The Hiram Harrington interview - revisited

[Airmid]

We have been discussing the Hiram Harrington interview a few times before. In these discussions, I always had in mind that the interview wasn't just printed in the newspapers, but that it is also mentioned in the Witness Statements. That added authenticity to the interview as it was published in the papers, in my view. However, I have changed my mind completely about this.
I would like to advance the idea that what is written in the Witness Statements is not the result of an independent interview of Hiram Harrington by officers Harrington and Doherty, but in fact a summary of what was printed in the newspapers.

Here is what is in the Witness Statements (p. 11):

Hiram Harrington. “When the perpetrator of this foul deed is found, it will be one of the household. I had a long talk with Lizzie yesterday, Thursday, the day of the murder, and I am not at all satisfied with statement or demeanor. She was too solicitous about his comfort, and showed a side of character I never knew or even suspected her to possess. She helped him off with one coat and on with another, and assisted him in an easy incline on the sofa, and desired to place a afghan over him, and also to adjust the shutters so the light would not disturb his slumber. This is something she could not do, even if she felt; and no one who knows her, could be made believe it. She is very strong willed, and will fight for what she considers her rights. She went to the barn, where she stayed twenty minutes, or half an hour, looking for some lead from which to make sinkers for fishing lines, as she was going to Marion next week.” He spoke about the Ferry street estate being given to the girls, and afterwards being returned. He spoke at some length about her telling about the same story as was published in the News and Globe of Friday evening.

Here is the interview as it was printed in the FR Herald: http://lizzieandrewborden.com/Resources ... Herald.htm

There are several things that are odd about the Witness Statements versions, that gave me reason to think that this was not the result of genuine police questioning.
First there's the language that is used. It is not spoken language, but written language.
Then there is the way the piece in the Witness Stements is written up. It uses complete, grammatically correct sentences. These are not the hasty notes of an officer. I am aware that the officers probably didn't write down their reports until some time afterwards, but there's quite a difference with the way other interviews are worded. An example from the Mrs. Churchill interview (on the same page):
When I went over in answer to Lizzie’s call, I asked O, Lizzie where is your father? In the sitting room. Where were you? I was in the barn looking for a piece of iron. Where is your mother? She had a note to go and see someone who is sick. I dont know but they killed her too. Has any man been to see your father this morning? Not that I know of.

Compared with other reports too in the Witness Statements, this alleged interview stands out as "odd" and made my alarm bells ring.

There's one other thing that asks for attention in that piece, and that is the line: "He spoke at some length about her telling about the same story as was published in the News and Globe of Friday evening."
When I previously looked at this, I always thought that this was a reference to the interview as it was printed in the Newspapers. In that interpretation, one thing is odd, and that is the date that is mentioned: Friday the 5th, while the interview wasn't published in the newspapers until the 6th. But if this piece is a summary of that newspaper interview, the reference must be to something else.
I don't have access to the News or the Globe, so I can only make a guess. One thing that is spoken about in the newspaper interview is Lizzie's story of the burglary and the mysterious strangers she spotted hanging around the house. This is not mentioned in the "summary". Was this information published in the Globe on the 5th? There is one line on the subject in the FR Herald of the 5th (Sourcebook p. 10):
Various rumours have been started, one of which was that Miss Borden had assured a friend last winter after a mysterious robbery at the house that her father had an enemy somewhere.

There's another thing that could support the "summary" theory: Hiram Harrington's Inquest testimony. Compared to the interview, Hiram was uncommonly mild in his comments on the Borden household and especially about Lizzie. That is very odd if this is the same man who supposedly had no qualms to say the most horrible things about Lizzie to the police.

Putting a summary of a newspaper article in a police report, and perhaps trying to pass it off as the result of an official interview smells of falsification. It is hard to imagine that an officer would be capable of doing that. However, there was an officer at the time who was from the first preoccupied against Lizzie, and didn't hesitate to make his opinion know to his superiors: officer Philip Harrington. In the Witness Statements, page 5 and 6, he writes:
Lizzie stood by the foot of the bed, and talked in the most calm and collected manner; her whole bearing was most remarkable under the circumstances. There was not the least indication of agitation, no sign of sorrow or grief, no lamentation of the heart, no comment on the horror of the crime, and no expression of a wish that the criminal be caught. All this, and something that, to me, is indescribable, gave birth to a thought that was most revolting. I thought, at least, she knew more than she wished to
tell.
and on page 6 and 7, he goes on:
It was at this time I made known my suspicions of Miss Lizzie. To the Marshal I said “I dont like that girl”. He said “what is that?” I repeated, and further said “under the circumstances she does not act in a manner to suit me; it is strange, to say the least.”
...
The Marshal said, “I want you men to go give this place complete going over; every nook and corner must be looked into, and this hay turned over.” I then said to him “if any girl can show you or me, or anybody else what could interest her up here for twenty minutes, I would like to have her do it.” The Marshal shook his head, and said something about it being incredible; his words I cannot give.

