borden's gate.

I was reading Dr. Bowen's testimony at the Inquest and Preliminary.  He states at the Inquest:

"......Lizzie said that Emma was in Fairhaven, and wanted me to telegraph to her. Before I went out she said if you telegraph to her, perhaps she will come on this noon train. I went directly across to my house, and told my wife, and told her about telegraphing. I was satisfied she could not come on the noon train direct, so my boy drove me down to the telegraph office, and I telegraphed to Miss Emma Borden.
Q.  You had not then heard that the mother had been killed too?
A.  No Sir. Then I went across to Baker's drug store, I motioned the boy to come along. I stopped two or three minutes there and told them of it. When I came out, I got in my carriage again and drove directly to the house again and stopped at Mr. Borden's door and went in. There were no crowds there at that time, that I remember of. I drove up on his side and told the boy to stand there.
Q.  Had the crowd began to collect around there then?
A.  No Sir."

**Note: He uses the words "told them", plural. So there is at least 2. There may have been others in the store who overheard the conversation.

At the Preliminary:

"Q.  After consulting the time tables, what did you do? Did you drive to the telegraph office?
A.  Yes Sir, my boy drove me down to the telegraph office.
Q.  Then right back again?
A.  I went from the telegraph office into Mr. Baker's drug store on Main street. I had a few moments conversation with Mr. Samuel Flint. Then I drove directly to the Borden house."

So the good doctor was getting the word out by telling at least 2 people.  Word along Main Street must have spread quickly. Then there was the doctor's "boy" who drove the carriage.

(Message last edited Jan-6th-03  6:40 AM.)

Having grown up in a relatively small town, I can testify to how quickly news spreads!  Our house had a small fire start in it that was quickly put out, a corner of the front of the house and part of the front porch were damaged.  The next day on my way to school, people were coming out of their homes to express their sympathies for my family with our tragedy.  It even went in the local newspaper 2 days down the road!

So, attach the word "murder" to it and it spreads like wildfire.  Whats that old adage about bad news travels the fastest?  I wonder how old Dr. Bowen's "boy" was, I would think that he must have been in his teens to early twenties to be driving a carriage around?  Did you need some sort of driver's license at the time to do so?  Or was it just based on whether you could handle the horse(s) or not? 

Before Dr. Bowen went to the telegraph office, Mrs. Churchill told her handyman about it at the stables, and from there the word went to the police, newspapers, etc. because several men were standing there at the time. So within just maybe a couple minutes of Mrs. Churchill's conversation directly after talking with Lizzie, the word spread via the telephone probably to several parts of the city.

Kent
Pg.3+
"The first edition of the Daily Herald, prepared, as it undoubtedly was, in a fury of activity, contained a number of errors that would later be corrected, along with extensive and mistaken speculation as to what exactly had taken place, but it captured the essence of the horror and the shock of the crime.

The issue was sold out in a matter of minutes.

SHOCKING CRIME

A VENERABLE CITIZEN AND HIS AGED WIFE HACKED TO  PIECES AT THEIR HOME

MR. AND MRS. ANDREW BORDEN LOSE THEIR LIVES
AT THE HANDS OF A DRUNKEN FARM HAND

POLICE  SEARCH ACTIVELY FOR
THE FIENDISH MURDERER

The community was terribly shocked this morning to hear that an aged man and his wife had fallen victims to the thirst of a murderer, and that an atrocious deed had been committed. The news spread like wildfire and hundreds poured into Second Street. The deed was committed at No. 62 [read 92 ] Second Street where for years Andrew J. Borden and his wife lived in happiness. "
-----
And Kent
Pg.8
"Parenthetically, one has to admire the swiftness with which the small newspaper gathered and published this first story on the slayings. The first public outcry of "Murder!"  had been given on August 4 at 11:15. The Herald's first edition was on the streets by 2:15 the same day. Except for the speculations by the police as to how Mrs. Borden met her death, all of which would subsequently be proved wrong, it is a remarkably thorough and accurate report. "

--I was just re-reading Ter's "Swift" article from the LABVM/L, and Kent came up as to source as how quickly word spread about the murders.

