Lizzie Borden Society Forum

While reading a bit in Porter, I came across the Hiram Harrington story again.
Porter says he had an interview on Friday Aug. 5 with Harrington. Something struck my eye in that interview:
"On leaving the house, she says she went directly to the barn to obtain some lead. She informed me that it was her intention to go to Marion on a vacation, and she wanted the lead in the barn loft to make some sinkers." (Porter, p. 25)
I thought it was odd that the "lead" version was mentioned in this interview. So I double-checked it with the transcription of the actual newpaper article. I didn't find the orignal The News and Globe article from Aug. 5, but the Fall River Daily Herald article, dated Aug. 6, is on this site. (http://lizzieandrewborden.com/Resources ... Herald.htm)
And yes, the "lead" version is in the Daily Herald article too. I assume that article is a copy of the News and Globe article.
The Witness statements implicitely confirm that Porter had an interview with Hiram Harrington: "He spoke at some length about her telling about the same story as was published in the News and Globe of Friday evening.". Doherty and Harrington had this interview with Hiram Harrington on Saturday Aug. 6 (Witness p. 11). The "lead" version of the barn story is mentioned here too.
Now for the odd thing: Apparently Hiram Harrington knew already on Friday Aug. 5 that Lizzie was going to tell the "lead" version of the story during the Inquest. As far as I know, nobody else had heard of the "lead" version at that moment. All witnesses who where there on Thursday the 4th who testified about a version of the barn story, told the "iron" version.
Even the police didn't take Hiram's "lead" version seriously. They didn't start looking for pieces of lead in the barn until wednesday afternoon, Aug 10. That was directly after Lizzie told her "lead" version during the Inquest, on wednesday morning. So I seriously doubt that the "lead" version had been buzzing in the streets by thurday night, or friday morning, and that that was the source of information for Hiram.
That leaves me with only one possible conclusion, and that is the Hiram heard the "lead" version from Lizzie herself, and that he indeed had an interview with Lizzie on the night of the murders. It also leads me to the conclusion that Lizzie changed her "iron" story into the "lead" story already on the day of the murders.

What do you think?

Airmid.

I thought that she got iron from the barn. But then I heard to that she said she was getting lead, so I am not sure which is right. Don't know if that helps out.

Very interesting, Airmid. Sent me scurrying to the files.

Rebello, on page 86, has a listing of 10 stories that Lizzie told various people what she was doing at the time of her father's murder and for her reason for going to the barn. Only the last entry mentions the word "lead". That entry is for the story she told Mayor Coughlin on Saturday night, August 6, in the "you are suspected" visit to the house.

Coughlin confirms that in his trial testimony (Page 1163, vol. II).

Although sinkers can be made of anything that will (surprise!) "sink", most people generally assume lead as the material. It's hard to find when Lizzie first used the word "sinkers". If we can determine that was earlier then the alleged interview with Hiram Harrington, could Harrington have just assumed she was looking for lead?

Good find Airmid!

Harry @ Sun Jul 23, 2006 1:12 pm wrote: Rebello, on page 86, has a listing of 10 stories that Lizzie told various people what she was doing at the time of her father's murder and for her reason for going to the barn. Only the last entry mentions the word "lead". That entry is for the story she told Mayor Coughlin on Saturday night, August 6, in the "you are suspected" visit to the house.

Coughlin confirms that in his trial testimony (Page 1163, vol. II).

Ah yes, I hadn't checked his testimony. Marshall Hilliard says the same, I see.

Harry @ Sun Jul 23, 2006 1:12 pm wrote: Although sinkers can be made of anything that will (surprise!) "sink", most people generally assume lead as the material. It's hard to find when Lizzie first used the word "sinkers". If we can determine that was earlier then the alleged interview with Hiram Harrington, could Harrington have just assumed she was looking for lead?

Hiram gives a little more information about it. Here's a longer quote from the Daily Herald article:
"On leaving the house she says she went directly to the barn to obtain some lead. She informed me that it was her intention to go to Marion on a vacation, and she wanted the lead in the barn loft to make some sinkers. She was a very enthusiastic angler. I went over the ground several times, and she repeated the same story. She told me it was hard to place the exact time she was in the barn, as she was cutting the lead into sizeable sinkers, but thought she was absent some 20 minutes. Then she thought again, and said it might have been 30 minutes."

"Cutting" suggests a soft metal, such a lead, or perhaps tin. However, I'm not a native english speaker, so I might have that wrong.

Airmid.

Lizzie's inquest statement is in contradiction to Harrington's comment about her "cutting the lead into sizable sinkers". She testified (page 69)

"Q. How long did you remain there?
A. I don't know, fifteen or twenty minutes.
Q. What doing?
A. Trying to find lead for a sinker.
Q. What made you think there would be lead for a sinker up there?
A. Because there was some there.
Q. Was there not some by the door?
A. Some pieces of lead by the open door, but there was a box full of old things up stairs.
Q. Did you bring any sinker back from the barn?
A. I found no sinker.
Q. Did you bring any sinker back from the barn?
A. Nothing but a piece of a chip I picked up on the floor."

I can't imagine if she did cut up lead for sinkers that she would not bring them back.

Harrington's statement that he talked with Lizzie has always been suspicious to me. Lizzie at the Inquest was asked whether her father was on bad terms with anyone and the only person she could state was Hiram. Would she even talk with him if that was her opinion?

This appeared in Radin's book (page 82, paperback:

"The feud between Harrington and the Borden family, with the exception of Emma who still visited the Harringtons, was no secret in Fall River. All the papers, except the Globe, mentioned this fact so that their readers could judge for themselves the value of Harrington's statements.
One reporter, who had seen the blacksmith go in, timed the length of Harrington's stay. With tongue in cheek, he wrote that Harrington had managed to get a surprising amount of information from Lizzie considering that he had been inside the house exactly three minutes."