I would say it is "strange, to say the least" that officer Harrington devotes so many words to voicing his opinion about Lizzie in a police report. Seeing this, I wouldn't put it above him to add a newspaper summary to his reports as "evidence" for his suspicions.

I would be most interested to hear your comments and opinions!

Airmid.

[Allen]

There are several things that are odd about the Witness Statements versions, that gave me reason to think that this was not the result of genuine police questioning.
First there's the language that is used. It is not spoken language, but written language.

As far as I can tell Harringtons writing style seems to fit, and remain consistant. Which is how this interview was written.

Airmid Tue Sep 19, 2006 8:41 am Post subject: The Hiram Harrington interview - revisited

Here is what is in the Witness Statements (p. 11):

Hiram Harrington. “When the perpetrator of this foul deed is found, it will be one of the household. I had a long talk with Lizzie yesterday, Thursday, the day of the murder, and I am not at all satisfied with statement or demeanor. She was too solicitous about his comfort, and showed a side of character I never knew or even suspected her to possess. She helped him off with one coat and on with another, and assisted him in an easy incline on the sofa, and desired to place a afghan over him, and also to adjust the shutters so the light would not disturb his slumber. This is something she could not do, even if she felt; and no one who knows her, could be made believe it. She is very strong willed, and will fight for what she considers her rights. She went to the barn, where she stayed twenty minutes, or half an hour, looking for some lead from which to make sinkers for fishing lines, as she was going to Marion next week.” He spoke about the Ferry street estate being given to the girls, and afterwards being returned. He spoke at some length about her telling about the same story as was published in the News and Globe of Friday evening.

You stated that the interview as it was written up in the Witness Statements uses complete grammatically correct statements, and did not seem like the hastey notes of an officer. You stated also that there was a difference in how this interview was worded, and how the other interviews in the statements were worded. But Harringtons notes would be the only ones that interest me in researching this, did his style remain consistant?


Airmid Tue Sep 19, 2006 8:41 am Post subject: The Hiram Harrington interview - revisited

officer Philip Harrington. In the Witness Statements, page 5 and 6, he writes:
Lizzie stood by the foot of the bed, and talked in the most calm and collected manner; her whole bearing was most remarkable under the circumstances. There was not the least indication of agitation, no sign of sorrow or grief, no lamentation of the heart, no comment on the horror of the crime, and no expression of a wish that the criminal be caught. All this, and something that, to me, is indescribable, gave birth to a thought that was most revolting. I thought, at least, she knew more than she wished to
tell.
and on page 6 and 7, he goes on:
It was at this time I made known my suspicions of Miss Lizzie. To the Marshal I said “I dont like that girl”. He said “what is that?” I repeated, and further said “under the circumstances she does not act in a manner to suit me; it is strange, to say the least.”
...
The Marshal said, “I want you men to go give this place complete going over; every nook and corner must be looked into, and this hay turned over.” I then said to him “if any girl can show you or me, or anybody else what could interest her up here for twenty minutes, I would like to have her do it.” The Marshal shook his head, and said something about it being incredible; his words I cannot give.

This was the report for Thursday August 4, 1892 by Harrington. In looking over the witness statements Harrington seems to employ the same writing style through all of his reports. When the style seems to change is when the report was signed by both Doherty and Harrington, so maybe Doherty wrote some of the reports and Harrington just signed his name along to the statements as they were written? This would explain a difference.

From page 16 of the Witness Statements.

"Harrington. Visited Mrs. Jane Gray, Mrs. Borden's step mother. Her statement. "Things were not as pleasant at the Borden house as they might be. That is the reason I did not call on Mrs. Borden as often as would have liked to. I told Mrs. Borden I would not change places with her for all her money. What I know about them is all hearsay. Mrs. Borden was a very close mouthed woman. She would bear a great deal, and say nothing. She told me she and the girls were allowed an equal monthly allowance, but they had more out if it than I for I had to furnish the table coverings, towelling, and other small things for the house out of mine."

The same style is employed on page 18 for the interview of Lucy Collett.

[RayS]

Somewhere there is a statement from a reporter who was outside the house. He says Uncle Hiram Harrington was in the house for about 5 minutes. So how did he have all that time to talk to Lizzie who was reportedly under sedation, etc? Sounds like a made up story to cast guilt upon a person.
Those with references handy can say more about this.

[Kat]

It has always seemed fabricated in some way to me also, mainly because Hiram was a blacksmith and I could not imagine that he ever spoke like that. Then when the *interview* is compared to his testimony, he sounds like a blacksmith, and also less firm in his supposed opinion.

However, he was there in the house that day- so he could have spoken to someone- be it an onsite reporter or a police official. Maybe a reporter? And then Hiram went home to break the news to his [edit here: meaning "Andrew's sister"] sister and the police realized they missed getting his statement? So they got it from the reporter? This is an imaginary theory.