Not only is it interesting how swiftly word of the Borden murders spread, it is remarkable to consider the liberties the press took with the story.  I suspect the word spread through the city because it was a relatively small community and this was big news.  I also suspect the assumptions made by the press at the time the story broke and right through the trial ("news" stories and editorials) are simply the result of yellow journalism.  Just six years after the Borden murders, major newspapers across the nation would tell the American people that the Spanish had definitely and deliberately sunk the battleship, Maine, in Havanna harbor (this was later proven to be false by several investigations).  They did not have the full story nor did they need it.  What they needed was to sell newspapers, so editors and writers simply filled in the blanks with whatever would most attract the public to purchase their newspaper.  I have always figured the news accounts of the Borden murders were presented exactly the same way and were, therefore, unreliable except as a snapshot of the social values and the fears of the time.  They are fun to read but they are unreliable as historical fact.

(Message last edited Jan-9th-03  7:04 PM.)

"...They did not have the full story nor did they need it.  What they needed was to sell newspapers, so editors and writers simply filled in the blanks with whatever would most attract the public to purchase their newspaper...."

Yes, but I've heard both sides, that some papers were fairly accurate
and others were more such as you describe. Also the reporter could have been accurate but the editor changed what was reported so by the time it got into the paper it was a more tremendous story.

To this point of the media taking liberties, today on the Court TV channel I heard one of the moderators comment that an e-mail had been sent in to her about what she had said about the Lizzie Borden case.  She said the e-mail was taking issue that the moderator should have known and said that Lizzie Borden was declared not guilty after her arrest and trial and to her credit, the moderator made a point of letting the viewers realize she was in error.

Of course, newspapers and TV coverage, which was not available in 1892 are different, but it is nice to see corrections made when necessary.  And I was surprised to see Lizzie Borden's name come up on the show. 

Good post, Jim.  I dunno.  Did they need to jazz up the story of the Borden murders when it first broke?  My guess is maybe they filled in some cracks, but I tend to believe the reporters were basically correct during those first days, it was so sensational.  The cast of characters were so shook up, they were saying things and then later denying they'd said them.  (Dr. Bowen kinda lost it on August 4.  He was telling Mrs. Churchill to come see Andrew's body, said Abby died of fright, and sounds like he was understandably rattled quite a bit.  Morse tried to tell people the cellar door was open.  And witnesses seldom do agree on descriptions and events anyway.)  I think after the murders and before the trial when there was nothing going on, we'd see more yellow journalism, and perhaps when things got boring during and after the trial. 

The Borden case is known by many to be the first case that was able to use the media available to spread the word world-wide. 

There were telephones in the homes of those who were willing to pay for the service perhaps the more "prominent" citizenry of the time, doctors, lawyers, bankers, newspaper men, etc.  Once the word got out the wives of the factory owners not doubt would call the factory and let the hubby know.  He in turn told his formen who in turn spread the word to the workers.

Andrew J. was a "grinch" of his time, or so we are lead to understand that he was a tight fisted miserly type, and his reputation in Fall River well preceeded him.  So when the word got out that he had been done in, one can only imagine what would behavior would follow.

It was like a "holiday" of sort for the towns people, you can almost imagine that the factories literally shut down in order that the workers be allowed to congregate on Second Street.  Afterall it was hot humid muggy afternoon and the factory owner could surely allow the workers an hour off early for the purpose of "celebrating" the death of one of the town's famous "skinflints". 

Callous and heartless? you bet, but it's 1892 and it's Andrew J. Borden old Mr. Tighwad himself.  Of course when poor Abbey was discovered I am sure the mood changed to one of sympathy for the poor woman, afterall she didn't deserve the same fate.

That's my tale and I'm stikin' to it....