I have never been able to track that to a specific newspaper article.

Also that paragraph says only Emma maintained relations wit the Harringtons, so again, why would Lizzie give so much detail to a person she had suspicions of. I believe Lizzie continued, years later, to indicate that she thought Hiram was the murderer.

Since not everything everyone said is written down could Lizzie have said to someone else that she was looking for lead sinkers and somehow that information got back to Hiram? But who and when as no one else mentions it?

If Lizzie did cut up some lead for sinkers, what did she use as a cutting implement, could it have been an AX?

If it were sheet lead it could have been cut with a pair of heavy duty shears. I imagine it would be quite awkward to try to cut the lead with an axe or hatchet.

That's very true William, my apology if my little joke was at your expense, but it is true, shears could have been used. Back in that time there was always a little lead sheathing lying around. Lead was used for flashing, sealing or lining gutters, for water pipes etc.. As time went by lead was replaced by copper, cast and aluminum.

When we went fishing as kids we would use a large nail for a sinker. By then lead was difficult to find. Real sinkers cost money.

But along with the lead and iron, did Lizzie not mention anything about repairing a screen? Would Iron or Lead be used in repairs to a screen? Or was she talking about a "smoke screen"? Ok, ok not funny.

The Hiram Harrington story is part of a little investigation into Lizzie's alibi. There are different versions of what Lizzie said that she was doing in the barn while her father was being murdered. One could simply say that Lizzie never was in the barn, because she was in the sitting room chopping up her father. Whether that was the case or not, the question remains why Lizzie gave such an incoherent and unconvincing account of her doings during the Inquest.
So, I'm checking what the different versions are, who reported what and when, and tried to see how reliable their reports are.

I guess I'm doing what Mr. Rebello already has done, and of course I have far fewer resources to use than Mr. Rebello, but since I don't have the book and can't ask you guys to copy it all out on this forum, that's the only way to go. Besides, I think it's fun to do.

This little list is compiled from the Witness Statements, Inquest testimonies, and a few other sources:
Before Lizzie went upstairs to her room:

• Adelaide Churchill: "went to the barn to get a piece of iron" (Inq 128)
  Alice Russell: "a piece of iron to fix the screen" (Inq 150)
  Dr. Bowen: "out of doors, out to the barn, had been out a while" "looking after some irons" "some irons, or tin" (Inq 123)

After Lizzie went to her room:

• Off. Harrington: "went out to the barn" "was upstairs in the loft" (Wit 5)
  Off. Doherty: "was in the barn" (Wit 4)
  Asst. Fleet: "went up in the barn, upstairs" (Wit 2)
  Off. Medley: "upstairs in the barn" (Wit 28)

Thursday Aug. 4, evening, or Friday Aug. 5, morning:

• Hiram Harrington: "wanted the lead in the barn loft to make some sinkers"

Saturday Aug. 6, around 8 PM:

• Dr. Coughlin: "went to the barn for some lead for sinkers" (Trial 1163)
  Marshall Hilliard: "went out there to get some lead to make some sinkers" (Trial 1119)

Wednesday Aug. 10:

• Lizzie: "trying to find lead for a sinker" (Inq 69) "ate some pears up there" (Inq 75)

The list is nowhere complete. But I think it shows that there was an "iron" version to Lizzie's alibi early in the day, that changed into a "lead" version either during the day, or early the next day. Why? And how come that Hiram Harrington was, of all people, the person to report the "lead" version first? Those are the questions I'm looking into at the moment.

There is an obvious fallacy in these quotes. People seem to assume that the witnesses are 1000% correct and Lizzie is 1000% wrong. It could be that the same story was told (?) but each witness remembered it differently. None of the witnesses were taking notes, were they? Were the times given?
The Devil's Advocate made me do it.
Personally, I believe that Uncle John helped Lizzie to sort out the facts for her story. Lizzie did contradict herself at the Inquest, so they say.

mbhenty @ Sun Jul 23, 2006 11:14 am wrote:

If Lizzie did cut up some lead for sinkers, what did she use as a cutting implement, could it have been an AX?

I see nothing wrong with that question. Also, a hammer and chisel could be used to cut sheet lead.
PS You do know of another definition of a "sinker"? With coffee?

It sounds possibly as if Lizzie was switching to a fishing reason for being in the barn? The lead is for sinkers, but not iron, in her mind?
What do you think?

If it is something as simple as that- it might be a symptom/ and or proof that the family had some input as to her reason- Morse & Emma may have talked to Lizzie and influenced a shift in her reasons for going to the barn?

This is an interesting thread for a detail freak like myself.

Here's something totally off the wall ... which was inspired by Kat's musing on another thread as to the possibility that the court stenographer misheard Mrs. Whitehead's name.

(BTW, Airmid, I think catching that error is excellent close-reading on your part. I've read that same testimony too many times to count and have never noticed Abby's half-sister was referred to as Mrs. Whiting.)

But back to the original premise here. I've always had a bit of trouble with Alice Russell being the only one who heard Lizzie say she needed a piece of iron to "fix my screen". Is it at all possible, do you think, that Alice misheard Lizzie, and Lizzie actually said "fishing at Marion"? Neither of them were too coherent, I imagine -- and it's a well-documented fact that people are compelled to make sense of something they've only half-heard.

As for the distinction between iron and lead -- is it possible that women weren't as familiar with the difference? And Lizzie just said iron or tin at first -- and when it was established that she'd wanted it for sinkers -- someone corrected her and said "oh, you mean lead, not iron".

Both these thoughts are probably both pretty long shots, I agree....