[Edit here]: He also was not ever called to testify again after the inquest. Well, maybe at the grand jury but there'd be no record for us.

[Airmid]

Allen, I'll get back to you in a bit with I hope some better examples with what I mean. I find it very difficult though to pick the right examples. After all, trying to illustrate that the piece is not in Philip Harringtons style could lead to saying "No of course not, since it is Hiram who spoke" and to show that it is not Hirams style to "No of course not, since it's Philip who wrote it down". I might be easier to try and debunk the whole interview! But I'll give it a try and you'll hear from me soon.

It has always seemed fabricated in some way to me also, mainly because Hiram was a blacksmith and I could not imagine that he ever spoke like that. Then when the *interview* is compared to his testimony, he sounds like a blacksmith, and also less firm in his supposed opinion.

We should be careful there, I think. Hiram was involved in local politics and in the fraternities. He was a member of the FR council in 1860 and 1864 (from Fenner) and someone (Harry?) figured out he was a high priest in the Masons. So he would have been used to making speeches and (semi)official talk. We're very lucky to have his Inquest testimony as the source of the way he actually spoke!

Airmid.

[Kat]

Well, he does use "equivocate" and "reticent" but otherwise he sounds like a plainspeaking man to me who can't quite get his thoughts across. I never thought this sounded like that new *Interview*, but I'm not anyone who knows much about speech patterns.

This is Hiram on oath at the inquest- our only words from his own mouth in person, that we're sure of, so-to-speak. I've only left out the questions and a few short answers:

A. We never had no words, or anything of that kind. Some years ago I thought he was hard, and I cut his acquaintance; that is, he came to my house, and I would leave the room; and he very soon saw I cut his acquaintance; and he did mine.
...
A. No, I did not go to the house, any more than sometimes on business, that is, sometimes my wife wanted to send a letter or to invite the girls, or something of that kind, I would go to the house; sometimes I met him at the door, and have spoken.
...
A. I did not go into the house; all I can tell is hear say, that is from them. The step mother never mentioned it in my presence.
...
A. I dont know as I could put anything together now to tell you, any more than to tell you there was some difficulty some way. She thought
she equivocated. I dont know as I could put enough of it together now, I can just give you an idea. I cant remember words that were passed at the time, any more than just this much, that she thought she equivocated.
...
A. In regard to something about Bertie, that is, Mrs. Whitehead, a half sister of Mrs. Borden. I think it was something about helping her, or that her father had bought the property. The general construction I have got of what she said, and from what little I learned, was that he had bought the property and gave it to his wife; and of course that meant giving it to her half sister.
...
A. Sometimes it has been mentioned in a joking way, about the difficulties. I dont know as I could put enough together to say really what was passed.
...
A. I think last Winter sometime. I have not seen her at the house for, I might say all Summer, and I have inquired of my wife how it was that Lizzie had not been down. Emma has always come. And the reply I would get from her was that Lizzie was into everything, that is, the works in the church, and her time was occupied; that is what I would get from her.
...
A. I dont know as I could tell any more than to speak kind of sneeringly of Mrs. Borden. She always called her Mrs. Borden or Mrs. B. I dont know as I could remember anything to put together to make any sense.
...
A. Quite a number of years, I should think. They were rather reticent about telling these affairs, although sometimes it would crop out.

[Allen]

In this regard he was being questioned about information he had received second hand from other sources, seems to be coming from his wife. Could this be why he seems to not be able to get his thoughts across? He testified that he had cut off his relationship with Andrew, and did not go to the house. But what I find interesting is that he testifies also that for the first few years of Andrew and Abby's marriage everything was very pleasant "uncommonly so for a step mother." That gives me a glimpse of something I had not heard before.

[RayS]

In this regard he was being questioned about information he had received second hand from other sources, seems to be coming from his wife. Could this be why he seems to not be able to get his thoughts across? He testified that he had cut off his relationship with Andrew, and did not go to the house. But what I find interesting is that he testifies also that for the first few years of Andrew and Abby's marriage everything was very pleasant "uncommonly so for a step mother." That gives me a glimpse of something I had not heard before.

Emphasis on quotes.
Could it be that the behavior of the girls to their step-mom was not entirely of their choosing but a reaction to earlier years? Did Abby put on a character that disappeared with the relatives?
I'm sure we've all witnessed behavior during visits from relatives that is not what really goes on?

[Airmid]

Part one of my attempt to piece together more support for the idea that the Hiram Harrington interview in the Witness Statements was fabricated.

About the Witness Statements.

From the FR Herald, date probably August 9th (Sourcebook p. 36). The Herald is writing here about the events on Monday the 8th:
POLICE REPORTS SUBMITTED.
If it was quiet on Second street, there was plenty doing at the central station to keep the men interested in the case wide awake. Orders had been issued by Marshal Hilliard that every officer who had had any clue to work out should make a minute report of the same and submit it in writing for further examination by the head of the department and to be laid before the district attorney. After all the special work had been written up, the marshal had a stack of papers a yard high. These he thrust into a big box and waited. He was listening to hear a call from District Attorney Knowlton, whom he had been awaiting all afternoon.
About 5:30 o'clock the marshal's private wire set the telephone bell ringing, and a voice announced that the district attorney was at the Mellen house and ready to begin business. Tucking the big box under his arm, Marshal Hilliard started out of the office with Detective Seaver close to his heels.

