Rereading Mastorson and I am curious.

[snokkums]

I was rereading Masterston and came across somthing that has me cuurious and puzzled. On the first page he says that the temperature was slightly below 80 degrees. i read somewere where it was stifling hot that day. does anybody know forfsure what the temperture was?


The other thing is when Adekaude Churchill came over and asked Lizzie where she was at the time it happened, Lizzie perplied that she was in the barn to get a piece of iron and when she came in, she found the screen door open. I have never heard tell or read anything about the screen door being open. have I missed something?

[mbhenty]

Yes>

Apparently the story about how hot it was is folklore.

Thus, why I believe the police "LIED" about it being hot in the barn loft and why I choose to believe Brownie and Barlow. Young Barlow testified in court that:

"It was cooler up in the barn than it was outdoors".

The police "LIED" about it being hot in the loft.

As young Barlow testified, I remember being his age and playing in the barn across the street from my home, going in on hot summer days to feel the cool air inside the dark barn.

The day before the crime on the 3rd of August, the Fall River Daily News reported a high in Fall River of 66 degrees.

The day of the murder the US Weather service reported that in Conn. R.I. and Mass., the expected high was to be 83 degrees.

Not sure which one, either the Herald or the Daily News reported the high in Fall River on the 4th of August 1892 to be 78 degrees.

After a day of a 66 degree high, there is no chance that the barn could have warmed up to an uncomfortable level before noon the next day, especially when the temperatures were in the seventies.

The police LIED, and most of the writers of books about Lizzie chose to spread that LIE. Kent, Sullivan, Pearson, Spearing, Radin Lincoln, etc. Even Philipps who was on Lizzie's defense team said it was "superlatively hot". How is he using the term "superlatively? Could 80 degrees fall under the rendition "superlatively". Makes for a good story. So, how do we explain the discrepancy between reports in the newspapers and these authors? Makes for a good story.

Remembrer, this is New England. To some 80 degrees is a heat wave. All I hear are complaints about the heat here everyday, right through summer. Many New Englanders hate hot summers.

Begs me to ask............What is considered hot?

(for further study on how hot it was on August 4, 1892, look it up in Rebello, page 61)

[snokkums]

Yup, being from Wisconsin myself, 80 degrees is a heat wave for me too!

[DJ]

"Hot" is also relative to what one is wearing, and persons of 1892 wore more layers of clothing than we.

Also, the barn would have been cooler in the a.m., when Lizzie claimed to have been there.

Of course, she could have gone out there at some juncture; nevertheless, I believe her story was a ruse to place herself outside of the house while Mr. and Mrs. B were being cut up by some fiend. If Lizzie did it, she apparently believed the murders could be tied together in time, not placed more than an hour apart, rendering them all the more confounding
(to have been committed by an outsider).

[patsy]

It sure is relative to different conditions and attitudes of each individual. For me that would not be hot but then I like it 90° in the shade and I'm comfortable. So I could easily have stood being in a "hot" loft without a problem. And I was always curious about the so-called dust that was supposedly not disturbed, because unless it was grain dust would dust show up much on what I would think would be rough wood?

[Franz]

The 78 degrees equal about 25-26 °C. This temperature is pretty comfortable for an August day... at least I think so.

[mbhenty]

Yes... as you say Franz, "pretty comfortable." And it was.

Here in New England on the warm side.

We can even call it Hot.

But nothing like many writers have written about over the years. It was a warm day. One writer pushed it and said it was hot. Another thought it was more interesting to say it was sweltering, another that it was scorching. And it stuck. Thus goes the folklore.

So goes the legend, the acceptable myth, the most believable folk fantasy.

It was just a warm day.

Of course, as DJ said in his post above, people back then wore more clothing, and even a day in the high 70s would feel very uncomfortably warm. But by today's standards, as you say, "it was pretty comfortable for an August day."

[Allen]

I'd have to say that most authors who have written about the murders have perpetuated many of the myths surrounding the case. Usually because it fits neatly into whatever theory they are trying to peddle. I'm not so sure, however, that it was an author who first put forth the idea that it was very hot the day of the murders. There were several witnesses who also testified about the heat on that day. Some made reference to the day in general, but most were in reference to the heat of the barn loft.