Here's how Robinson dealt with this problem in his closing argument:
"She said she wanted some lead for sinkers. She also said she wanted something to fix the screen. Perhaps she had both things in her mind. It is perfectly natural. She wanted a piece of tin or iron to fix the screen. If she had set out to be this arch criminal that they claim, she would have had it all set down in her mind so that she would tell it every time just the same, line for line and dot for dot." (Trial, 1666)

diana @ Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:01 pm wrote:This is an interesting thread for a detail freak like myself.
Here's something totally off the wall ... which was inspired by Kat's musing on another thread as to the possibility that the court stenographer misheard Mrs. Whitehead's name.

(BTW, Airmid, I think catching that error is excellent close-reading on your part. I've read that same testimony too many times to count and have never noticed Abby's half-sister was referred to as Mrs. Whiting.)

But back to the original premise here. I've always had a bit of trouble with Alice Russell being the only one who heard Lizzie say she needed a piece of iron to "fix my screen". Is it at all possible, do you think, that Alice misheard Lizzie, and Lizzie actually said "fishing at Marion"? Neither of them were too coherent, I imagine -- and it's a well-documented fact that people are compelled to make sense of something they've only half-heard.

As for the distinction between iron and lead -- is it possible that women weren't as familiar with the difference? And Lizzie just said iron or tin at first -- and when it was established that she'd wanted it for sinkers -- someone corrected her and said "oh, you mean lead, not iron".

Both these thoughts are probably both pretty long shots, I agree....

Here's how Robinson dealt with this problem in his closing argument:
"She said she wanted some lead for sinkers. She also said she wanted something to fix the screen. Perhaps she had both things in her mind. It is perfectly natural. She wanted a piece of tin or iron to fix the screen. If she had set out to be this arch criminal that they claim, she would have had it all set down in her mind so that she would tell it every time just the same, line for line and dot for dot." (Trial, 1666)

Excellent message! Yes, people do mix up unfamiliar words. But I think most people then would know the difference between iron and lead, even if they should mispeak. Is that the only transcription error? Whiting for Whitehead.
I read in a courtroom drama novel that said "only the murderer has a story that they stick too", people "often change their story as they remember details". But this was fiction by a famous lawyer writer.
Ever start out on one task only to switch to another as facts change?

IMO Lizzie was in the back yard all the time. David Kent's timeline tells why Lizzie did not have enough time to do all she said she did. (Keep in mind that people did not have wristwatches like today.) I believe Lizzie changed her story so as to make herself a non-eyewitness and signal she would be part of the cover-up. Then she had to explain why she went into a barn that was hotter than the shaded backyard.

Know what famous game the following sentence is based on?

Kat @ Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:54 pm wrote:It sounds possibly as if Lizzie was switching to a fishing reason for being in the barn? The lead is for sinkers, but not iron, in her mind?
What do you think?
If it is something as simple as that- it might be a symptom/ and or proof that the family had some input as to her reason- Morse & Emma may have talked to Lizzie and influenced a shift in her reasons for going to the barn?

While I haven't done it myself, I have seen round iron washers used as "sinkers" in fishing. "Easier to tie to the line" attached to a stick.
Remember, Edward Radin says Lizzie was a devoted fisherwoman, which could have endeared her to some men, then or now. The dropped their line from a rowboat or the shore.
"You want to go fishing all weekend? Wait for me!"
I'll catch them, I'll clean them, I'll fry them in a pan.
They don't make them like that anymore.

There's so much to look into that relates to this matter! This will keep me busy for quite a while, I think, so I hope you don't mind if get back to the comments you folks made in a few days.
One thing I would like to comment on now:

RayS wrote:None of the witnesses were taking notes, were they?

I would say some of the witnesses indeed made notes: the police officers. It's a pity that none of them asked or gave details about what Lizzie was doing in the barn. So yes, it is possible that the 3 witnesses that gave the "iron" version were mistaken.
There is one other person around shortly after the murders that very likely made notes: an unnamed reporter. Officer Doherty reported this about the finding of Abby's body:
"I requested to see her; and on going up stairs found her lying on the floor, face downward, between the bed and dressing case. Several spots of blood was on the bed, and also a large tuft of hair. On examining the body, I found she was lying in a pool of blood. I informed the Doctor of the fact, and he expressed much surprise. I requested the Doctor, Mr. Wixon and reporter to remain by the bodies until I notified the Marshal." (Wit 4)
Do you think this article in the Fall River Herald, Aug. 4,
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/project ... news1.html
is the work of this unnamed reporter? If so, it's not going to help us much I guess, since the report is too full of mistakes and unverified information. Besides, the writer states that he didn't speak to Lizzie herself. "Miss Borden was so overcome by the awful circumstances that she could not be seen, and kind friends led her away and cared for her."

I hope I didn't send you folks off on a wild goose chase with this!
Airmid.

Kat @ Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:54 pm wrote:It sounds possibly as if Lizzie was switching to a fishing reason for being in the barn? The lead is for sinkers, but not iron, in her mind?
What do you think?

If it is something as simple as that- it might be a symptom/ and or proof that the family had some input as to her reason- Morse & Emma may have talked to Lizzie and influenced a shift in her reasons for going to the barn?

My understanding is that Lizzie told Alice that she needed iron to fix a screen. It may have dawned on Lizzie that no one who really knew her was going to believe that Miss Lizzie Andrew Borden was about to go and fix something around the house all by herself. I can just picture Bridget rolling her eyes on hearing that story.

Airmid @ Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:04 am wrote:There's so much to look into that relates to this matter! This will keep me busy for quite a while, I think, so I hope you don't mind if get back to the comments you folks made in a few days.
One thing I would like to comment on now:

RayS wrote:None of the witnesses were taking notes, were they?