From Philip Harrington's Trial Testimony (Trial p. 579). Harrington is cross-examined here by Mr. Robinson, who is questioning Philip Harrington about his description of the pink wrapper that Lizzie was wearing.
Q Did you make any memoranda at the time of her dress?
A I think I did, sir.
..............
Q Did you take the description, or did some lady?
A I took it myself, sir.
Q If you had not examined it for that purpose---
A I wrote it down from my recollection.
Q When did you write it?
A I think it was the Sunday following.

These two descriptions of the writing down of the police reports match nicely. Philip Harrington testifies that he didn't make notes about Lizzie's dress on the 4th, when he saw her, but that he wrote them down probably on the 7th. That timing is right for the Marshal to have the written reports on his desk by Monday afternoon.
Not all reports that were gathered in this manner made it to the document we now know as "Witness Statements". Who did the selection and when, is not known. There was an earlier thread in this forum where this was discussed: http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com/Archi ... snotes.htm
In this thread was also discussed that in one known case phrases were added to the original handwritten documents. Assistant Marshal Fleet's handwritten notes were compared to the version from the Witness Statements by Kat.

Looking at the Witness Statements again, the earlier Harrington&Doherty part (p. 4-11) consists of several parts, each signed by either Doherty, Harrington, or both. The parts contain the following:

• - Aug. 4th Doherty report on his visit to the Borden house.
  - loose remark by Harrington.
  - Aug 4th Harrington interview with Lizzie.
  - Harrington remarks on the interview with Lizzie and report of other events at the house. Harrington report of suspicious characters. Harrington report of the search of the Borden barn and yard and remarks. Harrington teams up with Doherty. Reports of interviews with neighbors. Report of the investigation of a suspicious character, drug stores, and interview with Eli Bence.
  - Continued reports ot investigation of drug stores. Report of guard duty at the Borden house thursday-to-friday night. Nine interviews with witnesses in the following days. Entries are not in chronological order. Six of them are follow-up interviews to fix the times correctly.
  - Three interviews with witnesses: Follow-up interviews into domestic relations. Hiram Harrington.
  - "Monday, August 8, 1892, Afternoon." and later reports.

From the time Harrington and Doherty teamed up, it is not always easy to see which entries were written by Doherty and which by Harrington. I would be inclined to say that the interviews that are shorter, more factual and contain less quoted speech are Doherty's; and the ones that contain more quoted speech and are more "chatty" in character are Harrington's. But there are a few don't don't fall clearly into one of these categories, so I think it best not to refer to the interviews at all when making comparisons.

Airmid.[/url]

[Kat]

Yes I can picture the police all scrambling to get their notes ready and coherent for the D.A. coming to town. They essentially had a time limit- 5 pm on Monday. At least that is how it appears to me.

I agree about the differences in Doherty & Harrington's scripts. I think things were done more casually back in the day, like the taking of notes.

Now, are you saying that Hiram probably never said any of that at all- that he wasn't questioned about Lizzie's solicitude?

[Airmid]

Now, are you saying that Hiram probably never said any of that at all- that he wasn't questioned about Lizzie's solicitude?

Yes Kat, that's the idea!

Airmid.

[Allen]

Hiram Harrington. “When the perpetrator of this foul deed is found, it will be one of the household. I had a long talk with Lizzie yesterday, Thursday, the day of the murder, and I am not at all satisfied with statement or demeanor. She was too solicitous about his comfort, and showed a side of character I never knew or even suspected her to possess. She helped him off with one coat and on with another, and assisted him in an easy incline on the sofa, and desired to place a afghan over him, and also to adjust the shutters so the light would not disturb his slumber. This is something she could not do, even if she felt; and no one who knows her, could be made believe it. She is very strong willed, and will fight for what she considers her rights. She went to the barn, where she stayed twenty minutes, or half an hour, looking for some lead from which to make sinkers for fishing lines, as she was going to Marion next week.” He spoke about the Ferry street estate being given to the girls, and afterwards being returned. He spoke at some length about her telling about the same story as was published in the News and Globe of Friday evening.


Just a few things, besides writing style, give me problems with this idea. At the time of the interview were the police already aware of the troubles between the girls and Mrs. Borden over the house, and that it was the Ferry Street house? Also police at the scene would know he was not wearing his bed slippers but had on his congress boots. Someone who was not at the scene would not. But could be told as much. I guess what I'm getting at is, how much of the information supposedly stated by Hiram in the interview would the police have been privy to on their own at this time if there was no interview? And how much of the information that was given that was incorrect should've been known by someone at the scene?