Trial testimony of Assistant City Marshal John Fleet page 482:

Q. How was the temperature in the barn in the afternoon? How was it up there in the afternoon?
A. Very hot.

Q. What sort of day was it in Fall River that day with respect to heat?
A. It was very hot, one of the hottest days, I think, we had had.


------------------

Trial testimony of Philip Harrington 570:

Q. What was the temperature in that loft of the barn?
A. As to degrees, I cannot say, but it was extremely hot.


Officer Phillip Harrington 571:

Q. In addition to heat I will ask you the direct question, --- was it what was called close?
A. Yes, sir, suffocating, you might say.

------------------------


Trial testimony of Officer Patrick Doherty page 600:


Q. I will ask you what the temperature was up in the loft of the barn?
A. It was very warm.

Q. How was the air for breathing?
A. Very bad. It was stifling hot there. Very bad.

-----------------------------

Trial testimony of Officer William H. Medley page 692:

Q. Wait a moment now. Did you notice what the temperature was in the loft of the barn as you went up there?
A. Well, I know it was hot, that is all, very hot. You know it was a hot day.


------------------------------------------

Trial testimony of The City Marshal of Fall River Rufus B. Hilliard page 1112:

Q. What sort of day was it with reference to the heat on the 4th of August last?
A. Very hot.

Q. How was the heat in this loft?
A. Well it was extremely warm there, almost suffocating --- the heat in the loft.

[Allen]

"Hot and close." Close means the lack of fresh air. Like the stuffy hot air in a room that has been shut up for a long time. Foul air.

[mbhenty]

Yes Allen:

No doubt it was a very warm day.

Temperature is relevant... that is to who ever is experiencing it.

To me it is not hot until it gets into the 90s.

My mother found it hot in the upper 70s.

All the testimony you have given were by police. They all stick together when it comes to testimony. One says it is hot and the remainder fall like dominos.

I tend to believe Thomas Barlow when he he was asked:

How was the heat up in the barn compared with it out in the sun?

To which he replied:

It was cooler up in the barn that it was out doors.


I have told this story many times before, and here I go again:

When I was a little boy we use to play in this barn across the street. One thing that always stayed with me was the temps in the barn compared to those outside. I remember walking into the barn on a hot day to lay in the cool hay which lay on the floor inside.

Also Thomas Barlow was a very young man. Young people tolerate heat more than adults.

And since I love it in the 90s, I must be a very young man indeed.


(Below was taken from Leonard Rebello's Lizzie Borden Past and Present)


Weather report for Wednesday evening, August 3, 1892. For New England, fair, preceded today by showers on the coast, slightly warmer, southeasterly winds. Fall River Daily Globe

Weather report for Wednesday night, August 3, 1892. Con't. cloudy, cool weather, easterly winds becoming variable. Herald office temperature: 8 a.m. 61, 12 noon 66, and 2 p.m. 66. Highest 66, Lowest 60 Fall River Daily Herald

Weather report, Thursday, August 4, 1892, according to the U.S. Signal Service at 7 a.m. 67 and 2 p.m. 83 and 9 p.m. 75

Weather report until Thursday night, August 4, 1892. Fair, preceded by coast showers today,
warmer Thursday, variable winds. Herald office temperature 8 a.m. 66, 12 Noon 72 and 2 p.m. 76
Highest 78, Lowest 63 Fall River Daily Herald




As reported by the Herald Office, which was a couple of blocks from the Borden home, the temperature at Noon was 72.

[Allen]

Rebello also stated as a note that no information was ever found for the humidity on August 4, 1892.

[Allen]

Rebello page 89:

Note: Thomas E. Barlow, age 16, resided with his grandmother and grandfather at 10 Lyon Street in Fall River. Four months after the Borden trial Thomas Barlow and several friends were arrested on Sunday, October 8, 1893, for breaking and entering into Daniel F. Sullivan's Boots and Shoes at 40 South Main at 11 p.m. When confronted by the police at the store they were wearing shoes which had been stolen earlier from Sears and Hall Boots and Shoes at 13 Granite Block. Thomas Barlow "the noted me" me who figured with his chum [Everett Brown] in the late Borden trial as 'Me and Brownie' was arraigned on Monday in district court.