I would say some of the witnesses indeed made notes: the police officers. It's a pity that none of them asked or gave details about what Lizzie was doing in the barn. So yes, it is possible that the 3 witnesses that gave the "iron" version were mistaken.
There is one other person around shortly after the murders that very likely made notes: an unnamed reporter. Officer Doherty reported this about the finding of Abby's body:
"I requested to see her; and on going up stairs found her lying on the floor, face downward, between the bed and dressing case. Several spots of blood was on the bed, and also a large tuft of hair. On examining the body, I found she was lying in a pool of blood. I informed the Doctor of the fact, and he expressed much surprise. I requested the Doctor, Mr. Wixon and reporter to remain by the bodies until I notified the Marshal." (Wit 4)
Do you think this article in the Fall River Herald, Aug. 4,
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/project ... news1.html
is the work of this unnamed reporter? If so, it's not going to help us much I guess, since the report is too full of mistakes and unverified information. Besides, the writer states that he didn't speak to Lizzie herself. "Miss Borden was so overcome by the awful circumstances that she could not be seen, and kind friends led her away and cared for her."

I hope I didn't send you folks off on a wild goose chase with this!
Airmid.

There were at least two reporters that I know of that were known to be on the scene that day. I knew that one of them was Edwin Porter, but was unsure as to the name of the other reporter who was identified as being there. I thought one of them would most likely be the 'unknown' reporter you mentioned. So I went back and checked out testimony. Specifically of both Dougherty and the people who would've been in the room with Abby at about the same time. The name of the other man was John J. Manning who worked for the Globe.


Trial testimony of Officer Patrick Dougherty page 589:

Q. When you got to the yard had a crowd collected about the house?
A. No, very few there when I got there first.

Q. Was there anyone in the yard at that time?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Who was in the yard at that time?
A. Mr. Manning.

Q. The reporter?
A. Yes, sir.

Trial testimony of John J. Manning page 1478:

Q. ( By Mr. Jennings) What is your name?
A. John J. Manning.

Q. What is your business?
A. I am a reporter.

Page 1479:

Q. You are not to tell what he said.
A. I was not allowed to go in. I sat on the back steps; waited for some person to come with whom I could go in. I had been there some two or three minutes, and Dr. Bowen came. I bade him good morning. He passed in, and I wasn't allowed to go with him. Shortly after he went in, Officer Dougherty came along Mr. Wixon was with him. They passed in, and I went with them.

1480

Q. Well, did you look through the house more or less?
A. Yes, sir. Passed through the corridor leading from the steps to the kitchen, and Miss Borden was sitting in a chair. Mrs. Churchill and Miss Russell were standing beside her. One was fanning her--didn't notice her particularly. I turned to the right, went into the sitting room. Mr. Borden was lying on the sofa; a sheet was covering him. Dr. Bowen called the officers' attention to him, took the sheet down and used his fingers in describing the wounds. I didn't notice them particularly. Dr. Bowen and the officer and Mr. Wixon stood near the man. I drew back toward the wall. The blood seemed fresh. There was some few spots on the wall. At the time it didn't strike me that there was much blood as there would be in an ordinary killing.

Q. Nevermind, describe what you did, not what appeared?
A. I went upstairs with Officer Dougherty. At the time I think Dr. Bowen said that Mrs. Borden was dead.

Q. Now wait a minute, you must not tell what anybody said, just tell what you did.
A. I went up stairs to a hallway that was dark, and went into a bed chamber, and Dr. Bowen went around the foot of the bed toward the body that was lying between a dressing case and the bed.

Q. Do you remember whether it was light or dark in the room, Mr. Manning?
A. My recollection was it was not very light: I think some of the wooden shutters in the room were closed.

Q. Did you see the position of the body?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Can you tell us what the position of the arms were relative to the body?
A. My recollection is that the right arm was about here (illustrating).

Q. Where was the left arm?
A. I don't recall, sir. That was on the inside, toward the dressing case, and I did not look very close.

Q. Were the arms stretched above the head at all?
A. I don't think they were: I don't recall that they were.

Q. After you had looked at the body what did you do then?
A. Dr. Bowen bent closer to the woman, and Officer Dougherty said he could probably see better if he pulled the bed out. He pulled the bed from the wall, and went around the head of the bed and leaned down over the woman, and remarked that he thought --

Thanks for typing all that! And for the name of Manning!
He seems like a good, objective observer.

That reminds me- iron or lead- I found this in Mrs. Holmes' testimony about when Lizzie was questioned in her bedroom:

Trial
Mrs. Holmes
Q. Do you recollect any other part of the conversation? Give it all.
A. Well, they asked her where she was, and she

Page 1502

said she went to the barn; and they asked her what for, and she said for something to fasten the screen. I cannot tell you whether at that time she said "a piece of iron" or "a piece of tin" or "something." I heard her say all those things to different people.
--[emphasis mine]

If Lizzie first said *to fix a screen* or *to fasten a screen*- maybe she was attempting to imply there was a defective screen and that might be a way an intruder could get in?
(Even tho the windows are pretty high...)

Good find, Kat!

So Mrs. Holmes testimony nullifies my earlier thinking that if Alice was the only one who testified about the screen she may have mis-heard what Lizzie said and thought she said "fixing a screen" when Lizzie actually said "fishing at Marion".

Just to muddy the waters further, here's Arthur Phillips:
"She had been into the barn loft to locate some fishing tackle or sinkers and to find some metal which would fasten a blind of the house." (The Borden Murder Mystery: In Defence of Lizzie Borden p. 22)

Ooo! Very Good! Thanks for pointing those things out!

Thanks folks! I have been quite busy on this subject in the meantime myself, and I'm still working on piecing together what probably happened after the murders, who said what and when, etc.