[RayS]

Surely you've read of the police technique of publishing misleading material to draw out a suspect?
I surmise that the "Hiram Harrington" story was created to put pressure on Lizzie to tell just who she saw so she could say "it wasn't Bridget or anyone who worked for Father".

[Kat]

That's a good question, Missy.
I realize tho that the Ferry Street house is not the house of contention- it was the Fourth Street house.
The Ferry Street house was given in 1887, but was most recently bought back July 15th. It was one reason the girls had money in the bank.
Also, it was not fussed over like the other property.
But I understand your point and it's a good one.

[Airmid]

Part two: The style of the Hiram Harrington piece in the WS.

First, let's see if the piece is in Hiram Harrington's style. We can see his style of speaking in the Inquest document, which gives us the literal representation of his words.
Reading through his Inquest testimony, I would characterize his speech as not very outspoken, rather hesitant, and anxious to get his words right. Some examples to illustrate this:
"We never had no words, or anything of that kind."
"I did not go to the house, any more than sometimes on business, that is, sometimes ...."
"... and I cut his acquaintance; that is, ...."
"O, yes there had been I guess. For several years, I guess, ..."
"... all I can tell is hear say, that is from them."

The bits is his testimony that are outspoken are facts that he is really sure of, or when he is telling of his own actions:
"... and I inquired of my wife how it was that Lizzie had not been down, Emma has always come. And the reply I would get from her was that Lizzie was into everything, that is, the works in the church, and her time was occupied; that is what I would get from her."
"Some years ago I thought he was hard, and I cut his acquaintance; that is, he came to my house, and I would leave the room; and he very soon saw I cut his acquaintance; and he did mine."

Hiram Harrington is especially careful not to repeat hearsay or state things he isn't sure about:
"I don't know as I could put anything together now to tell you, ..."
"I don't know as I could put enough of it together now, I can just give you an idea."
"The general construction I have got of what she said, and from what little I learned, ..."
"I don't know as I could put enough to say really what passed."
"I don't know as I could remember anything to put together to make any sense."

This style of speaking is very much different from what we find in the Witness Statements. That piece is very outspoken, with no hesitation whatsoever, whether facts or opinions are given:
“When the perpetrator of this foul deed is found, it will be one of the household. I had a long talk with Lizzie yesterday, Thursday, the day of the murder, and I am not at all satisfied with statement or demeanor. She was too solicitous about his comfort, and showed a side of character I never knew or even suspected her to possess. She helped him off with one coat and on with another, and assisted him in an easy incline on the sofa, and desired to place a afghan over him, and also to adjust the shutters so the light would not disturb his slumber. This is something she could not do, even if she felt; and no one who knows her, could be made believe it. She is very strong willed, and will fight for what she considers her rights. She went to the barn, where she stayed twenty minutes, or half an hour, looking for some lead from which to make sinkers for fishing lines, as she was going to Marion next week.”

I can find no similarity at all in the style of Hiram's Inquest testimony and the style of the report of the supposed interview in the Witness Statements. Agreed, the occasion of both statements was somewhat different, since the Inquest statement was given under oath, and the statement to a police officer was not, but a statement made to a police officer is still something different than an informal chat.
So, my conclusion is, that what we found in the Witness Statemtns is not an actual word-for-word account of what Hiram Harrington supposedly said.

Next, let's see if the piece is in Philip Harrington's usual style. This is quite hard, since Philip Harrington uses several styles in his reports.
One of the reports of the interviews that are undoubtedly by Philip Harrington is the interview with Lizzie on page 5 of the Witness Statements. Two of his styles can be seen in this piece:

Miss Lizzie. “Saw father, when he returned from the P.O. He sat down to read the paper. I went out to the barn, remained twenty minutes; returned, and found him dead. Saw no one in the yard when going to or returning from the barn. Heard no noise whatever while in the barn.” (To a question.) Not even The opening or closing of the screen door. “Why not, you were but a short distance, and would hear the noise so made?” “I was upstairs in the loft.” “What motive?” “I dont know.” “Was it robbery?”
“I think not, for every thing appears all right, even to the watch in father’s pocket, and ring on his finger.” “Have you any reason, no matter how slight, to suspect anybody?” “N-n-no, I have not.” “why hesitate”? “Well, a few weeks ago father had angry words with a man about something”. “What was it?” “I did not know at the time, but they were both very angry at the time; and the stranger went away.” “Did you see him at all?” “No sir they were in another room; but from the tone of their voices, I knew
things were not pleasant between them.” “Did father say anything about him, or his visit?” “No sir. About two weeks ago he called again. They had a very animated conversation, during which they got very angry again. I heard father say “no sir, I will not let my store for any such business.” Just before they separated, I heard father say “well, when you are in town again, come up, and I will let you know about it.”


