Jeffery's Theory

[diana]

Is "George E. Howe" any relation to "Fred Howe" who was the getaway driver in Fritz Adilz's theory? They seem to have reacted quite differently.

According to Adilz Howe didn't leave Davis high and dry but was there when the butcher came out. And it was Howe who went into a shop and asked a switchboard operator to put a call through to Emery's so he could tell JVM the business was done. Then Fred left his wagon and team with Davis and hopped on the next train to New Bedford. (Source: The Hatchet, Feb/March 2004, p.18+)

[Kat]

I don't know. This Howe of Jeffery's is provable- where does Fritz get his Howe, do you know?

[diana]

According to the Adilz article in The Hatchet , Fred Howe worked for Davis in his slaughterhouse.

[Kat]

These news items seem to imply this Howe is from South Dartmouth as well as Davis.

I don't understand about Morse going to Howe's after the PO in order to buy a stamp.

Maybe this guy is in town temporarily but the cop following Morse makes it sound like Morse went to "Howe's", like Howe was a business of some type people had heard of.

[Kat]

For info on Morse, please see "More On Morse" Topic.

[jeffery]

there was no fred howe who worked in the slaughterhouse at the davis farm.
there was a portugese named manuel silva who worked there as early as 1880.
silva was also metioned(unnamed) in the witnness statements.

[weber]

Good morning all-
I am curious about Uncle Morse's relationship with the girls after the trial was over. Did he call on them or write (how would we know that?). Did he stay in the area or return to Iowa?

I think Jeffrey's theory is interesting. For some reason it seems more plausible than that of Brown. It would seem that money and passionate hatred would be strong motives. It would also go a long way in solving the blood mystery. I can "see" Lizzie killing the stepmother but not her father- especially in the manner it happened.

[donj]

This was all very interesting but I still think Lizzie did it.

[Haulover]

jeffrey,

i like your theory in that it connects one of the farms/slaughter/butcher -- to the borden murders.

my question, though, is why you find it necessary to connect to it this lincolnesque dress-switch? i've spent some time on lincoln's dress theory, and i don't buy it at all. do you have your own reasons for it? just wondering how deliberate or important it is, and why if any testimony it is based on -- or is it outside of testimony?

[Kat]

Good morning all-
I am curious about Uncle Morse's relationship with the girls after the trial was over. Did he call on them or write (how would we know that?). Did he stay in the area or return to Iowa?

Rebello, 72
John V. Morse's will:

"Sixth -- I direct that the real estate of which I am now possessed in Mills County, Iowa, which is now leased to W[illiam E[dwin] Van Ausdale shall at the expiration of said lease be sold and the proceeds be divided equally between my nephew and nieces, not named, except those named Borden, who are not in need of it."

"Note: The 100 acre farm in Hastings, Iowa, was sold to Mr. T. M. Brazelton for $12,500.00. Based on the courts construction of the will, the following nieces and nephews each received $910.64 from the sale (less expenses): Ada A. Lancaster, Edith M. Lancaster, Arnie Andrews, Eva M. Roe, Selecta M. Bee, Bird Fairchild, Sarah England, Henry L. Shaw, John W. Shaw, John Morse, George Morse and William Morse."

74:
"Residuary Account

The court made the following ruling on March 17, 1913: Mr. William B. Morse, brother of John Morse, entitled to 1/6 ($1,211.98); Arabella, half-sister of John Morse, ($1,211.98); entitled to 1/6, Lisbeth Borden and Emma Borden, entitled to 1/12 ($605.97)..."

Emma refused the share, while Lizbeth accepted hers.
Supposedly Emma thought of him as their dear uncle, at least during the inquest. She also admitted to corresponding with him regularly before the murders.
Emma's estate accepted the residuary account and added it to her legacy after her demise.

What happened in between, we don't really know.

[Yooper]

I realize this is an old thread, but there may be too much made of Morse's involvement with the "horse traders". If the horses were consigned to Morse he was then the owner's agent for the sale of the horses. He was not the owner, only a middle man. The "itinerant horse traders" may well have been farm or ranch hands sent by the owner to look after the horses. If Morse was looking to stock a farm with the animals, why would any of them have been auctioned off? If Morse is a horse trader and there are other horse traders camped near the horses, I don't see why an auctioneer is necessary.