Here's what Alice said (Inquest 150):

A ... I asked her what she went to the barn to do. She says my screen and window -- she gave me to understand they did not come together right, or something, "I was ironing handkerchiefs, and my flat iron was not hot, and I thought I would go and get that while I was waiting".
Q What did she say she went to get?
A A piece of tin or iron to fix the screen.
.......
Q When did she tell you of the piece of tin for the screen?
A The first day; I remember asking her the question, and her answering me.
Q I suppose you had heard from somebody that she was at the barn?
A Yes.
Q Do you remember who you heard that from?
A I think I heard her say it. I think somebody asked her in the kitchen before we went out.
Q And she said she was in the barn?
A That she went to the barn.
Q A piece of tin for the screen for which window?
A A piece of tin or iron. She says "you know there is everything up there, and I went to see if I could not get a piece of tin or iron to fix it". The screen or the window, I don't know which she was going to fix.

So heard Lizzie saying someting about going to the barn twice. As far as I can tell the first time was when Lizzie was questioned by Officer Doherty in the kitchen. Alice said, ".... I remember seeing her talking with officers once before she went upstairs." (Trial 414) so we have a conformation that Alice was present while some officer questioned her.
Another confirmation comes from Officer Doherty's testimony (Trial 595):

Q Where did you see her?
A In the kitchen I think.
Q Was anyone with her?
A Yes, sir.
Q Who?
A Miss Russell and Mrs. Churchill.
Q Did you have any talk with her at that time?
A Yes, sir.
Q WIll you be kind enough to state what it was?
A Yes, sir. I said, "Miss Borden, where were you when this was done?" She said: "It must have been while I was in the barn." ......

Other people asked Lizzie where she was prior to this (Bridget, Mrs. Churchill, Dr. Bowen), but Alice was not in the Borden house yet when they asked, as far as I can piece things together. One other officer questioned Lizzie too before she went up to her room. This was Officer Mullaly. That interview probably took place while Lizzie was in the dining room (Trial 611). I haven't found anything (yet) about other witnesses who might have been present during that interview. She might have been alone, since Morse states that about that time he found Lizzie alone in the dining room (Trial 154), though he isn't too sure about it (Inq 104). So, my best guess is that Alice heard Lizzie telling about going to the barn during Officer Doherty's interview with Lizzie.

Later that afternoon Alice asks Lizzie what she went to do in the barn. This was while Lizzie was upstairs in her room. Mrs. Holmes' account has the same sound to it as Alice's, so I think it's quite safe to assume that both Alice and Mrs. Holmes were present when Lizzie told this story.

Airmid.

As to the reporters: there were 2 or 3 reporters in the house before or shortly after noon that day.
Manning, a reporter for the "Fall River Globe" was there first. He sneaks in with Doherty and Wixon (thanks Allen for that chunk of testimony!) and follows them when they go to view Andrew's and Abby's body. After that he leaves the house again. He didn't get to talk with Lizzie, but he got the opportunity to have a talk with Bridget. Bridget was in the back entry at that time, sitting on the stairs (Trial 1482). That Bridget was there is confirmed by the statement of Mr. Morse, who entered the Borden house a little before Manning came down the stairs (Inquest 104, Trial 151, Trial 1481). After that Manning goes into the yard and meets with reporter Stevens of the "Daily News".

Stevens was in the house too, but only for a very short time. He arrives with Officer Mullaly (Trial 1384), so that is a bit after Manning gets there. He has a look around the yard first (Trial 1385) and then manages to get inside the house. He was only in the house for a short time. He didn't go upstairs (Trial 1386), but he went into one or more rooms on the first floor (Trial 1393):

Q Where did you go in?
A Went through the kitchen.
Q Whom did you see there?
A Miss Borden was there. I didn't know her at that time.
Q Anyone else?
A Bridget Sullivan.
.........
Q Then did you talk with anybody in the house?
A Mrs. Churchill.
Q And did you make notes of your talk as you talked?
A No.
Q Did you talk with anybody else besides Mrs. Churchill?
A Not at that time.

Porter, the reporter of the "Fall River Herald" (though he has been called a reporter for the "Fall River Globe" too, and even for the "Boston Globe") was perhaps inside the house too, early that day. I could only find one reference to that. Officer Allen says (Trial 436/437):

Q Where did you then go?
A I went down and I met Mr. Morse at the head of the stairs right in the -- entering the room.
Q Did you go anywhere else in the house while you were there?
A No sir. I went down stairs, and Mr. Porter told me --
Q Wait a minute. Don't tell us what anyone said. ......

Officer Allen is telling here what he was doing after he went upstairs after viewing Abby's body with Dr. Bowen, Mr. Manning and some other officers.
Personally I think he was mistaken in naming Mr. Porter here. There is no other reference to Mr. Porter this early in the day. I rather think he meant to say "Mr. Manning". There is some evidence that Manning left the guest room at the same time as Allen. It's a pity that Manning is very vague in this part of his testimony. He had been cautioned multiple times not to repeat what anybody said at this point, so her resorts to (Trial 1482):

... In consequence of what he saw the doctor bent more closely toward her, and at that time somebody else called some person who was in the room, and when this person went down I went after him.
Q Do you know who the person was?
A I don't recall, but it is my impression it was Mr. Morse. I did not know him at the time. It was some elderly man with gray whiskers.

I think what happened was this: Dr. Bowen, Officers Allen and Doherty, Deputy Sheriff Wixon and Mr. Manning were viewing Abby's body. At that moment Morse returned to the house. While going up stairs towards the guest room he calls out to someone (Allen? "Officer"?) and at that moment both Allen and Manning go out the room and meet him. If this is the case, then it's reasonably to assume that Allen made a mistake when he named "Porter".

Back to the newspaper article (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/project ... news1.html.
First, it is an article in the "Fall River Herald". If I got my information right, Porter was a reporter for the Fall River Herald, while Manning worked for the Fall River Globe and Stevens worked for the Daily News. So, one could assume that it was Porter who wrote the article. However, I'm not quite content with that.