Philip Harrington, in this piece, tries to give Lizzie's words quite literally, or tries at least to give the suggestion that he does so. The piece starts with very short sentences in factual statement-style, and the questions he asked Lizzie are also given in very short form. Towards the end of the piece his sentences are more elaborate and gives the impression of a genuine conversation. Aboth questions and answers are given. He also includes non-essential words and phrases:
"Well, a few weeks ago..."
"I did not know at the time, but...."
"No sir."

Philip Harrington can be quite pompous in his choice of words as well. The next part of the interview with Lizzie, apparently written down at another occasion, reads as follows:
During this conversation with Lizzie, I cautioned her about what she might say at the present time. I said owing to the atrociousness of the crime, perhaps you are not in a mental condition to give as clear a statement of the facts as you will be tomorrow; and also by that time you may be able to tell more about the man who wished to hire the store. You may recollect of having heard his name, or of seeing him, and thereby be enabled to give a description of him, or may recollect of something said about him by your father; so I say it may be better for you not to submit to an interview until tomorrow, when you may be better able to recite what you know of the circumstances.” To this she replied “no, I think I can
tell you all I know now, just as well as at any other time.”

In this style, he doesn't care to give the impression of authentic speech. He merely paraphrases on what he might have said in reality, and puts as much elaboration it is as he can.
Interestingly, there is another version of this same interview. Philip Harrington talked to the press about it (probably to Edwin Porter of the FR Globe; see also Porter p. 12), and we find the piece copied in the New Bedford Evening Standard of August 5th:
Officer Harrington, who talked with Miss Lizzie Borden, says that the young woman’s self-possession was wonderful. He saw her just after the murder had been committed, and said: “I suppose you are so disturbed, Miss Borden, that you don’t care to say anything just now?” Miss Borden replied “I can talk about it now as well as any other time.”
To all outward appearances she was perfectly composed.
“How long were you in the barn?” asked the officer. “Twenty minutes.” “Are you sure about the time? Aren’t you overstating it?” “No; I am positive that I was in the barn 20 minutes.” “What happen then?” “I came into the house and saw father lying dead on the lounge.” “What did you do?” “I screamed for Bridget.”

The words used in the article above, “I suppose you are so disturbed, Miss Borden, that you don’t care to say anything just now?”, sound to me much more natural and are probably a much better representation of what Philip Harrington actually said than the elaborate "speech" he gives in the Witness Statements.

Philip Harrington's "pompous" style agrees more or less with the style in which the Hiram Harrington piece is written. The other two styles he used in the Lizzie-interview do not agree with it. However, there is, in my eyes, one big difference between those two pieces. In the first piece, Philip Harrington paraphrases his own words. It seems to me that he does this with a calculated effect to impress his superiors. This is not the only occasion he appears to do so. Giving Hiram Harrington's words in the same style would of course not serve the same purpose.

Interestingly, the Hiram Harrington piece in the Witness Statements is in the style of the newspaper interview that was published in the local newspapers on August 6th. Comparing a few phrases:
WS: "She was too solicitous about his comfort, and showed a side of character I never knew or even suspected her to possess."
FR Herald: "All these things showed a solicitude and a thoughtfulness that I never had heard was a part of her nature or custom before."
WS: "She helped him off with one coat and on with another, and assisted him in an easy incline on the sofa, and desired to place a afghan over him, and also to adjust the shutters so the light would not disturb his slumber."
FR Herald: "She was very solicitous concerning him, and assisted him to remove his coat and put on his dressing-gown; asked concernedly how he felt, as he had been weak from a cholera morbus attack the day before. She told me she helped him to get a comfortable reclining position on the lounge, and asked him if he did not wish the blinds closed to keep out the sun, so he could have a nice nap."

The style of both pieces is quite formal and not at all like normal speech. Both pieces are full of words that have much simpler synomyms which would be much more likely to have been used in normal speech.
Earlier I concluded that the Witness Statement piece does not reflect Hiram's way of speaking. But the style of the Witness Statement piece does reflect in my opinion the style of the newspaper article. Having both a newspaper reporter and a police officer paraphrasing Hiram's much more simple and hestitating words into the same pompous style is a bit too much coincedence for me. Supposing that Philip Harrington used the newspaper interview to put together his piece is a natural conclusion in my eyes.

Airmid.

[Airmid]

Just a few things, besides writing style, give me problems with this idea. At the time of the interview were the police already aware of the troubles between the girls and Mrs. Borden over the house, and that it was the Ferry Street house? Also police at the scene would know he was not wearing his bed slippers but had on his congress boots. Someone who was not at the scene would not. But could be told as much. I guess what I'm getting at is, how much of the information supposedly stated by Hiram in the interview would the police have been privy to on their own at this time if there was no interview? And how much of the information that was given that was incorrect should've been known by someone at the scene?

I don't know what was known to the police about the house before the 6th, but on the 6th, when the interview was published in the FR newspapers, two other newspapers had the following information:

Boston Herald Aug 6th: "Lizzie was born in the old family homestead on Ferry st.,in which her father has lived and his father before him. It is the same estate which the dead Andrew J. Borden deeded to the two girls in 1887."