Many possibilities exist for the arrangement, I'll suggest one in which an auctioneer plays a telling role. Imagine a drought year in Iowa. There isn't enough feed for the number of horses and all of the farmers are in the same boat in the drought area. The Iowa farmer can't buy additional feed for the animals, there's none to be had anywhere nearby. The farmer can't sell the horses in the area because nobody has enough feed for their own animals, let alone addtional livestock. The choices are to buy in feed (assuming available funds in a bad year) from a distant source with the added expense of shipping, or selling the horses in a distant market with the expense of shipping the horses. Buying hay for the horses is less likely in a bad year because it requires a large outlay of money. Selling the horses creates income which can then go to feed the rest of the farmer's livestock. If the Iowa farmer is a friend or acquaintance of John Morse who happens to live in an area where feed may be plentiful (having available pasture in August, for instance), and a stable market for horses, why not hire him as a sales agent? Selling at auction means taking whatever you can get for the animals and implies a degree of desperation on the part of the seller.

This makes Morse's statements with regards to the horses and horse traders seem a bit more accurate. The newspaper accounts might be based too much on assumptions.

[RayS]

WAS 1892 a drought year? 1893 saw the worst Depression in American history until the Great Depression (1929-1949). Actually, the Depression started in 1921 with a fall in crop prices.

Your comments about selling off livestock when fodder is high is true (see 1816 in the northeast, and Europe). But they were more likely to be slaughtered for meat. Less in transportations costs!

Arnold Brown points out that "horse traders" were regarded as low as "used-car salesmen" in that day. Brown also wonders about Morse arriving by rented buggy when he was a horse trader! That's like a used-car salesman taking a taxi.

In effect, this validates the theory of a Secret Visitor doing the murders. But it multiplies dependencies needlessly, IMO.

[RayS]

Given the history of Vermont and its famous Morgan horses (US Cavalry), I wonder why they didn't seek a closer source than Iowas (if indeed they did ship them in that way, like cattle to Chicago).

Reading about the early 19th century, I read that a horse would be used up, or die, after about 200 miles of post riding (fast gallop). What can anyone say about the use of horses in that way?

[Yooper]

I don't know that 1892 was a drought year overall, but droughts can occur locally. Actually, any scenario which creates too many animals and expensive or scarce feed would work here. It might have been good horse market in the east that year. Many possibilities, but remember the auctioneer!

[Curryong]

This is an interesting thread on many levels, as it explores the links between Morse and the Bordens, also I was struck by the reported conversation of Bridget and Nellie McHenry in which she says Abby fretted about Morse imposing himself on them all summer long and 'why don't he get married and go away..." (Post on Page 1) Quite amusing!

[phineas]

1891 was a drought year in Iowa, the summer before. http://bit.ly/1s4kFPa

[Curryong]

Hmm, interesting, Phineas! Of course there seems to be consensus among many posters that the Nellie McHenry--Bridget interview didn't happen, but to me this comment appears to have the ring of truth. Abby may well have not wanted a garrulous, unhygenic, awkward sort of person hanging around her home for the summer. She probably was less enamoured of his company than Andrew was though they were cordial to each other, of course.

John Morse had visited his uncle Charles in Rhode Island between 1890-1891, 'imposing' himself there for about a year and a half. His farm was rented out. He left in October 1891 to stay with his old friends, the Davises of South Dartmouth. In 1892, Morse had visited the Bordens in June and July, and August, of course. I don't believe in 'Morse the shady horse dealer' but otherwise Jeffery's is a very interesting, if a bit convoluted, theory, very interesting indeed!

[debbiediablo]

I find this difficult to envision for one of the reasons Possum (I think) pointed out, and that is that all three men said not a word to anyone for the rest of their lives. Usually crimes of this magnitude involving multiple people fail to remain secret: someone has too much to drink or falls too much in love-lust or gets into a testosterone fueled bragging match or has an attack of overwhelming guilty conscience and spills the beans. To my knowledge no one who might actually have been the murderer ever alluded to being the murderer. Plus, the idea that Morse had horses brought east to sell for the purpose of buying a farm ignores a more logical reason for Morse to come east which is to watch the horses be sold. To this day, farmers who sell livestock by auction go to watch it be sold. There's a natural sense of closure in this.

[geri]

The farm issue seems a pretty weak motive to hatchet someone. I think if Lizzie participated or was in on that explanation of the crime she would certainly have let Bridget find the Body. It always seemed to me that she seemed to be in shock when she discovered him and that could have contributed to her not running from the house, yet people do react strangely under stress. I always have felt that Lizzie contracted to have her stepmother killed and the killer hung around and dusted her father too.

[twinsrwe]

Welcome to the forum, Geri. I hope you will find this site very interesting and full of the best information available on the Borden Murder Case.

[Curryong]

Yes, welcome Geri! Hope you enjoy it here. The Jeffery theory is very convoluted but I found it interesting as a real attempt to tie up loose ends. I agree, motive and keeping three people's mouths shut afterwards would be a real problem. I believe that Lizzie did burn paperwork afterwards. That I agree with! John Morse's involvement with Howe seems peripheral in real life, though, even if they were distant cousins.