Source: Me and Brownie: 'Me' and Other Boys Caught in the Act of Store Breaking,"

If they were in fact in the Borden barn that day, I'd wager they were there to steal something, and decided to gain some celebrity out of it all instead.

[Allen]

I don't believe that all the police would 'fall down like domino's' and agree with each other so easily. If we believe that then none of their testimony is to be believed at all.

[mbhenty]

You could be right Allen. (I knew that domino line would get a comeback. Think I'll change my name to MBfranz )

Let's mention Michael Mullaly. A character I quite like.

I'm talking about his testimony and that of Fleet and the vanishing hatchet handle.

Now, old Mikey appeared to be one rigid domino.

In the annals of Borden testimony and fact, there's one that was never explained. How could they both get it so wrong.

[mbhenty]

One fact that I must mention about the fall river police.

And it's a particular personal one.

I remember sitting at the bar of the Ringside Cafe in fall river's east end. 1966, there or about.

A bar room.

My friends and I.

Sitting on chrome and red vinyl stools, leaning on the bar, smoking Marlboros like old men, enjoying a brew.

We were around 15 or 16 years of age. I remember we were not driving age.

We sat there drinking our luke warm Narraganset beer. If you were from Southern New England you knew the Narraganset Brew Company. Very popular skunky beer. All the bars and cafe's along Pleasant street reeked of stale Narraganset. Within 3 blocks from my house, east or west, there were at least 6 cafes.

One day while we sat there, in came a cop. A tall impressive looking fellow with a tomato red complexion, imposing blue wool uniform with rows of walnut size brass buttons along his breast, nightstick bouncing off his hip. He walked directly and dismissively to the bathroom towards the back of the tavern, the only place that smelled more foul than the Narraganset we were drinking.

The bartender poked a button on the cash register, out came the draw, where he pulled out some money.

He proceeded to place out a glass of water with several green notes under it, money...at the end of the bar by the door. The cop came out of the washroom. Our heads all followed him. All the other drunks ignored him and swayed at will. He never looked at us, took the sweaty glass of water, indulged in a gulp or two, calmly put down the cup, and at the same time, like he was collecting his change, slip the bill (s) in his pocket... never saying a word, never acknowledging us or the bartender, and strolled out.

It was ridiculously obvious that we were a group of underaged teenagers. And, it was no accident that we were always served.

As a youngster that image of authority, and some others, stayed with me for a long time.

[PossumPie]

This temp. thing comes as quite a shock to me. I am skeptical about much second hand info regarding the case, but if these are actual temps as reported in the newspaper, they must be correct. Many of the 'arguments' about guilt or innocence revolves in some way around temperature. Father and the window, the barn, windows open or closed. These are verified temps? Hmmmm My whole paradigm has been disrupted.

[Allen]

mb I don't mean any disrespect, and I do really enjoy your stories. I find them all quite interesting. But I don't see what something that happened to you in 1966 has to do with the police force in 1892.

[Allen]

I would also take into account that the weather reports back then were probably as reliable as they are today. If our weathermen today cannot get it right with all their technology, why should I believe that the Victorians were any more reliable? Yesterday the weatherman said in my area it was about 78 degrees. Yet my thermometer registered 82. It also doesn't take into account layers of clothing or humidity. This reminds me of a something I was sent in my email by a friend. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me 862,593 times... you're the weather man."

[PossumPie]

This is a brilliant example of how urban legends perpetuate until they have a life of their own. Even things we take a 'fact' may be drawn from vague accounts first hand, then like "Chinese Whispers" where one person passes it to the next, begins to morph into it's own story. "It was stuffy" became it was hot, it was close, it was very hot and close, it was the hottest day New England ever could remember....