New York Herald Aug. 6th: "Both girls have been given property by their father." ..... "It is related that when there was trouble about the collection of the rents of two tenement houses which the girls owned he traded with them and gave them a block of stock in return for the houses, as the girls much preferred collecting dividends to dunning for rents."

Officer Medley spoke about the Ferry Street house with Charles C. Cook, but this was probably on August 7th or later.

The lead-for-sinker story and Lizzie's visit to Marion were also told in the newspapers of the 6th:

New York Herald Aug. 6th: "...; she went to the barn after a piece of lead, to return in twenty minutes and discover the crime."

New Bedford Evening Standard Aug. 6th: "She had made arrangements to go to Marion the first of next week for a short visit,...."

Interestingly, Philip Harrington was confused about Andrew's shoes, but he was under the impression Andrew was wearing high laced shoes or boots when he was found. (Trial p. 577/578)

Airmid.

[Harry]

We seem to have two different threads going at the same time on Hiram Harrington's alleged interview with Lizzie. I posted this to the other thread:

I, too, could find no newspaper article mentioning Hiram Harrington actually entering the house. Since the article is dated the 6th (Saturday) and Hiram says the interview was "last evening" I assume it took place on Friday the 5th. The following appeared in the NY Times on August 6th covering events of August 5th:

"... From all indications it would seem as if the funeral services to-morrow would have an official flavor. Miss Lizzie has kept her room all day and has been inaccessible to callers, no matter who or what they were. ..."

If Hiram actually did enter the house I don't think he got very far. He may have asked to see Lizzie and she more than likely would have told him in so many words to "get lost". Of course that's just speculation on my part.

It sounds to me like he was just saying what he knew of the Bordens from his and Laurana's personal knowledge.

[Allen]

Trial testimony of John Fleet page 488:

Q. Now you have told us that when Mr. Borden came back---she said that when her father came back into the house that she thought he looked rather feeble, and she advised him to lie down on the lounge or sofa.
A. And assisted him.

Q. Did you tell anything about that before?
A. I think I did, sir.

Q. Do you have any recollection of it, the slightest?
A. I think I did, sir.

Q. Do you testify now that you did?
A. I do, I think it is just about the same, stands about the same, as it was before.

Q. No, I don't care about the whole of the testimony as it was before. I want to know if you testified about that at the other hearing?
A. I did; yes, sir.

Q. You swear to that?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Then after she told you that, you say you went out into the yard and up into barn. Is that so?
A. After she told me that she had assisted her father to the lounge?

Q. Yes.
A. Yes, sir, she said she was ironing and she left her ironing and went outside and up into the barn.

[Allen]

Another thing I find interesting about this angle, is that Harrington actually worked for Andrew at one time. During the trial, on page 559, he testified to having known Andrew Borden for about twenty to twenty-five years, and that at one time he had worked for him for over three years.

[Kat]

I'm sorry, but I am missing the point of the Fleet testimony included here?

Also, Terence Duniho has an article published in the LBQ about Suspect Carpenter who embezzeled money from Borden & Almy and growing up possibly as boyhood friends with P. Harrington:

"Duniho, Terence. 'Friends From Boyhood: A Police Officer and an Embezzler.' Lizzie Borden Quarterly VIII.3 (July 2001): 7, 17-20.
Duniho follows the trail of Joseph W. Carpenter, Jr., an employee of Andrew J. Borden who had embezzled $6,700 from Borden & Almy as a possible suspect in the murder of Andrew and Abby Borden."

http://lizzieandrewborden.com/Resources ... Auth.htm#d

[Allen]

I'm sorry, but I am missing the point of the Fleet testimony included here?

Also, Terence Duniho has an article published in the LBQ about Suspect Carpenter who embezzeled money from Borden & Almy and growing up possibly as boyhood friends with P. Harrington:

"Duniho, Terence. 'Friends From Boyhood: A Police Officer and an Embezzler.' Lizzie Borden Quarterly VIII.3 (July 2001): 7, 17-20.
Duniho follows the trail of Joseph W. Carpenter, Jr., an employee of Andrew J. Borden who had embezzled $6,700 from Borden & Almy as a possible suspect in the murder of Andrew and Abby Borden."

http://lizzieandrewborden.com/Resources ... Auth.htm#d

The Fleet testimony was intended to show that Lizzie told at least one other person that her father was feeling feeble and that she assisted him in lying down on the sofa. I took note that you said possibly as a boyhood friend. Does this mean there was no conclusive proof?

[Kat]

It means I didn't get out the article and re-read it!

Would you like more information?