First, there's the description of the bodies:
Meanwhile the story spread rapidly and a crowd gathered quickly, A HERALD reporter entered the house, and a terrible sight met his view. On the lounge in the cosy sitting room on the first floor of the building lay Andrew J. Borden, dead. His face presented a sickening sight. Over the left temple a wound six by four had been made as it the head had been pounded with the dull edge of an axe. The left eye bad been dug out and a cut extended the length of the nose, The face was hacked to pieces and the blood had covered the man's shirt and soaked into his clothing. Everything about the room was in order, and there were no signs of a scuffle of any kind.

Upstairs in a neat chamber in the northwest corner of the house, another terrible sight met the view. On the floor between the bed and the dressing case lay Mrs. Borden, stretched full length, one arm extended and her face resting upon it. Over the left temple the skull was fractured and no less than seven wounds were found about the head. She had died evidently where she had been struck, for her life blood formed a ghastly clot on the carpet.

This definitely sounds like an eye witness report to me. Reading through Porters book (http://ccbit.cs.umass.edu/lizzie/images ... 15F01.html) I don't find the same degree of detailing as I found in the newspaper description.
Some quotes from Porter:
"When discovered, the remains of Mr. Borden lay stretched at full length upon the sofa in the sitting room of his home; the head literally hacked into fragments and the fresh blood trickling from every wound. Up stairs in the guest chamber lay the body of Mrs. Borden similarly mangled and butchered with the head reeking in a crimson pool."
"To those who early visited the house, the vision of Mr. Borden's body as it lay on the sofa, with the life blood still warm , and flowing from a dozen gaping wounds was a horror so dreadful that they had no thought of Mrs. Borden."
"Reaching a landing half way up where their eyes were on a level with the floor, they looked across the hall, through an open door, under the bed, and saw the prostrate form of the dead woman. It lay full on the face and the arms were folded underneath."

Porter, for instance, does not mention Andrews eyeball. As to the discovery of Abby's body, he rather relates Bridgets and/or Mrs. Churchill testimony than the reporter's account ("outstretched arm").

Second, as I argued in my previous post, I don't think Porter was in the house early after the discovery of the murders. Did any of you find anything about him being in the house at all on the day?

If I'm right about the newspaper article being an eye witness account, then I would say the author was Mr. Manning. He saw the bodies, while Mr. Stevens did not (see above).
He also had a talk with Bridget, and that might account for this bit of information in the article: "The heavy fall and a subdued groaning attracted Miss Borden into the house.". As far as I know, Bridget is the only witness who reports that Lizzie said something about a groan:
"...and when I came back I says, "Miss Lizzie, where was you?" I says, "Didn't I leave the screen door locked?" She says, "I was out in the back yard and heard a groan, and came in and the screen door was wide open." (Trial 244)
Stevens said in his testimony that the only person he interviewed was Mrs. Churchill (see above).

You all might say, "Why bother about this all?" Well, there's an awful lot of information in that newpaper article. Some of it correct, some of it totally wrong. Knowing who wrote it, and with whom the author spoke, could give us more insight in the statements of the various witnesses. Also, the newpaper article could confirm that Lizzie indeed told Bridget, or that Bridget thought Lizzie told her, that she heard a groan while being outside the house. So I will keep working on it a bit more!

Airmid.

Airmid @ Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:44 am wrote:Second, as I argued in my previous post, I don't think Porter was in the house early after the discovery of the murders. Did any of you find anything about him being in the house at all on the day?

For clarification, both Porter and Manning worked for the Fall River Globe, Stevens worked for the News

We do know Porter was in the yard. This is Fleet's testimony at the trial, page 515:

"Q. Well, do you recall Mr. Sawyer?
A. He was there at the back door.
Q. And some name, Mr. Manning, I believe, has been mentioned at the same time. Was he there then?
A. He was at the front door when I went in the house.
Q. I am now out in the yard, after you had been in the house and come out again. Was Mr. Manning there?
A. Yes, sir, and Mr. Porter.
Q. What Mr. Porter is that?
A. Reporter for the Fall River Globe.
Q. A Mr. Porter who is a reporter?
A. Yes, sir."

And keep digging! That's what makes this case fun.

Thanks Harry!

Btw, just now I found Manning saying this (Trial 1488):
Q And you are a reporter for what paper?
A Fall River Herald.

This may explain the Herald answer. He had been hired by the Herald in January 1893 and thus at the time of the trial his answer would have been correct.

"John J. Manning, Fall River Daily Herald. He had worked for the Boston Globe and had just been hired by the Fall River Daily Herald to cover the Borden trial in January 1893. He accompanied Walter Stevens of the Fall River News to the Borden home shortly after the Bordens were murdered. Most of his work was in politics and city government.
"Our Folks and Other Folks," Fall River Evening News, Tuesday, January 31, 1893: 8.
"Mr. John J. Manning [a reporter] has joined the Herald staff."

I believe there was some connection between the Boston Globe and the Fall River Globe. That needs to be pursued though.

I briefly scanned a lot of my sources and could find no evidence that Porter was in the house on the 4th.

You have done us a service raising this topic. I think it's important to know that when he writes of the events of the morning of the 4th at the house that they are things which he did not witness himself.

The Fall River Globe's first article on the murders (almost certainly written by Porter, as he was their "criminal" reporter) states:

"The first intimation of a murder having been committed was received at the Globe office at 11.20 o'clock. A Globe reporter was sent out at once and was the first newspaper worker on the scene."