BC

You been watching Scrooge movies this past Holiday season?
You are one to talk, Mr. Andrew J. Borden Birthday Boy!
Are you black and white Scrooge material?
I don't think so.
Do you honor your wife and your family life, yet because things may be running smoothly at home, you can turn your full attention to matters of career and, in your case, advanced education?
And you do it for your family, do you not?
So they might benefit...even if it might be, at times, at the expense of your very precious presence?
You are showing an example of hard work gaining dividends though they be delayed?
And it is all done in the dedication of the preservation and security of that family?
Can our Andrew have some of these traits, born on your day?
What do you think?

Ahhhhhh....I was just test drivin' a theory Kat and it's grand to know that you haven't changed a bit...of course I don't subscribe to all that hype about my man Andy J.  He was generous to Abbey and her family as well.  And those two spinsters of his got enough to keep them in frills if they wanted it.  The gossip tree on that fateful day flourished like a palm on Universal Blvd. 

I'm still my old self same values same hard working dude with all the trials and tribes as before...just kickin' out a theory my Lady...and that's my story........ ...

BC

You're a naughty boy seeing what you can get away with!
Too much charm you have, and a gift of the Blarney. 

BTW:  I get to wear sunglasses with my smiley cause I passed 3000 Posts.
(that's 200,000 bowls of cereal)

Perhaps if you were a witness to an event later reported in the press, you would notice the same "liberties". A reporter is seldom on the scene, he just picks up the words of others. Or the facts that the police choose to release.
Its how the system works.

Note the use of words today: reportedly, allegedly, etc.
Every effort is made to be accurate, but deadlines do not allow 1000% accuracy, then or now.
Ever read even the sports news on a local baseball game?

Oh MY God/Dess!
You have over a thousand posts, Ray!!!

It wasn't a holiday, and workers weren't let out. It was a spontaneous general strike, with all that implies. The factory owners had a pre$$ing need to get the workers back on the job!!!

Then or now, aren't people arrested just to show people, then later released with little publicity? Or worse, made to confess for a crime they didn't do!!! Hear about the 5 whose conviction was overturned in NYC for a 1989 crime?

F Lee Bailey says the worst thing that can happen to you is to be arrested for a crime you didn't do, and you're innocent. Guilty guys can often plea bargain because they know stuff the police want to learn.

[Reusing to save space]

One thing about Spiering's book is that it contains extra material about the events of the time. He specifically states that so many workers left their job that the factories had to shut down. Costing time, money, and profits. Do you remember that Friday of 11/22/1963? Was ANY work done that afternoon? Remember that Oct 1995 when the jury on the Trial of OJ Simpson gave their verdict?
That's how I remember it.

(Message last edited Jan-15th-03  1:11 PM.)

What's this about a strike?
What do we know about this?

Well now, that's basically what BobcookBobcook said in his post.
The workers didn't return to the factories, so it was a sort of holiday for them.

With Andrew sitting on some of the mill boards, do you think that the mill workers were possibly excited that one of the people that produced their miserable jobs, bit the dust?  Or, do you think it was just big news in a small town and everyone wanted to see what was going on.  Was always kind of curious about that, did they know who Andrew Borden was personally, met him before?  Glad to see him go? 

Supposedly when Abby and Andrew's funeral cortege passed by on the way to the cemetery, large numbers of citizens stood in the streets, and the men respectfully removed their hats in tribute.  I think I read this in Rebello or in contemporary newspaper accounts.  Of course, the gesture could have simply meant, "We're glad you're gone, you rascal you!"  Some of the early newspaper accounts of Andrew's demise were quite flattering to him, especially mentioning his honesty and fair dealing.  Possibly the reporters were following that old adage, "Never speak ill of the dead."

Thanks, Edisto.  From what I've gathered, Andrew was considered quite the prominent man about town.  I just wonder how much the mill workers knew of him and his family, wasn't it supposed to be in their sector where the Lizzie Borden took an axe.... ditty was composed?