[Kat]

Lizzie Borden Quarterly
Pages 7 and 17 through 20 - July 2001

FRIENDS FROM BOYHOOD:
“A Police Officer and an Embezzler”

Bt Terence Duniho

...
[Excerpt]:
Joe Carpenter, Jr. and Phil Harrington both worked for Borden & Almy. (9) Harrington worked there a little more than three years, (10) from roughly 1874 to about 1877, and Carpenter from 1874 to 1878. (11) Carpenter was a bookkeeper, while Harrington was apprenticed as a cabinet maker. Carpenter was 18, then 19, in 1874, while Harrington was 14 and 15 that year. When Harrington left, in or near 1877, he would have been about 17 or 18. When Carpenter left, he was 21 or 22.

Questions: Based on the Fall River Daily Globe article, we know they became acquainted at that time, but was it more than an acquaintance? Might it have been a close friendship?

Facts: Hiram C. Harrington, Lizzie's uncle by marriage, worked as a clerk for Borden & Almy in 1876 and 1878. (12) There were no city directories in 1875, 1877, or 1879, but in 1874 and 1880 Hiram was a blacksmith on Ferry Street. So it is possible that he was employed by his brother-in-law from late 1874 to early 1880. He is the only person whose name Lizzie or Emma ever publicly mentioned when asked who they each thought might have "had bad feelings" toward their father, or their father toward someone else. (13)(14) Besides Philip and Hiram, there is a third Harrington connected to this case. Bridget Sullivan's cousin, Patrick, in whose home on Division Street she stayed for a few days shortly after the murders. Interestingly, on page 21 of the Witness Statements, Phil Harrington, in an interview with Bridget conducted on October 1, 1892, wrote: "She promised wherever she would go, she would let me know through Mrs. Harrington of Division Street."

Question: What might have been Hiram Harrington's relationship to Joe Carpenter, Phil Harrington and/or even Patrick Harrington?

Facts: Carpenter is known to have embezzled $6,700 from Borden & Almy "over a period of [no more than 4] years." (15) That would be about $105,000 today. (16) Unlike Carpenter, whose embezzling was criminal, Harrington became a policeman. Though police and criminals do not by any means always associate intimately with each other, it is true that very often those who later go into law enforcement and those who later become criminals are seen to have been closely associated with each other when they were younger.

[RayS]

Unlike Carpenter, whose embezzling was criminal, Harrington became a policeman. Though police and criminals do not by any means always associate intimately with each other, it is true that very often those who later go into law enforcement and those who later become criminals are seen to have been closely associated with each other when they were younger.

The fact is that police are drawn from the "blue collar" population. Its not unusual for a plumber or carpenter or construction worker to join the force. Sometimes its who you know. Many officers will get a son (or daughter now) into the ranks.

You all know that the most dangerous occupations are: farmer, miner, construction worker, fireman before policeman. Most cops never fire their weapon in the line of duty. Not if they have "command presence".

[RayS]

= deleted duplicate =

[Kat]

Was any of the info on Carpenter/Harrington useful to you, Missy?

[RayS]

It has always seemed fabricated in some way to me also, mainly because Hiram was a blacksmith and I could not imagine that he ever spoke like that. Then when the *interview* is compared to his testimony, he sounds like a blacksmith, and also less firm in his supposed opinion.

However, he was there in the house that day- so he could have spoken to someone- be it an onsite reporter or a police official. Maybe a reporter? And then Hiram went home to break the news to his [edit here: meaning "Andrew's sister"] sister and the police realized they missed getting his statement? So they got it from the reporter? This is an imaginary theory.

[Edit here]: He also was not ever called to testify again after the inquest. Well, maybe at the grand jury but there'd be no record for us.

Doesn't Edwin Porter (in his book) say that the police let no one into the house that evening so Harrington could not have done what he said he did?
Let us use a little skepticism here. Just because somebody wrote it down does not make it true. Remember all those Lizzie Legends?

[Kat]

Hiram Harrington was there that day. I don't know what Porter says- have you a quote?

In Proceedings, some of Jennings' notes have been transcribed. This is on Hiram:

k.  Harrington, Hiram--Brother-in-law of A.J. Borden arrives at 12:05 and at 12:15 (?) hired a horse to go notify his wife because she had been sick and he wanted to tell her himself because of the shame he feared.

[RayS]

Hiram Harrington was there that day. I don't know what Porter says- have you a quote?

In Proceedings, some of Jennings' notes have been transcribed. This is on Hiram:

k.  Harrington, Hiram--Brother-in-law of A.J. Borden arrives at 12:05 and at 12:15 (?) hired a horse to go notify his wife because she had been sick and he wanted to tell her himself because of the shame he feared.

Quoting from memory, I believe there is a chapter that contains the Hiram Harrington story. Porter's book came from articles in the FR Globe. As far as I know.

[Kat]

Well you do see that Hiram was there that day?
It is in Jennings notes.

[RayS]

Well you do see that Hiram was there that day?
It is in Jennings notes.

I agree that Harrington was there that day.
The question is whether he did go inside and stay to talk with Lizzie as was claimed in that article.

[Kat]

It reads like he was there about 10 minutes.
I thought we had already discussed this visit?