[mbhenty]

NEVER MIND

[Steveads2004]

Old thread full of golden information.

[BeautifulLizbeth1]

Hmm...
What convinces me most of a hIred assassin is the fact that Morse went to Swansea the day before to retrieve the Eggs.

[camgarsky4]

A core tenet of Jeffery's Theory is that John Morse felt slighted by Andrew by backing out of selling John the Swansea farm. Per the Theory, Morse wanted to own the farm in order to raise horses.

In my opinion, there are big holes in this aspect of Jeffery's Theory.

1) Morse owned a house and farm in Iowa, and doesn't appear to have the intention to reside full time in Massachusetts for the duration of his life. This is proven out by the fact that he returned to his property in Iowa and lived out his life there.
2) Morse appears to have had the financial capacity to purchase property in Massachusetts if he had so chosen. Why would he brutally murder two people 'just' for not selling him property for a use/need that could be addressed thru purchase or rent of a different property.
3) Emma placed the 80 acre Borden Swansea 'upper' farm on the market almost immediately after the murders. Presumably this sale was necessary to free up cash for Lizzie's legal defense. If John wanted the farm, it was now officially available. But he did not purchase the property and it sold the following Spring, 1893, to a non-family member.

Screenshot 2024-11-17 072632.png

[camgarsky4]

Singer/Jeffrey -- Your theory is very well researched and fascinating. So I am not challenging it, but would like more insights to help me decide if I think a viable solution for my own consideration.

If I am understanding correctly, "Jeffrey's Theory" states that the motive for Morse/Davis was AJB backing out of the sale of the Swansea farm to Morse.

As the newspaper clippings below tell us, Emma put the 80 acre Swansea farm on the market just days after Lizzie was jailed after the Preliminary Hearing. My presumption is that the sale was intended to raise cash for Lizzie's defense.

It would make a lot of sense if when Emma mentioned needing to sell the farm, Uncle John would have simply said, "no worries, I'll buy it and keep it in the family."

Is this still the core motive for 'Jeffrey's Theory'?

Screenshot 2025-01-11 090726.png

Screenshot 2025-01-11 090513.png

[Singer7j]

Yes

[camgarsky4]

Resurfacing a thread containing aspects of "Jeffrey's Theory". Jeffrey posted actively on the site when it first went live. He seemed to have gone 'dark' for a super long while, but posted again a year ago or so, and it was fun to connect briefly with him.

Might be a good topic to toss around for a while.

There are other threads with Jeffrey's Theory as a topic, so please search the forum for these additional insights.

[Inspector]

This would explain Seaver’s visit to the Borden house after the murders.

state officer, George f. Seaver, Fall River,

Westport promises something, and again comes to the front in the flat contradiction of John V. Morse's statement that he had no knowledge whatever of the horse traders at Westport. state detective Seaver said , 'before I knew anything about this case whatsoever, I heard that a large consignment of wild horses to John V. Morse had arrived at Westport, and I went down to see them. I wanted to see the mustangs, and see them lasso them. there were 80 horses, I should think together. I went down there with a gentleman from Westport factory and saw the horses in a field. they were consigned to John V. Morse of South Dartmouth. there are farmers about there and it is the best place to make a trade. there had been an auction, and about 12 horses had been sold by the auctioneer. that was a week ago today, exactly, and Morse was the man to whom they were consigned.the murders happened about 2 days later, and I knew nothing of the case until Thursday night.'

(this interview between the reporter and detective Seaver was on August 8th, and Mr. Seaver's visit to Westport was on Tuesday aug 2, two days prior to the Borden murders.)

J’s theory brings up several things that have always irritated me:

The note that JVM just happened to have with him. (nothing to see here in the innocent note.)
Showing up unannounced.
Sleeping in the guest room.
No contact with Lizzie.
The telephone call to Morse that was denied ever happened.
Inconsistency in the events at Emery’s

I could keep going, but will add that with all the talk of a will, Andrew’s package or papers (Thursday morning) and burning things in the stove, I am reminded of something a visitor to the Borden house once said.

The key hole from Lizzie’s door to her parents bedroom was a perfect spot for her to listen through.

Also, if I were to buy into J’s theory , the auction of 12 horses may have been out of desperation, since the Swansea farm was denied John.

Strangely I was thinking about a cleaver being used the other day…weird! Probably because of John’s ties to the butcher business.
I was planning at looking into William Davis, but this does a good job better than I could do.

[Inspector]

Comment about Seaver's visit to the Borden house again, being unclear previously, was in regards to Spencer’s comment on page 115, CALB.