At the height of WW II in Philadelphia a Naval ship was being fitted with a magnetic system to try to make it "invisible to magnetic mines" This was of course classified, so rumors started. One night the ship left Philly late and sailed to Norfolk. It made it there and back in a matter of one night b/c while all other ships had to go way out in the ocean to avoid mine fields laid to protect the coast, therefore took much longer, the destroyer took a shortcut reserved for the navy. down the Chesapeake Bay. "Invisible to mines" soon became "invisible" which morphed into "disappeared" "few hours to Norfolk" became "few seconds", and the legend of the Time Traveling Naval ship was born. There is a completely mundane answer that has been so lost in urban legend that very respectable sources quote respectable sources who quote....

Point being Don't hang a theory or conspiracy on "facts" unless they converge from many respectable sources, and even then, you may get burned.

[Allen]

Police officers who were there are no longer considered respectable sources?

[Yooper]

My experience at stacking hay bales in a variety of barns leads me to believe the police account. It gets hotter than hell up in the rafters of a barn on a warm day.

[mbhenty]

Yes: Allen.

As always no offense taken.

But,

What happened in 1966 may have a lot to do with what happened in 1892.

The secret is one must stand out from behind the Blue Curtain of Silence to see it, or at the very least, admit that it exists.

[mbhenty]

Yes Yopper:

What you say is very true.

About my little barn story, the one we played in when I was a child.

There was this ladder that we went up to get into the loft of the barn, and this rope which hung from the rafters. We would climb the ladder and slide down the rope. I remember waiting for my turn and how much hotter it was up in the loft/rafters than it was on the ground.

Perhaps it was a lot hotter in the barn than I remember. Like I said, to children heat is always more tolerable than adults. But I do remember it was much cooler in that barn than it was outside.

I'm sorry if I get carried away and write, write, write. Some of my posts are very long. But whether its 1892, or 2013 or even 1966 it is always about Lizzie Borden's fall river.

One other thing I must stress. The world in 1966 and the world today is drastically different. The changes are dramatic. I mean in people, the way they see each other, the affluence that now exists. But the difference between my world in 1966 and Lizzie Borden's in 1892 changed very little. At least for the poor and working classes. Sure, after WWII the middle class took off. But not for everyone, and certainly not for some of the poorer classes in those pre-welfare times. Especially immigrants. I see old photos of the turn of the century in 1900 fall river, and my world in the 50s and 60s and they are very similar compared to today and the 60s.

So please forgive me my little stories. But be assured they are about Lizzie Borden's fall river, though they may be very personal and .

[mbhenty]

Yes............what say you, Franz?

[Allen]

In my earlier post I stated that even today with all the technology weathermen cannot always accurately predict the weather. Nor is it always accurately reported. If we can't predict it today why would the Victorians be any more accurate? I have only to watch the news and consult my own thermometers to see how accurate it is. Also, only two of those weather reports mbhenty provided are actually for the day of August 4, 1892. How are weather reports and predictions that are for a general area and not specific to Fall River in some cases, and are for August 2nd and 3rd, relevant to the temperature of August 4, 1892? In one of the reports for August 4, 1892 at 2 p.m it was allegedly recorded to be 83 degrees. The second report for August 4, 1892 starts out as a weather prediction not a report. "Weather report until Thursday night..." But the second report states at 2 p.m it was 76 degrees, not 83 degrees. So indeed those two reports that are presented do not even agree on the temperature of the day. Which goes back to my earlier statement about how accurate weather predictions are, the layers of clothing, and lack of any data on humidity. I am more inclined to believe several people who were actually there then go back and guesstimate using hind sight and weather predictions that have as much chance of being accurate as they do today. The bolding is mine. This is the full list of weather reports cited in Rebello. And even Rebello noted that there was no data on degree of humidity.


Rebello page 61:

Weather Reports:

Weather report, Tuesday evening, August 2, 1892. For RI, MA & CT Showers followed by clearing weather, cooler in the interior, easterly winds, shifting north. Fall River Daily Globe

Weather report until Tuesday night, August 2, 1892. Cloudy and unsettled, slightly warmer, variable winds, generally easerly to southerly, Wednesday , fair and cooler. Fall River Daily Herald.

Weather report for Wednesday evening, August 3, 1892. For New England, fair, preceded today by showers on the coast, slightly warmer, southeasterly winds. Fall River Daily Globe.