That was Manning. as per his testimony at the trial. Page 1479:

"Q. When did you first hear of it?
A. Some time before half past eleven. I couldn't give you the exact time.
Q. What was the means of your information?
A. Mr. O'Neal, city editor of the Globe, told me to go up to Second street, a stabbing affray had taken place there.
Q. Did you go?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How fast did you go?
A. I ran the greater portion of the way.
Q. What time should you judge it was, Mr. Manning, when you received your information.
A. Between 25 minutes and half past eleven."

Again, thanks for raising the subject. Very interesting.

Most reporters today do not witness the events they write about, IMO.
The high costs associated with this together with declining newspaper revenues make such coverage a thing of the past for many events.

The newspaper reports are also the highlights of any event. In-depth coverage is rare today (based on my local newspapers).
"Tabloid TV" is often criticized about this. "Mrs. Yates, how do you feel about the deaths of your children?"

In Porter's book he says this about Manning:
John J. Manning, reporter. “I first heard of the Borden murder some time before 11:30; Mr. O'Neil, city editor of the Fall River Globe, told me to go up Second street as there had been a stabbing affray there, and I ran most of the way; when I was going there I saw Mr. Cunningham, Bolles and one or two others; I went into the yard and up to the house, and found Mr. Sawyer at the door; he wouldn't allow me to go in, and I sat down on the steps."--pg. 206

Information found on the web:
The Herald News (http://www.heraldnews.com/site/news.asp ... v_sec=4242)
"The Herald News was founded in 1892, the result of the merger of three newspapers born in the 19th century: the Fall River News, which was founded in 1845; the Fall River Daily Herald, established in 1872, and the Fall River Daily Globe, created in 1885."

From the Trials:
Testimony of Manning, page 1490: "At the time you went to see Mrs. Reagan were you also the local reporter for the Associated Press?" "Yes, sir."
Testimony of Hickey, page 1492: Hickey was at the time of the murders a reporter for both the Fall River Globe and the Boston Herald. The Boston Herald and the Boston Globe were "pretty active competitors".

My guess is that this newspaper article is by Porter too: http://lizzieandrewborden.com/Resources ... -1892b.htm
A quote:
“And I thought you told me,” resumed the interviewer, “that you first learned of this affair by a telephone message when you were in another part of the city?”
“You are mistaken,” said Mr. Morse, “I said no such thing.”
Witness Statements page 29 (Medley):
He told Reporter Porter of the Daily Globe that the first he
knew of it was when he was telephoned for.

Curiouser and curiouser!
Airmid.

PS: I see you discussed a lot of this before: http://lizzieandrewborden.com/Archive06 ... VAnews.htm

Do they mean Trickey? He was a really good writer, and was into the case close to the beginning.

What does this mean, may I ask?
What Trials?

From the Trials:
Testimony of Manning, page 1490: "At the time you went to see Mrs. Reagan were you also the local reporter for the Associated Press?" "Yes, sir."
Testimony of Hickey, page 1492: Hickey was at the time of the murders a reporter for both the Fall River Globe and the Boston Herald. The Boston Herald and the Boston Globe were "pretty active competitors".

--Airmid

--I don't recall that Trickey testified at the trial.

Thomas F. Hickey, not Henry G. Trickey.

Thanks. What Trials?
Do you mean Trial as in The Trial?
If you mean The Trial, which version are you using?

I just found Hickey after Manning and before Winwood.

Kat @ Sat Aug 05, 2006 3:15 pm wrote:Thanks. What Trials?
Do you mean Trial as in The Trial? Was A Hickey called to testify?
If you mean The Trial, which version are you using?

Yes sorry, I meant "Trial". Hickey was a witness for the defense. His testimony starts on page 1492 of the Trial Transcription, the 2001 version published here on the site. The main point of his testimony was to prove, that the Mrs. Reagan story published in the Boston Globe was untrue.

Airmid.
PS: Ah nice, you found it!

I think Trickey was on the spot as well- in Fall River- and up to his eyebrows in the case. If he had lived, his experiences of sleuthing the case would have been fascinating! He was brilliant, so young- and a really wonderful newspaper writer.
Harry- do you know when Trickey hit town?

The earliest date I can find a Trickey article is in the paper of the 6th. The article itself is dated the 5th so that would mean he was there Friday. The other Boston Globe reporter, Carberry, wrote the first article. His article is dated the 4th.

I always surmised that once the story was thought to be a sensation they sent their big gun, Trickey. He was still reporting through the Preliminary.

(Airmid) "I would say that some of the witnesses were taking notes; the police.

I think too that the reporters that were on the scene might have been taking them too.

Sorry if I have been a bit silent, but I'm still here, and still studying Lizzie!
I discovered the Keeley Library (http://www.sailsinc.org/durfee/fulltext.htm) and got lost in the jungle of people and relations between them. It's so odd with this case, whenever you look into one of the "players" a bunch of totally unexpected relations with other players turn up!

Anyway, I'm still interested in the newspapers and the reporters at the moment. I ordered the Sourcebook, and can't wait until it arrives! Until then, I hope some of you can help answering this question:
Did the "Hiram Harrington-article" actually appear in the Globe on Friday the 5th, or Saturday the 6th?

Airmid.

Hi Airmid -- I did some looking but only came up with the Harrington interview in the Fall River Herald on Saturday, the 6th.

Rebello also says "the interview was published in local papers on Saturday, August 6, 1892." (Rebello, 85)

BUT then I found this in the Witness Statements--
[Hiram Harrington] spoke at some length about her telling about the same story as was published in the News and Globe of Friday evening." W.S. p. 11)

So 'you pays your money and you takes your chances' here, I guess. Maybe it was in the News and the Globe on the 5th and in the Herald on the 6th?

I'm not very confident about this. I know you specifically asked about the Globe and I'm sorry I can't be more definite here.

Harry and Kat are really the newspaper gurus.

The alleged interview with Hiram Harrington appeared in the Fall River Globe on August 6th, Saturday.