[Inspector]

A couple names possibly linked to Davis and Howe, are Lincoln and Cooper from Westport.

Interesting, Isaac Davis (son of William) and Mr Howe visited the. Borden house to see JVM in Sunday after the murders , and Davis made a strange comment about the horse trading business.
Source W Spencer CALB Page 131.

Davis’s comments could be construed as a diversion away from his (Davis’s ) possible involvement, and that would fit well into J’s theory.
This could also make sense of why Davis would distance himself from, yet return to the scene of the crime.
Someone may say there was unfinished business which necessitated the visit, and also explains JVM’s concern for being able to access the post office .

[Lorcan]

Given that the skulls were boiled in water to get them down to the bone, I think the gilt was put into Abby's wound accidentally by someone testing a new hatchet after the skull was already processed. Additionally, I think Andrew was killed with the handleless hatchet because it had been ground down (sharpened) so many times, it fit perfectly into the wound and a new 3.5 inch hatchet would not.

It's not just that the blade was thinner than a new hatchet of the same style and size, it was that it was asymmetrically thinner in precisely the area of the blade that matched the wound (see the line about the lower corner in the testimony below).

That, to me, is very close to a modern ballistics match: From the trial:

Q. The handleless hatchet is not an uncommon instrument, is it?
A. No, sir.
Q. It has a very general circulation?
A. I think so.
Q. Like some other things. (Producing a new hatchet). Is there anything about that which is out of the ordinary?
A. Nothing that I perceive at present, sir.
Q. Won't you see if you can cut that into the injury or the scar in the skull?
A. (After trying experiment). It does not fit the wound.
Q. Why not?
A. Because it is too blunt at this lower corner and does not go into this passage right here.
Q. That is on account of the grinding?
A. It is on account of the thickness and the grinding.
Q. That is to say, it is not ground enough, in your opinion?
A. It is not.

I think John was as honest a horse trader as most others, that is to say, about as honest as an average used car salesman. So, yes, I think John didn't want to draw extra scrutiny about the details of the horse trading business. One thing that I don't know if everyone has as common knowledge but livestock was so much cheaper out west - John was in the transport and arbitrage business - not raising animals in the crowded expensive New England. He was just bringing in relatively cheap livestock from out west and trying to quickly sell them. So, I think he didn't need a farm like a farmer needs a farm, he just periodically needs the use of a barn, some hay, and somewhere to display the animals for sale. He already had that out in Westport and Dartmouth, I think.

[Inspector]

Good points, the fact that the medical testimony was so detailed, did help narrow the description of the blade that killed the Borden’s.

The problem I have with J’s Theory, is now we’re involving at least three accomplices.
I have enough trouble finding the one, if there is one to be found.
I do find the accomplice theories intriguing, and J’s is one I would say is quite so.

[Lorcan]

I wasn't going to comment generally on this thread because I didn't think I had anything that would really move it forward. But since I gave my opinion on Andrew not being killed with a cleaver, I'll add my broader thoughts on this theory.

This was a brutal double murder committed in broad daylight, on a busy street, inside an occupied house, with Bridget present and other potential witnesses nearby. Any conspiracy theory has to explain why a pre-planned killing would be carried out under those conditions. That is the central problem for me.

If this was a planned conspiracy involving an outside killer, why proceed while Bridget was still in the house? Would any serious plan depend on her not hearing anything, not seeing anything, not interrupting anything, and not becoming a witness? If Lizzie was involved in the conspiracy, she had an obvious way to reduce that risk: send Bridget away on an errand.

The method of killing is another problem. Andrew was elderly, asleep, and vulnerable. Abby was a 64-year-old woman, about five feet tall, and the killer was apparently close enough to strike her with a hatchet. Yet the killer did not seem to rely on silent physical control. The attacks were violent, repeated, and risky. That does not look like the work of a strong, confident, pre-planned assassin trying to minimize noise, time, and exposure.

So for me, any conspiracy theory has to answer two practical questions:

1. What kind of pre-planned killer is willing to commit murder for money, but does not choose a quieter or more controlled way to overpower an elderly sleeping man and an older, short, overweight woman?

2. Why commit the murders in the house, in daylight, while Bridget was there, when a conspirator inside the house could have created a much safer opportunity?

That does not make a conspiracy impossible. But it makes it operationally hard to believe. The crime looks less like a carefully managed outside plot and more like an attack by someone who had access, opportunity, and a very narrow window, but who did not trust their ability to subdue the victims silently.

[Lorcan]

I agree with others that there is still a value in pursuing all these conspiracies...they sometimes uncover something useful or at least get us to look at things from a different angle. So, please don't take my debunking as discouragement. I think all the investigation can be useful and should be done if it interests the investigator.