Weather report for Wednesday night, August 3, 1892. Con't cloudy, cool weather, easterly winds becoming variable. Herald office temperature: 8 a.m. 61, 12 noon 66, and 2 p.m. 66. Highest 66, Lowest 60. Fall River Daily Herald

Weather report, Thursday, August 4, 1892, according to the U.S. Signal Service at 7 a.m. 67 and at 2 p.m. 83 and at 9 p.m. 75.

Weather report until Thursday night, August 4, 1892. Fair, preceded by coast showers today, warmer Thursday, variable winds. Herald office temperature at 8 a.m. 66, 12 noon 72 and 2 p.m. 76 Highest 78, Lowest 63. Fall River Daily Herald

[Yooper]

Two considerations other than temperature are humidity and the type of clothing worn. If the police were wearing any type of wool uniform and if the humidity was relatively high, 80-something would feel oppressively hot. Another consideration is entirely subjective, individual tolerance for heat and humidity. Personally, anything over 70 degrees is too warm to me and worse if it is humid.

[Allen]

This is a brilliant example of how urban legends perpetuate until they have a life of their own. Even things we take a 'fact' may be drawn from vague accounts first hand, then like "Chinese Whispers" where one person passes it to the next, begins to morph into it's own story. "It was stuffy" became it was hot, it was close, it was very hot and close, it was the hottest day New England ever could remember....

At the height of WW II in Philadelphia a Naval ship was being fitted with a magnetic system to try to make it "invisible to magnetic mines" This was of course classified, so rumors started. One night the ship left Philly late and sailed to Norfolk. It made it there and back in a matter of one night b/c while all other ships had to go way out in the ocean to avoid mine fields laid to protect the coast, therefore took much longer, the destroyer took a shortcut reserved for the navy. down the Chesapeake Bay. "Invisible to mines" soon became "invisible" which morphed into "disappeared" "few hours to Norfolk" became "few seconds", and the legend of the Time Traveling Naval ship was born. There is a completely mundane answer that has been so lost in urban legend that very respectable sources quote respectable sources who quote....

Point being Don't hang a theory or conspiracy on "facts" unless they converge from many respectable sources, and even then, you may get burned.

I believe the ship you refer to was the USS Eldridge and what was called the Philadelphia Experiment or Project Rainbow.This took place somewhere around October 28, 1943. It was said the ship was teleported from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to Norfolk, Virginia. The deck logs of the ship, WWII action reports, and war diaries of the USS Eldridge show it was never even in Philadelphia during the time of the supposed experiment. Members of the ship the SS Andrew Furuset supposedly witnessed the ship arrive in Norfolk after the teleportation. But it was proven that ship was never anywhere near Norfolk at the same time as the Eldridge during that time period. It was somewhere out in the Mediterranean. The Andrew Furuset departed Norfolk on October 25, 1943 and arrived at it's destination on November 12, 1943. It did not return until January 17, 1944. Making it impossible for it to have ever seen the USS Eldridge at the dock in Norfolk at all. The WWII action reports and war diaries all available on microfilm. There was no experiment. There is no proof the ship was ever fitted with any equipment.

[Allen]

Two considerations other than temperature are humidity and the type of clothing worn. If the police were wearing any type of wool uniform and if the humidity was relatively high, 80-something would feel oppressively hot. Another consideration is entirely subjective, individual tolerance for heat and humidity. Personally, anything over 70 degrees is too warm to me and worse if it is humid.

Many layers of clothing, or clothing made of heavy fabric, can absolutely make a day feel hotter than it is. I wish Shelley or Fairhavenguy were still posting. I think they both said something about the heat and wearing their period costumes. Humidity definitely can take a comfortable day and turn it into a sauna.

I agree that individual tolerance is a factor. My husband and I argue about this subject to a degree. He has a low tolerance for heat. He is constantly turning the heat off in the house when it's 40 degrees outside, or driving with the window down in the middle of winter and freezing me. Because he can't take the heat past a certain point. He is more comfortable with cooler temperatures. But I am always going behind him and cranking the heat back up and I get cold very easily. I need higher temperatures to feel comfortable. It causes a constant jockeying to control the heater or air conditioner in our house. He says it makes him feel like he can't breath if the heat runs for too long. A comfortable day to me feels like the seventh circle of hell to him. And I can see he's not exaggerating because he will actually be sweating.