It also appeared in the Fall River Evening News on the 6th.

The interview may have occurred on the 5th but didn't make the papers until the 6th.

Am I thinking of the same, or a different interview - the one that Porter I believe it was described as having lasted about three to five minutes from start to finish? The alleged discussion between Hiram and Lizzie, that is to say.

Yes, Doug65oh, that's the interview I believe Airmid is referring to.

There is also the possibility that the newspapers put out special editions on the evening of the 5th.

I haven't been able to find any paper though that published it on the 5th but I certainly don't have access to them all.

Thanks!
So lets assume that the Hiram Harrington interview wasn't published until the 6th. That leaves Lizzie a bit more time to come up with the "lead for sinkers" version of her alibi.
You have convinced me in this thread that Hiram didn't have a lengthy talk with Lizzie herself. But I think there is no doubt that Hiram Harrington was interviewed by a reporter, and there is no reason to suppose that the reporter made up large parts of the interview, especially since the contents of the interview are confirmed in the Witness Statements.
So yes, someone must have told Hiram Harrington the details about Lizzies alibi.

There's this other very interesting newspaper article, from the Fall River Globe, August 6th: http://lizzieandrewborden.com/NewResear ... oversy.htm
(scroll all the way down for the complete article!).
It tells about the movements of John Morse on the evening of Friday the 5th. He goes out around 8 o'clock to get the mail at the post office, followed by a large crowd. Then, at around 9, he goes out for a second time and is followed by Officer Minnehan to Turner Street, where Hiram Harrington lived.
I would say that after 9 o'clock in the evening was hardly an appropriate time for a social call in those days. So I always thought that there was something pressing that Morse had to discuss with Harrington on Friday evening. If the "Hiram Harrington-interview" had been published on the 5th, Morse's actions would have made perfect sense: he picked up the mail and the newspapers, went home, read the interview, and wasted no time in telling Hiram Harrington what he thought of him!
But if the Hiram Harrington interview wasn't published until the 6th, none of that could have happened.

So that leaves me again with a bunch of questions:
- Is the information in the "Intense Excitement" newpaper article correct and accurate?
- If none of the newspapers published the interview with Hiram Harrington on the 5th, how come that all 3 major Fall River newspapers, all evening newspapers, and allegedly all competitors, managed to publish exactly the same interview in their August 6th editions?
- If the story of Morse's visit to Turner Street on the 5th is correct, what could have been so pressing to account for such a visit?
- Would that have been the occasion that old blabbermouth Morse told Hiram Harrington about Lizzie's alibi?
- Who was the reporter who had the interview with Hiram Harrington? I always assumed it was Porter, but that might not be correct.
- Or was there, as Harry suggests, a special edition on the 5th of one of the newspapers, or any other written source, that originally published the interview?

It would be so easy to answer that last question with "Yes", since that would solve most of my questions. But apparently it's not as easy as that. I'll keep looking for information and hints, though! Any thoughts, information or ideas would be greatly appreciated!

Airmid.

diana @ Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:26 am wrote:Hi Airmid -- I did some looking but only came up with the Harrington interview in the Fall River Herald on Saturday, the 6th.

Rebello also says "the interview was published in local papers on Saturday, August 6, 1892." (Rebello, 85)

BUT then I found this in the Witness Statements--
[Hiram Harrington] spoke at some length about her telling about the same story as was published in the News and Globe of Friday evening." W.S. p. 11)

So 'you pays your money and you takes your chances' here, I guess. Maybe it was in the News and the Globe on the 5th and in the Herald on the 6th?

I'm not very confident about this. I know you specifically asked about the Globe and I'm sorry I can't be more definite here.

Harry and Kat are really the newspaper gurus.

*nods* I wondered about the Witness Statements report too. It would be a great help if we could figure out what date in the investigation that entry is referring to. It could either be Saturday the 6th or Monday the 8th. On page 9 the entries are for Saturday 6th, Monday 8th, and then Saturday 6th again, so it seems they got mixed up a bit, unless one portion represents Doherty's entries and the other portion Harrington's entries.
If the entry was for the 6th, then we have some indication that something was published on the 5th.

By the way, Pearson also has something to say about the date of the publications. He says on page 33, that 'papers' printed an interview with Harrington on the 6th; and in the footnote on page 34, he says he used the Fall River Evening News newspaper article from the 6th as a base for his compilation of the Hiram Harrington interview.

Porter says (page 24) that the interview with Hiram Harrington was held the day after the murders, but he doesn't say when it was published.

Airmid.

I'm responding to the question as to why Morse might go to Turner Street. Do we know he went to see Hiram? Did anyone else live on Turner Street?

If he did see Hiram, they were uncles together to the orphan girls and might have thought they were surviving patriarchs of the family- representing each side. I'd think they had plenty to discuss if they were to be guiding the girls in future.

Do you guys remember this?
I only bring it up because it shows Hiram went to California:

http://www.rootsweb.com/~rinewpor/mercury1882.html

Kat @ Tue Aug 15, 2006 11:12 pm wrote:I'm responding to the question as to why Morse might go to Turner Street. Do we know he went to see Hiram? Did anyone else live on Turner Street?

If he did see Hiram, they were uncles together to the orphan girls and might have thought they were surviving patriarchs of the family- representing each side. I'd think they had plenty to discuss if they were to be guiding the girls in future.

Didn't Arnold Brown cover this in one of his articles?
So they had plenty to discuss? About what? A cover-up? Funeral arrangements? Just what would you suggest?

According to Harry's research, the (only?) case-related character on Turner Street, other than the Harrington's was "Maurice Libby" a hairdresser at #4. I'm not sure what his *role* was.
I suppose it was Hiram that Morse saw.

These men might have thought they could control the fortune. There could be lots of things they needed to discuss- just use the imagination, I guess.