But if several people state the same observation I wonder if individual tolerance still comes into play.

[Franz]

Yes............what say you, Franz?

You are always so kind with me, mbhenty.

I think the habit of clothing is another aspect to be considered. In the time of Lizzie people did wear more clothes then us, but I dont' think they would feel necessarily hotter than us under the same temperature, because they got used to wearing more clothes, just as we get used to wearing less.

[Allen]

Yes............what say you, Franz?

You are always so kind with me, mbhenty.

I think the habit of clothing is another aspect to be considered. In the time of Lizzie people did wear more clothes then us, but I dont' think they would feel hotter than us under the same temperature, because they got used to wearing more clothes, just as we get used to wearing less.

To some extent, I actually agree with this Franz. People of that era were used to wearing more clothing than we are today. They may have been used to sweating out the hot days under all of those layers of clothing. It was a fact of life. But I wonder if it would have actually made them less aware of their discomfort. Even today with the luxury of wearing less clothing, and being one that likes warmer temperatures, there are days I would still consider miserable. This summer we had temperatures that were up in the 90's. Even in shorts I felt like I was going to melt. I could not imagine wearing a long dress with sleeves and all of those under garments. Newspapers of the time remarked on the heat, especially in the courtroom where everyone was packed in like sardines to see what was going on.

[Aamartin]

And the weave of the garments! They weren't made like they are today--- as cheaply and as quickly as possible!

[Franz]

And the weave of the garments! They weren't made like they are today--- as cheaply and as quickly as possible!

Right, Aamartin!

[Franz]

Right! Aamartin. (sorry double posting).

(Can we cancel a post?)

[PossumPie]

I believe the ship you refer to was the USS Eldridge and what was called the Philadelphia Experiment or Project Rainbow.This took place somewhere around October 28, 1943. It was said the ship was teleported from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to Norfolk, Virginia. The deck logs of the ship, WWII action reports, and war diaries of the USS Eldridge show it was never even in Philadelphia during the time of the supposed experiment. Members of the ship the SS Andrew Furuset supposedly witnessed the ship arrive in Norfolk after the teleportation. But it was proven that ship was never anywhere near Norfolk at the same time as the Eldridge during that time period. It was somewhere out in the Mediterranean. The Andrew Furuset departed Norfolk on October 25, 1943 and arrived at it's destination on November 12, 1943. It did not return until January 17, 1944. Making it impossible for it to have ever seen the USS Eldridge at the dock in Norfolk at all. The WWII action reports and war diaries all available on microfilm. There was no experiment. There is no proof the ship was ever fitted with any equipment.

To further clarify, and after further research on my part, the Eldridge was not even commissioned until Aug 28th, and left home port of NY for the Bahamas for it's first shake down cruise in late Sept. You see, the "Facts" even in a more skeptical scientific account are skewed...Just b/c a Newspaper of the day, or "Eyewitnesses" are quoted doesn't make something fact.
As to the temperature in Fall River, there is a HUGE difference between a forecast and reported temperatures after the fact. The publications of ACTUAL temperatures is much less likely to be incorrect than 10 people's feelings about the temp. I think that even at 80 degrees the upper loft of a barn would be stifling. This of course is opinion, b/c what is 'stifling' or 'hot' to one person is comfortable to another. In any case the loft of a Barn on a sunny day can be as much as 10 degrees warmer. Perhaps both sides are correct. The temps on the ground may have been a seasonal 80, but in the loft it was 90. Also NO WHERE was there air conditioning in those days, we feel hot often b/c we have a/c in the house, and a/c in the car, and a/c at work so 90 feels hotter to us. Sadly, I am slowly coming to the realization that much of what we take as fact b/c it has been so often quoted as such, may be speculation, and worse, "red journalism". In that case, to continue debating this case in the hair-splitting way we do, is an exercise in futility. As I said before, the closest we can come to actual fact is the court transcript. Even that is at best two opposing views of what the facts were. contradictions abound, I LOVE carefully dissecting the facts to see how closely we can verify them, Perhaps this winter when I have more free time, I will go through the "facts" again, and try to verify how 'factual' they are.

[NancyDrew]

Interesting thread.

Is the barn still standing on the Borden property? (I'm embarrassed to say I don't remember; it's been over a year since I visited, although I keep saying I"m going back.) If so, and if the loft is still there, it would be fun and interesting to try an experiment...pick a day when the temperature is approximately the same as reported to be on August 4, 1892, dress in a long skirt, long sleeved blouse, and boots, and climb on up there! See what it feels like...I'm willing to give it a go..anyone else live nearby that would give this a shot (if it's even possible...I don't know if the public is allowed in the barn--if it exists.)

[Allen]

I believe the ship you refer to was the USS Eldridge and what was called the Philadelphia Experiment or Project Rainbow.This took place somewhere around October 28, 1943. It was said the ship was teleported from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to Norfolk, Virginia. The deck logs of the ship, WWII action reports, and war diaries of the USS Eldridge show it was never even in Philadelphia during the time of the supposed experiment. Members of the ship the SS Andrew Furuset supposedly witnessed the ship arrive in Norfolk after the teleportation. But it was proven that ship was never anywhere near Norfolk at the same time as the Eldridge during that time period. It was somewhere out in the Mediterranean. The Andrew Furuset departed Norfolk on October 25, 1943 and arrived at it's destination on November 12, 1943. It did not return until January 17, 1944. Making it impossible for it to have ever seen the USS Eldridge at the dock in Norfolk at all. The WWII action reports and war diaries all available on microfilm. There was no experiment. There is no proof the ship was ever fitted with any equipment.

To further clarify, and after further research on my part, the Eldridge was not even commissioned until Aug 28th, and left home port of NY for the Bahamas for it's first shake down cruise in late Sept. You see, the "Facts" even in a more skeptical scientific account are skewed...Just b/c a Newspaper of the day, or "Eyewitnesses" are quoted doesn't make something fact.
As to the temperature in Fall River, there is a HUGE difference between a forecast and reported temperatures after the fact. The publications of ACTUAL temperatures is much less likely to be incorrect than 10 people's feelings about the temp. I think that even at 80 degrees the upper loft of a barn would be stifling. This of course is opinion, b/c what is 'stifling' or 'hot' to one person is comfortable to another. In any case the loft of a Barn on a sunny day can be as much as 10 degrees warmer. Perhaps both sides are correct. The temps on the ground may have been a seasonal 80, but in the loft it was 90. Also NO WHERE was there air conditioning in those days, we feel hot often b/c we have a/c in the house, and a/c in the car, and a/c at work so 90 feels hotter to us. Sadly, I am slowly coming to the realization that much of what we take as fact b/c it has been so often quoted as such, may be speculation, and worse, "red journalism". In that case, to continue debating this case in the hair-splitting way we do, is an exercise in futility. As I said before, the closest we can come to actual fact is the court transcript. Even that is at best two opposing views of what the facts were. contradictions abound, I LOVE carefully dissecting the facts to see how closely we can verify them, Perhaps this winter when I have more free time, I will go through the "facts" again, and try to verify how 'factual' they are.

I always try to use the most credible sources when finding information. If there are newspaper accounts of something, I try to find the source information those accounts are based on if it's possible to verify information. Newspaper accounts are indeed full of errors. There is no disputing that for me. But they also contain many true facts. The trick is to find supporting information from reliable sources to discern what is true and what is not. Don't just believe everything you read.

In my research on the Eldridge I used the information on a Naval History Site that got it's information from the actual war diaries, WWII action reports, and deck logs for both of the ships involved. It used actual credible sources available to anyone to gather information. Then I checked into other accounts that also got their information from these same sources to see if each verified the other. There is also a link on the Naval History site that takes you to an order form where you can send away for copies of this information yourself. I find that much more credible than newspaper accounts, or sites set up by armchair researchers and conspiracy theorists who only read the newspapers and the fabricated eyewitness stories. Then figured anything that went against it was a cover up. I see the point of eyewitness testimony not always being accurate. This is quite true. We were cautioned about this in my classes as well. But most of the inaccuracies in eyewitness accounts are not due to outright fabrications as in the case of the Eldridge. It is because over time a persons memory becomes less accurate, not the other way around. But what they testified to might not be incorrect. The memory just becomes less clear as time passes. They don't invent details, they forget the ones they already knew. This is another reason why officers take notes in the first place. To me there is a big difference between supposed eyewitnesses purposefully fabricating an unbelievable story that has no possible basis in fact for the sake of notoriety, and several trained police officers all testifying to the same information on an actual case they are investigating.

[Allen]

I researched the Eldridge at around the same time I was researching the disappearance of Flight 19. Actual source information to anything is the most valuable information when researching facts. And because your memory fades over time, you should always re verify information before you state it as fact yourself.

[Albanyguy]

Sorry, Nancy Drew, the barn was torn down many years ago. Supposedly, a hatchet was discovered within the barn's walls but proved to be unconnected with the murders.

[Harry]

Yes, the barn was torn down in 1929. Here's the NY Times article on it:

"The New York Times, Sunday, April 7, 1929 – 13

FIND AXE IN RAZING
OLD BORDEN BARN

Some Fall River Residents Conjecture It
May Have Been Used in Famous Murders.

Special to The New York Times.

Fall River, Mass., April 6. – An old-fashioned axe, rusty and stained, which some persons conjecture may have been the weapon used in the famous Borden murder, came to light today after thirty-seven years, when workmen razed the old Borden barn.
Lying on a beam in the loft in which Lizzie Borden, accused of the murders, maintained she was hunting for a fish line sinker while her father and stepmother were being slain, the ancient axe clattered down into the debris as the timbers were torn apart.
The implement was turned over to Dr. William F. Boos of Boston, a Harvard pathologist, for tests to determine if possible, whether the stains were caused by human blood.
Because of the important part played by the barn in the trial and acquittal of Lizzie Borden in 1893 and the belief that its destruction might reveal the weapon used in the murder of the couple, local interest in the razing was intense.
Dr. William Dolan, Medical examiner at the time, reported that the Bordens were slain by some sharp instrument, which he always contended was an axe or hatchet.
Four hatchets were found in the cellar of the Borden home and a fifth, bloodstained, later was turned up one hundred yards from the house."

The new one was built about 10(?) years ago. Lee-ann let me look out the window munching a pear.

My 4,000th post! Yikes

[twinsrwe]

My experience at stacking hay bales in a variety of barns leads me to believe the police account. It gets hotter than hell up in the rafters of a barn on a warm day.

I agree! I also have experienced the hotter than a raging inferno hay loft, while stacking bales of hay. It was hot in the hay loft before we even started to physically stack the bales, and by the time you were done, you are ringing wet!!!

[twinsrwe]

… There was this ladder that we went up to get into the loft of the barn, and this rope which hung from the rafters. We would climb the ladder and slide down the rope. I remember waiting for my turn and how much hotter it was up in the loft/rafters than it was on the ground. …

We had a rock wall that we used to climb up into the hay loft, and a rope to slide down. I know it was a lot hotter in the hay loft, than in the barn.

[twinsrwe]

... I could not imagine wearing a long dress with sleeves and all of those under garments. ...

Me neither!!! No matter what the temperature was, with or without humidity, on August 4th 1892, having to wear the kind of garments those women wore, would make me melt! Anything over 70 degrees is too high for me; humidity added to that temperature just makes it unbearable!

[twinsrwe]

… My 4,000th post! Yikes

Alright, Harry!!! Congratulations!!!

[Franz]

Yes, Harry, congratulations for your 4,000th post! Many thanks for posting that photo!

[Allen]

Thank you for posting the picture of the barn Harry. And congratulations on your 4000th post!

[Harry]

Thanks all for the congrats. Another 9,000 and I'll be up to Kat. Whew!

Notice how steep those stairs are. No railing either unless they had already taken it off. Must have been hard to climb in those bulky 1892 dresses. All for some lead sinkers.